Aa
Super Congress????
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/23/super-congress-debt-ceiling_n_907887.html?icid=main%7Chtmlws-main-n%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk3%7C219902
WASHINGTON -- Debt ceiling negotiators think they've hit on a solution to address the debt ceiling impasse and the public's unwillingness to let go of benefits such as Medicare and Social Security that have been earned over a lifetime of work: Create a new Congress.
This "Super Congress," composed of members of both chambers and both parties, isn't mentioned anywhere in the Constitution, but would be granted extraordinary new powers. Under a plan put forth by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and his counterpart Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), legislation to lift the debt ceiling would be accompanied by the creation of a 12-member panel made up of 12 lawmakers -- six from each chamber and six from each party.
Legislation approved by the Super Congress -- which some on Capitol Hill are calling the "super committee" -- would then be fast-tracked through both chambers, where it couldn't be amended by simple, regular lawmakers, who'd have the ability only to cast an up or down vote. With the weight of both leaderships behind it, a product originated by the Super Congress would have a strong chance of moving through the little Congress and quickly becoming law. A Super Congress would be less accountable than the system that exists today, and would find it easier to strip the public of popular benefits. Negotiators are currently considering cutting the mortgage deduction and tax credits for retirement savings, for instance, extremely popular policies that would be difficult to slice up using the traditional legislative process.
House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) has made a Super Congress a central part of his last-minute proposal, multiple news reports and people familiar with his plan say. A picture of Boehner's proposal began to come into focus Saturday evening: The debt ceiling would be raised for a short-term period and coupled with an equal dollar figure of cuts, somewhere in the vicinity of a trillion dollars over ten years. A second increase in the debt ceiling would be tied to the creation of a Super Congress that would be required to find a minimum amount of spending cuts. Because the elevated panel would need at least one Democratic vote, its plan would presumably include at least some revenue, though if it's anything like the deals on the table today, it would likely be heavily slanted toward spending cuts. Or, as Obama said of the deal he was offering Republicans before Boehner walked out, "If it was unbalanced, it was unbalanced in the direction of not enough revenue."
Republicans, however, are looking to force a second debt ceiling fight as part of the package, despite the Democratic rejection of the plan. Under the Republican plan, lawmakers would need to weigh in on the debt ceiling during the heat of the presidential election, a proposal Democrats reject as risky to the nation's credit rating. "We expressed openness to two stages of cuts, but not to a short-term debt limit extension," a Democratic aide close to the negotiations said. "Republicans only want the debt ceiling extended as far as the cuts in each tranch. That means we’ll be right back where we are today a few months down the road. We are not a Banana Republic. You don’t run America like that."
The aide said that Democrats are open to a series of cuts as well as a Super Congress, but only if the debt ceiling is raised sufficiently so that it pushes past the election. "Our proposal tonight was, do two tranches of cuts, but raise the debt ceiling through 2012 right now, though the McConnell process would be one way," said the aide, leaving open the possibility that Boehner could craft a new process and distinguish it from McConnell's, which the Tea Party despises as a dereliction of duty. "Do that now with a package of cuts, and have the joint committee" -- the Super Congress -- "report out a package that would be the second tranch. Republicans rejected that, and continued to push a short-term despite the fact that Reid, Pelosi and Obama all could not have been clearer that they will not support a short-term increase. A short term risks some of the same consequences as outright failure to raise the ceiling -- downgraded credit rating, stocks plunge, interest rates spike, etc. It is unclear why Republicans have made this their sticking point."
Boehner spokesman Michael Steel argued that the inability to come to a larger deal so far left a short-term extension as an "inevitable" option. "For months, we have laid out our principles to pass a bill that fulfills the president's request to increase the debt limit beyond the next election. We have passed a debt limit increase with the reforms the American people demand, the 'Cut, Cap, and Balance' bill. The Democrats who run Washington have refused to offer a plan," he said in a statement. "Now, as a result, a two-step process is inevitable. Like the president and the entire bipartisan, bicameral congressional leadership, we continue to believe that defaulting on the full faith and credit of the United States is not an option."
