With a bipartisan debt deal nowhere in sight, Republicans will (once again) take the lead with an ambitious solution of their own. But will it succeed?
House Republicans have united around a proposal to tie sizeable spending cuts and major budget reforms to any increase to the debt ceiling. The plan, known as “Cut, Cap, and Balance,” originated in the Republican Study Committee, and has gradually made its way to the forefront of the GOP’s intraparty discussions on the debt limit. At a closed-door conference meeting Friday morning, Republican leaders resolved to vote on — and pass — the plan next week on the House floor. Its chances for success in the Senate are close to nil, but Republicans intend to present it as the type of plan that can pass the House, and also as a serious proposal that House Republicans have put forward in the absence of Democratic leadership.
“All year long, we’ve led on the big issues that are facing the country,” said House Speaker John Boehner (R., Ohio) at a press conference Friday, citing the House-passed Paul Ryan budget as a key example. “We’re in the fourth quarter here. Time and again Republicans have offered serious proposals to cut spending and address these issues, and I think it’s time for the Democrats to get serious as well.”
Under the “Cut, Cap, and Balance” legislation, Congress would raise the debt ceiling by $2.5 trillion (the amount requested by President Obama to get him through the 2012 election). However, that increase would go into effect only if both houses of Congress pass — with two-thirds majorities — a balanced-budget amendment (BBA) to the Constitution and send it to the states for ratification. In addition, the plan calls for significant spending cuts to next year’s budget — about $111 billion — and firm caps on federal spending at 18.5 percent of GDP by the end of the decade. According to White House data, given current trends, spending will exceed 25 percent of GDP this year and will hover around 22.5 percent for the next five years. (The legislation will make no immediate changes to Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security.)
More here.
This is certainly better than the "McConnell Capitulation" and as the Big Zero won't put forth any specific plan it will allow the R's to point to another effort to keep the government gasping along. (By the way, I must be one of the 20% not in favor of increasing taxes! Obama must be a product of the "new math" initiative of several years ago which emphasized "feeling good about yourself" and not necessarily getting the correct answer.)
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIs it legal to make the execution of one bill be contingent on another bill passing?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNo. Later bills are superior to earlier ones. You must specifically create or write into a higher area of law. Personally, I'd like to see the creation of a law between constitutional amendment and above normal law. But that's probably just me.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMuch better; although the balance part isn't necessary.
When the democrats have been reduced to saying "we want Obama to be just like Bush and Reagan", they've lost the argument.
And, they know it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHow does the current crisis get resolved with this? The BBA will not fly, meaning the GOP still gets stuck with the charge by Obama of not agreeing to raise taxes on the rich to avert the crisis. A short-term increase to the debt limit coupled with dollar-for-dollar spending cuts is the better way to go.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse> spending at 18.5 percent of GDP...
will end up having no meaning (GDP will be redefined). the correct formulation would be something like 98% of last FY's tax receipts.
What are the penalties for failing to satisfy the statute? We see the effects the fearsome penalties of the Budget Act in the senate's actions.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseCC&B will put Obama on the defensive until time is almost up, at which point the House will vote to increase the debt ceiling to cover 90-days of spending so that negotiations can continue. This will force Obama to either renege on his pledge not to sign a 90-day extension or take 100% of the blame for plunging the country into default.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse