I have no idea, but he insisted on no short-term solution and threatened to do the cutting of SS on 8/3. Now, he changed his tune.
IMO, I’d rather the house sign on to the debt increase with some cuts than any of the big deals being discussed. Assuming CCB isn’t happening with this Senate (which is my assumption all along), I’d rather take some cuts, do the debt increase and kick off the 2012 campaign than one of these ultra-damaging other bills. The Dems simply refuse to cut, so we need to remove more of them and get it done later.
If the House stays the course, cuts will be required. Obama needs a deal to help protect his base. Last thing he needs is for the people to realize they don’t need most of the federal government.
ok -
the meeting must’ve resolved that they have to go short term deal in order to avoid CCB or blame.
so, they’re changing their tune, as you said. By doing so, they keep open the possibility of a “grand compromise” when the new, short term deal is over.
It was a good strategic retreat.
Now, pubs gotta get something passed that is in our favor and minimizes the likelihood of a later “grand compromise”.
ideally, we’d get some cuts and take it to election. IMO we should offer NO short term deal. Offer a different option w/ out the amendment - but do NOT let the door open again until after election. jmho
what are your thoughts?