It now appears all but certain that the Senate will not adjourn as scheduled next week for the July 4th recess, as Republicans have threatened to do “everything in their power” to prevent this from happening. Still, no one could give a definitive answer Wednesday night as the Senate let out for the night. Sen. Tom Coburn (R., Okla.) said he expected to be here next week because Republicans simply weren’t going to permit a recess.
Most Democrats seemed to think they’d be back as well, and didn’t seem too happy about it. “Go ask Minority Leader DeMint!” Sen. Tom Harkin (D., Iowa) barked at reporters, when asked if he’d be working next week. “He’s got a stranglehold of his caucus over there.” Sen. Jim DeMint (R., S.C.) was one of many GOP senators who signaled that they would object to any unanimous consent agreement to adjourn for the holiday.
Sen. Kent Conrad (D., N.D.), chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, told reporters he expected the Senate would be in session next week, and if so, he would be introducing a budget resolution that every Democrat on the committee had signed off on. He said the overall package would contain “over $4 trillion” in deficit reduction, but provided few other details. Conrad said he did not plan to bring the resolution before the committee for a markup or hold any floor votes.
Sen. Bob Corker (R., Tenn.) riffed with reporters as to why Republicans decided to take a stand by objecting to the recess. “The alarm bells have gone off,” he said, indicating that most Republicans now realize that negotiations between party leaders and the White House are “not going any place that matters.” Indeed, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.) referred to the talks as “a parody” earlier in the day.
“Obviously the best deal is having the president involved but it appears that that’s not going to happen at this moment,” Corker said. “We’re looking for Plan B.”
Corker said Republicans, who in exchange for raising the debt ceiling were demanding “dramatic changes in the character of spending,” have concluded that a deal with the White House is “less and less likely.” Even the roughly $2.5 trillion in deficit reduction ironed out during the negotiations led by Vice President Joe Biden was “nowhere near enough” to satisfy the GOP, let alone the bond markets. “I don’t think they’d look at that as serious,” he said. “People realize that on the course we’re on we’re heading for a train wreck.”
If you had asked him two months ago, Corker said, he would have told you there was a “great chance” that lawmakers would reach an agreement. He is dramatically less optimistic now, at least as far as negotiations with the president are concerned. As long as the White House has “taken everything off the table,” specifically entitlement programs, which are the biggest drivers of the federal debt and deficit, Corker said a deal was all but impossible.
“There’s nothing there that provides any saving,” he said. “Everything big has been taken off — Medicaid, Medicare — it’s kind of where all the money is, so how can you get to an agreement? We’re going to have to work outside that process because that process is not going anywhere.”
Corker insisted that “there are other ways of making deals” outside of these formal negotiations, and predicted “a lot of hustling around” as multiple, smaller groups of senators begin to come forward with their own ideas in an effort to forge a grand bargain. He pointed to the Coburn-Lieberman Medicare plan as an example. “Everyone is focused on how do we get a deal that’s acceptable,” he said. “That’s the conversation that’s going on on the floor.”
And it’s about time, he said. For Congress to have gone nearly 800 days without passing a budget to deal with our massive debt crisis is “unbelievably irresponsible,” and he suggested that people ought to be far more concerned than they are right now. “I tell people back home, no matter how irresponsible they think Congress is, believe me it is far worse than that,” he said. “I can’t believe the markets are this calm.”
The one thing I keep coming back to in all this back and forth is that every conversation from both sides do not address the very real problem of the interest that will be paid on the debt moving forward. The markets will not abide the usual gimmicks of 'cuts' spread over the years. The only real chance to make substantial changes to the federal governments spending is to cut all parts of the budget NOW. The simple fact that a return to the 'normal' range for interest rates paid out by the federal government over even the last couple of decades blows every proposal from either side out of the water. Cut the spending from THIS year and NEXT year. Any grand plan beyond that isn't worth the paper its printed on.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"The markets will not abide the usual gimmicks of 'cuts' spread over the years."
What? What leads you to believe this?
I think you're totally wrong, and instead the opposite is true: the markets couldn't care less about our debts and deficit. In large part because of the way their exposure to our debt is structured.
On the other hand a default - or partial default - will be devastating to the markets. You have this issue completely backward.
If you don't think this is true, I'd love to hear you (or anyone) explain why treasury bills are currently available for purchase at record low rates...
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseInteresting, isn't it? The Repubs and Obama don't want a 4th of July recess. The Dems in the Senate and House do. Is this triangluzation?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseDon't insult us, Senator Corker. We're pretty g-darned concerned about you worthless, negligent, self serving, irresponsible morons in Congress who seem hell-bent-for-leather determined to run this country right into the ground, spawning mass social unrest and God knows what else, but what the heck else is it, exactly, is it you want us to about it????
Every day we turn on the news and listen to the juvenile display of self-preening, posturing arrogance that passes for political debate in DC this days...we lose more hair, and take years off of our lifespan. Cigarettes take 7 minutes off a smoker's life? Bah! Watching DC further disintegrate into the cesspool of payoffs and backroom deals between Democrats and Republicans is taking years off of our lives.
We elected so-called Republicans to do something. If you can't, get out of the way and let someone in who can. Quit your whining, and quit asking us to do whatever it is you don't think we are doing, besides working and paying taxes to the galactic black hole named the USA.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseDitto completely.
I always operate on the assumption that a person's job is what he actually does, not what the nameplate on his door says. By this operational definition, Congress's official job is to destroy the country. That's what they do all the time, no matter which "party" has control.
They appear to be happy with this task, and the executive branch is also happy. Otherwise the executive branch would dissolve Congress, declare martial law, and solve some problems.
This never happens, therefore both branches are marauding enemy armies, no matter which "party" owns them.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbusePoppycock. Corker is busting his butt to get this done. Go to youtube and search videos of him in the Senate chambers. He is doing all he can, but he is one person. And he is right. The vast majority of Americans don't give a darn about our budget problems. Just because a few commenters on NRO does, doesn't mean everyone does. We are like the Greeks. If nothing changes, stupid people will be in the streets of New York rioting about entitlements while the ship goes down.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe language in these posts is so misleading. When you say $2.5 Trillion or $4 Trillion - is this for one year or 10 years? It needs to be made explicit every time it's mentioned. If it's over 10 years- that means the cuts are $250 to $400 million dollars - a real drop in the bucket.
And nowhere is it ever mentioned what the Yearly budget is. I think that's important to get a sense of the spending on a yearly basis and the kind of cuts that are being talked about.
To not mention all the facts is just irresponsible.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIf they mention all numbers, then how are the politicians going to fool you?
Face it, there is not going to be any spending cuts, in the sense that next year's spending is less than this year's spending.
All they are fighting for is whether they increase the debt by $16 Tr in 10 years or by $12 Tr.
I am sure you feel a whole lot better adding just $12 Tr to the debt than $16 Tr.
To me, it doesn't make a difference. If the US can handle a $26 Tr debt by 2021, then it can handle a $30 Tr debt. So spend away.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseUnfortunately the spending cuts are always illustrated over 10 years. This is absurd. I went to a state college and I can come up with over 500B in about 10 minutes. None of these guys are serious. At this point, I don't care if they shut it down. Make interest payments and basic social services - SS/Medicare - for now. Let's really see how bad it is with all this other garbage not funded. If I were the R's I would already have the commercials cut and ready to go. POTUS has put forth a budget that got 0 votes in the Senate. Harry Reid has not submitted a budget in nearly 800 days. Who is holding the process up here? Don't worry though, Mitch and the boys will find a way to scru this up anyway.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWell said. Percentages would be even more telling, I would think.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"When you say $2.5 Trillion or $4 Trillion .... If it's over 10 years- that means the cuts are $250 to $400 million dollars"
Your math is, shall we say, interesting.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAlmost as irritating as the budget battle is the security box here which demands you play a sound clip at some ungodly sound level.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSilly Senator Corker. The markets are calm because they know the Republican party is ultimately going to cave in the end. Rather than claim 2.5 trillion is somehow not enough, they are eventually going to be thanking their lucky stars that they might even get half of that.
Why would Republicans cave? Because the alternative to increasing the debt ceiling is a temporary stop in entitlement payouts, until Republicans cave. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that the Republican party does not want to become a minority regional party for a generation, and would therefore not have such a state of affairs last for very long. This is precisely why the Republicans caved in 1995.
The Republican Party would have been much better off if it didn't ratchet up expectations here, because now the base is going to go nuts when they inevitably cave. (Just look at comments here!)
There is a segment of the base that believes most Americans think like they do, that entitlements need to be ratcheted down or eliminated (even though most of the Republican party itself disagrees, let alone the rest of the country). They believe that the result of no agreement (an entitlement shutoff) is a good thing, so they don't want to negotiate. They are completely separated from the vast majority of the American people, who would throw anyone they knew thought that way out of office. The expectations people like Corker are creating now are just going to make it that much more painful for the base when the cave comes. For their own sake, they should not be playing with fire -- certainly not fire that they themselves created.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNope, they should just keep spending.
Money that they don't have, BTW. Let the next generation figure out if and how they will pay. Not our problem.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe goal is to cut spending. Whether we do it by agreement or by not raising the debt ceiling, it doesn't matter. Either way, the GOP wins and gets their spending cuts. The only difference is, Geithner and Obama decide what to cut - and then the American people will hold them accountable for their decisions. So... "Explain to us why, President Obama, why funding Obamacare is more important than paying the debt and maintaining the full faith and credit of the United States?" And so on, straight down the list of the $6 trillion-plus spending cuts in the Ryan Plan? "Tell us, Mr. Geithner, why keeping all of that spending is more important that the full faith and credit of the U.S.?
As for Social Security, didn't Clinton demogogue - uh, claim - that the funds are in a "lockbox"? But if they're not, the solution is simple: privatize.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI really hope the GOP doesn't bring up privatization of Social Security in this debate. It is going to be hard enough to make serious headway with the Democrats already pushing granny off of a cliff, so we don't need any more issues that will give them a chance to "personalize the target," as they are so prone to do. That would be a tactical error along the lines of the Democrats going after the oil depletion allowance every time they want to make a change to the tax code. We need to wave as few red flags in front of the bulls as possible until we get something decent on the table that takes care of the immediate problem.
WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseConcur with comments that we need $500 billion or so guaranteed spending cuts for FY 12 as an immediate down payment for deficit reduction. I wish our leaders would give us some signal of how much they believe is doable for FY 12. The 10-year plans are just hogwash.
The big news is that Democratic senators now know they are dealing with a delusional president, a pedantic juvenile who is in denial over the economy, his job, and the failure of his policies. The White House wants total war, including witholding social security checks; the GOP will not bend or break; so there will be no debt ceiling increase. In the internet age, with proper preparation of the American people by everyone, there is no way that a Social Security stunt will work; in fact, Obama will be blamed further for playing games with seniors' lives.
Even if Reid and Schumer try to play along regarding social security checks, they cannot hold their caucus on this issue; too many of their flock are terrified of 2012, particularly those from red states (both Nelsons, McCaskill, Manchin, Tester).
The more interesting question is whether Obama will agree to a deal, get his debt increase, and then veto the spending cuts. The GOP had better put the entirety in one package, or they will get punked by Obama and Reid.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI am going to make a confession. I really don't have a lot of sympathy for the "young" in America who might be facing the daunting task of cleaning up the fiscal mess being made even as we speak.
Why such a lack of concern for the kids? It is simple really, they voted for Obama. they got what they wanted, now they must face the consequences of that. We old curmudgeons will do what we can to mitigate the looming disaster but I am not doing it "for the children" because the children, in some measure, did this to us.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI'm with you on this, curmudgeon. Sometimes people have to learn the hard way. There is so much learning going on right now (though you wouldn't know it from the MSM) that once the day dawns and the dust clears, the country will be in a lot better shape for some time to come.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse