Six Reasons the Supercommittee Will Succeed

Real Clear Politics ^ | 09/03/2011 | Paul Weinstein

[SeekAndFind]

Whatever you think of Standard and Poor’s decision to downgrade America’s credit, their justification was fairly plain. Political gridlock has managed to scuttle several successive efforts to get a handle on the federal debt. And few, if anyone, is sanguine that the new “supercommittee” in Congress will have any better luck.

But a closer look reveals that, despite the nation’s pessimism, there are several reasons to believe that the 12-member supercommittee may be able to implement a plan that sets the nation back on track. The setup has been rigged to force a deal. So, in an age where “shorting” the market has become a sort of dirty word, the smart money may be in betting that Washington will enact a responsible comprehensive budget framework by the end of the year

First, the dynamics of the committee itself suggest that that building sufficient support in the room will be that much more palatable. Negotiators need only corral seven of the twelve members (50 percent plus one) to send any deal straight to the floor of both houses of Congress. By comparison, the Bowles-Simpson Fiscal Commission was required to receive a full 77 percent, and managed only 61. In essence, the fact that a decision by any single member could boost any proposal past the required threshold will compel every member of the commission to negotiate in a serious manner. That diminishes the likelihood that political shenanigans will scuttle this deal like they have undermined previous negotiations.

Second, the supercommittee doesn’t have to start from scratch. Several proposals already developed–the Fiscal Commission, the Gang of Six, the Rivlin-Domenici plan, and the Obama-Boehner discussions—have already outlined the parameters of what might be in a grand bargain. As a result, most members of the supercommittee understand where the tradeoffs can be made.

[3Fingas]

Congress always puts off tough, politically dangerous votes.
Congress needs to stop delegating its responsibilities. Stand-up like free men and women, propose, debate, and vote. That is what you were sent to Washington to do. If you can’t do that, please return your paychecks, resign from office, and let someone with character take your place.

[norwaypinesavage]

"the 12-member supercommittee may be able to implement a plan that sets the nation back on track."

Hardly. The 1.2 trillion reduction is hardly "on track". Over 10 years, that's only about 100 billion per year. It's actually much less than that, due to compounding. That's barely roundoff error.

[editor-surveyor]

Who wrote this, Obama?

One need only look at one single fact to know that the committee cannot succeed:

The debt ceiling increase guarantees that enough additional debt will be added that we will be unable to pay it off without inflating it away, Zimbabwe style.

One has to be utterly devoid of numeric skills to believe that they can succeed.

[editor-surveyor]

>> “Sorry; c does not follow from b, and b does not follow from a.” <<

.
Thank you!

That kind of nonsense constantly gets posted in these threads.

[editor-surveyor]

>> “It is a disgrace that the GOP agreed to it.” <<

.
And you could say that about just about everything they have done this session.

[SpaceBar]

The author is simply restating in different words what many already know: that dictatorships are more efficient in the short term than democracies/republics because there is no red tape, pesky compromises, or annoying opposition to wade through.

[M Kehoe]

Six Reasons the Supercommittee Will Succeed

Two Reasons it Won't Succeed

The committee is not super, or Constitutional.

The informed electorate (e.g. Tea Party) is watching BOTH parties. Trust me.

5.56mm

[icanhasbailout]

Here’s one more: John Kerry is on it

[ImpBill]

Mr. Weinstein is either seriously stoned or off his medications if he believes these 12 will do anything but protect "party" interests.

The day Washington politicians placed country before "political party" passed quite a while back. The bastards haven't breathed the same air as "we the people" for a long, long time.

[SierraWasp]

"I set my congressman right smack on his ass about this. I asked. “Congressman, who do we redress our grievances to and since you are our voice and represent us in congress, who do we petition since no bill coming from that committee can be amended?” “So therefore, you voted to take away our rights to petition to amend and redress of grievances.”

Brilliant deduction, crz... just brilliant. My Congressman didn't and wouldn't vote for it!!!

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks SeekAndFind.

Writing in Real Clear Politics, Paul Weinstein claimed:

Whatever you think of Standard and Poor's decision to downgrade America's credit, their justification was fairly plain. Political gridlock has managed to scuttle several successive efforts to get a handle on the federal debt.

Zerocare and its advocates are the SOLE reason for the S&P downgrade.

[newzjunkey]

He had no answer because you sent drivel.

"To petition the Government for a redress of grievances" means you will not be punished for complaining to or asking help from government.

There's nothing unconstitutional about this silly committee. It's made up of elected representatives. It produces legislation and all our representatives vote up or down. The constitution doesn't tell congress how to make its sausage.

[newzjunkey]

You’re correct. Unfortunately, I think you’ll find the word “unconstitutional” is thrown around these parts too often as a synonym for “I don’t like it.”

[crz]

F off commie.

Time for you commie rats to move back to your hole.