Obama has shown himself to be a fan of the commission approach to cutting social programs and entitlements. Shortly after taking office, Obama held a major conference on deficit reduction and subsequently created, by executive order, The National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform. The White House made two telling appointments to chair the commission: The first was former Sen. Alan Simpson (R-Wyo.), a well-known critic of Social Security who earned notoriety by suggesting, among other things, that the American government had become "a milk cow with 310 million ****!" Yet Obama's Democratic appointment was even more indicative of whose interests took priority: former Clinton White House Chief of Staff Erskine Bowles. Bowles is a member of Morgan Stanley's board of directors; an adviser to Carousel Capital, a private equity firm; and a director of Cousins Properties Incorporated, a firm with significant investments in commercial and mixed-use real estate.
Simpson and Bowles, perhaps unsurprisingly, produced a report recommending corporate and high-end tax cuts, along with cuts to Social Security, Medicare, veterans' benefits and a host of other social programs.
The commission needed 14 of 18 members to approve the plan in order for it to advance to Congress for a vote. The commission fell short, but did win a majority.
Proponents of slashing spending won't make the same mistake with a new Super Congress. Only a simple majority will be necessary
WASHINGTON -- Debt ceiling negotiators think they've hit on a solution to address the debt ceiling impasse and the public's unwillingness to let go of benefits such as Medicare and Social Security that have been earned over a lifetime of work: Create a new Congress.
This "Super Congress," composed of members of both chambers and both parties, isn't mentioned anywhere in the Constitution, but would be granted extraordinary new powers. Under a plan put forth by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and his counterpart Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), legislation to lift the debt ceiling would be accompanied by the creation of a 12-member panel made up of 12 lawmakers -- six from each chamber and six from each party.
Legislation approved by the Super Congress -- which some on Capitol Hill are calling the "super committee" -- would then be fast-tracked through both chambers, where it couldn't be amended by simple, regular lawmakers, who'd have the ability only to cast an up or down vote. With the weight of both leaderships behind it, a product originated by the Super Congress would have a strong chance of moving through the little Congress and quickly becoming law. A Super Congress would be less accountable than the system that exists today, and would find it easier to strip the public of popular benefits. Negotiators are currently considering cutting the mortgage deduction and tax credits for retirement savings, for instance, extremely popular policies that would be difficult to slice up using the traditional legislative process.
House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) has made a Super Congress a central part of his last-minute proposal, multiple news reports and people familiar with his plan say. A picture of Boehner's proposal began to come into focus Saturday evening: The debt ceiling would be raised for a short-term period and coupled with an equal dollar figure of cuts, somewhere in the vicinity of a trillion dollars over ten years. A second increase in the debt ceiling would be tied to the creation of a Super Congress that would be required to find a minimum amount of spending cuts. Because the elevated panel would need at least one Democratic vote, its plan would presumably include at least some revenue, though if it's anything like the deals on the table today, it would likely be heavily slanted toward spending cuts. Or, as Obama said of the deal he was offering Republicans before Boehner walked out, "If it was unbalanced, it was unbalanced in the direction of not enough revenue."
Republicans, however, are looking to force a second debt ceiling fight as part of the package, despite the Democratic rejection of the plan. Under the Republican plan, lawmakers would need to weigh in on the debt ceiling during the heat of the presidential election, a proposal Democrats reject as risky to the nation's credit rating. "We expressed openness to two stages of cuts, but not to a short-term debt limit extension," a Democratic aide close to the negotiations said. "Republicans only want the debt ceiling extended as far as the cuts in each tranch. That means we’ll be right back where we are today a few months down the road. We are not a Banana Republic. You don’t run America like that."
The aide said that Democrats are open to a series of cuts as well as a Super Congress, but only if the debt ceiling is raised sufficiently so that it pushes past the election. "Our proposal tonight was, do two tranches of cuts, but raise the debt ceiling through 2012 right now, though the McConnell process would be one way," said the aide, leaving open the possibility that Boehner could craft a new process and distinguish it from McConnell's, which the Tea Party despises as a dereliction of duty. "Do that now with a package of cuts, and have the joint committee" -- the Super Congress -- "report out a package that would be the second tranch. Republicans rejected that, and continued to push a short-term despite the fact that Reid, Pelosi and Obama all could not have been clearer that they will not support a short-term increase. A short term risks some of the same consequences as outright failure to raise the ceiling -- downgraded credit rating, stocks plunge, interest rates spike, etc. It is unclear why Republicans have made this their sticking point."
Boehner spokesman Michael Steel argued that the inability to come to a larger deal so far left a short-term extension as an "inevitable" option. "For months, we have laid out our principles to pass a bill that fulfills the president's request to increase the debt limit beyond the next election. We have passed a debt limit increase with the reforms the American people demand, the 'Cut, Cap, and Balance' bill. The Democrats who run Washington have refused to offer a plan," he said in a statement. "Now, as a result, a two-step process is inevitable. Like the president and the entire bipartisan, bicameral congressional leadership, we continue to believe that defaulting on the full faith and credit of the United States is not an option."
Obama has shown himself to be a fan of the commission approach to cutting social programs and entitlements. Shortly after taking office, Obama held a major conference on deficit reduction and subsequently created, by executive order, The National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform. The White House made two telling appointments to chair the commission: The first was former Sen. Alan Simpson (R-Wyo.), a well-known critic of Social Security who earned notoriety by suggesting, among other things, that the American government had become "a milk cow with 310 million ****!" Yet Obama's Democratic appointment was even more indicative of whose interests took priority: former Clinton White House Chief of Staff Erskine Bowles. Bowles is a member of Morgan Stanley's board of directors; an adviser to Carousel Capital, a private equity firm; and a director of Cousins Properties Incorporated, a firm with significant investments in commercial and mixed-use real estate.
Simpson and Bowles, perhaps unsurprisingly, produced a report recommending corporate and high-end tax cuts, along with cuts to Social Security, Medicare, veterans' benefits and a host of other social programs.
The commission needed 14 of 18 members to approve the plan in order for it to advance to Congress for a vote. The commission fell short, but did win a majority.
Proponents of slashing spending won't make the same mistake with a new Super Congress. Only a simple majority will be necessary
I agree with everything everyone's posted above. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Politicians aren't even authorities on politics, so why would we want their help with the economy? One would think you'd talk with a financial expert.
I don't know, call me stupid... but when I want to invest money, I don't go ask the jerk ringing up my Slurpee how diversified his portfolio is.
This is creating more red tape, and some of the same dolts who have professed to want a smaller government are the same tool bags behind this idea.
I've got a novel idea! Instead of creating another useless government entity, why don't you a$$hats sit down and do the damned job you were elected to do? I don't give a squirt about the "gang of 6" and I really don't give a squirt about a Super Congress. We've got a congress that is flailing about in DC, what in the hell makes you think we want another flailing, useless, entity full of inflated egos to sit around and do nothing?
Wake the **** up and do your ******* jobs!!!! Don't create anything more other than solutions to our problems!!! A "Super Congress" sounds super ****ed up to me!
I want a damned do over with every politician out there who thinks a super congress is a good idea, followed by any others out in Politiland who are not doing their jobs. Your work ethic stinks! The whole lot of you blowhards! Go away and clear room for Americans who want to make a difference, a real difference! Talk is cheap and every American has heard plenty of talk. Do something or you're fired.
I don't know, call me stupid... but when I want to invest money, I don't go ask the jerk ringing up my Slurpee how diversified his portfolio is.
This is creating more red tape, and some of the same dolts who have professed to want a smaller government are the same tool bags behind this idea.
I've got a novel idea! Instead of creating another useless government entity, why don't you a$$hats sit down and do the damned job you were elected to do? I don't give a squirt about the "gang of 6" and I really don't give a squirt about a Super Congress. We've got a congress that is flailing about in DC, what in the hell makes you think we want another flailing, useless, entity full of inflated egos to sit around and do nothing?
Wake the **** up and do your ******* jobs!!!! Don't create anything more other than solutions to our problems!!! A "Super Congress" sounds super ****ed up to me!
I want a damned do over with every politician out there who thinks a super congress is a good idea, followed by any others out in Politiland who are not doing their jobs. Your work ethic stinks! The whole lot of you blowhards! Go away and clear room for Americans who want to make a difference, a real difference! Talk is cheap and every American has heard plenty of talk. Do something or you're fired.
Yes, I think I agree with LMNO on this one. Like I said, I dont trust anyone to do anything anymore without a personal and corrupt agenda for doing it.
Just what we need... more red-tape.
Yet another level of bureaucratic b/s that the PEOPLE will have to suffer through.
And when this proposed "Super Congress" can't come to a decision? We'll create a "Sooper Dooper Congress" to decide. And when THEY can't decide??? We'll create a Sooper Dooper Dooper Sooper Dooper Congress"!!!
And the beat goes on...
Yet another level of bureaucratic b/s that the PEOPLE will have to suffer through.
And when this proposed "Super Congress" can't come to a decision? We'll create a "Sooper Dooper Congress" to decide. And when THEY can't decide??? We'll create a Sooper Dooper Dooper Sooper Dooper Congress"!!!
And the beat goes on...
I honestly dont know what to think. I dont trust anyone anymore. I would need to get a lawyer, have him go over it and advise to see what is really or really not being said and done. lol Politics done went and got me!
Yes, yes yes and more yes. When you need an expert, hire or trust an expert.
I’ve been wandering for a while now, why do we think Politicians are Financial Experts? Wouldn’t it make since to have a panel of Financial Experts to put together the best-case scenario with the Pros and Cons of each action?
They could then present their report to Congress. At least they would have something real to fight over, Instead of these Ghost Plans that for some reason, eludes us.
When we are Constructing a Building and run into major problems, I don’t sit back and tell the Mechanical, Electrical, and, Structural Sub-contractors to figure it out. I contact The Architect, who contacts all the Engineers. The Engineers specialize in their fields of expertise, finds the best resolution to the problem.
Maybe I’m just to simple minded but to me, having Politicians resolve the Budget would be like me having a Mason to convert and connect 3 Phase to 2 Phase Electrical to an Air Handling Unit.
I really don’t think the Brick Mason would put down the Block Mason because he disagrees with the way he would do it. They both have enough common since to tell me, Electrical is not in their field of expertise. So, blame the Republicans or Democrats all you want but neither are qualified.
They could then present their report to Congress. At least they would have something real to fight over, Instead of these Ghost Plans that for some reason, eludes us.
When we are Constructing a Building and run into major problems, I don’t sit back and tell the Mechanical, Electrical, and, Structural Sub-contractors to figure it out. I contact The Architect, who contacts all the Engineers. The Engineers specialize in their fields of expertise, finds the best resolution to the problem.
Maybe I’m just to simple minded but to me, having Politicians resolve the Budget would be like me having a Mason to convert and connect 3 Phase to 2 Phase Electrical to an Air Handling Unit.
I really don’t think the Brick Mason would put down the Block Mason because he disagrees with the way he would do it. They both have enough common since to tell me, Electrical is not in their field of expertise. So, blame the Republicans or Democrats all you want but neither are qualified.
You must join this user group in order to participate in this discussion.
You are reading content posted in the Current Events . . . Group
A list of national and international resources and hotlines to help connect you to needed health and medical services.
Herpes sores blister, then burst, scab and heal.
Herpes spreads by oral, vaginal and anal sex.
STIs are the most common cause of genital sores.
Condoms are the most effective way to prevent HIV and STDs.
PrEP is used by people with high risk to prevent HIV infection.
