Patterico's Pontifications

7/19/2011

Enter the Gang of Six

Filed under: General — Karl @ 12:46 pm



[Posted by Karl]

Daniel J. Mitchell summarizes what little we know of the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly of the Senate’s bipartisan attempt to put off dealing with our national debt.  Like the Simpson-Bowles recommendations — but unlike Pres. Obama — the Gang proposes reducing tax rates, but still hiking takes by at least $1 trillion.  The Gang also punts on entitlement reform — our government will magically spend healthcare dollars more efficiently (IPAB, anyone?) — and appears to leave Obamacare otherwise untouched.  The Gang’s spending caps won’t apply to entitlements either.  Furthermore, the Gang proposes only to slow the rate of growth of government, not actually cut it.   The only cuts you can bank on amount to a mere $500 billion of the $3.6 trillion advertised (note the tax hikes are the twice as much).  No wonder I’ve learned to stop worrying and love the debt bomb.

Gangster Dick Durbin (D-IL) doubts the plan could be enacted in the two weeks remaining before the debt ceiling is his, because it needs to be scored by the CBO.  A senior White House official says the OMB could get it scored in time to get a deal in place by August 2, meaning that Obama would personally scrawl some figures on a cocktail napkin if it means getting the GOP to play Charlie Brown to his Lucy Van Pelt in time for football season. Remember, this is not about the debt ceiling or the debt; it’s about Obama’s re-election campaign.

Update: Conn Carroll explains that the Gangsters may be proposing $3 trillion in tax hikes. Given that it’s a $3.6-3.7 trillion plan, that would mean the $500 billion of immediate spending “cuts” would be almost all the “cuts” in the plan.

–Karl

34 Responses to “Enter the Gang of Six”

  1. So the question is: are the GOP gang members ignorant? Or are they disingenuous? It’s the former if they think this is going to do anything to cut federal spending and the role government plays in our lives, the former if they know it and are still pushing it anyway.

    steve (369bc6)

  2. Karl – Don’t worry too much about that IPAB thinger. According to Secretary Sebelius it really doesn’t have any power at all and is subject to intense Congressional oversight, or something. I heard her say it so it must be true.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  3. Steve – it does not have to be one or the other. It can be/is both.

    JD (ce7dc6)

  4. These Senate Gangs should be investigated by the anti-gang units, as they are far more corrosive to American society an street gangs.

    JD (ce7dc6)

  5. JD: No, it can’t be both. Either they know (this isn’t going to work) or they don’t. It’s the same thing as with criticism of Bush: either he was stupid or he was an evil genius, by definition he couldn’t be both.

    steve (369bc6)

  6. It is not possible for a Senate geezer to be stupid and disingenuous?

    JD (ce7dc6)

  7. Since we’re borrowing 40% of the Federal budget, no debt ceiling raise leaves the current administration, i.e., Geithner, to wisely, fairly pay the bills, as far as the money goes.

    They’ve got $300 Billion left in pension funds left to pilfer which will run out in October.

    So they have a dilemma, but if we get no cuts in current spending for JEF to veto none of the Senators hoping to dodge blame should be returned.

    gary gulrud (790d43)

  8. A stupid person could try to be disingenuous, but really couldn’t pull it off. Although a disingenuous person could try to come off as stupid…

    steve (369bc6)

  9. Wow, I heard 66% cuts and 33% loopholes. Well, let me tell you RINO hunting just got more visceral if this is the case. Cocktailers beware …. voters are going to be pissed.

    Sponge Bob Torquemada (786e37)

  10. cowards and whores

    happyfeet (a55ba0)

  11. “Cocktailers beware …. voters are going to be pissed.”

    Jimminy Cricket – DeMint is now supporting it. Because of teh PURITY!!!!!!!

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  12. daleyrocks,

    If you have a link re DeMint, please post it. The Hill has him not knowing enough about it, but I’m guessing you saw something more on TV…

    Karl (f07e38)

  13. Karl – My mistake. It was Coburn. I was recalling headline from Hot Air.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  14. With all of these “gangs” in the Senate, I just have to muse:
    Where is Deng Xiaoping when you need him?

    AD-RtR/OS! (b87a7f)

  15. I am so disappointed I could just vomit. If this is what we get for our effort in 2010, does 2012 really matter?

    David (8e8ff2)

  16. does 2012 really matter?

    Comment by David — 7/19/2011 @ 4:48 pm

    Imagine what the deal would have been like had the Democrats controlled congress.

    Oh wait. There would be no deal. When the democrats ran the House too, horrible unpopular entitlements were created and rammed through congress in the dead of night. Deem and pass.

    Yes, even though the GOP is not yet powerful enough to do much, they are a vast improvement over 2006-2010. Yeah, the government is yet horribly bloating, but this is the one single reason the skyrocketing growth has plateaued. Sure, we’re out of money, but we were out of money in 2009 too. They could just pass a debt ceiling of infinity if they had all the power.

    Don’t get me wrong. You’re right to be frustrated with this ‘deal’ and despair for the future, but hopefully you know your support in 2012 is part of the solution.

    Furthermore, the Gang proposes only to slow the rate of growth of government, not actually cut it.

    Yes, we really are in deep trouble right now if the democrats actually want to continue this way.

    Maybe I don’t need to worry about voters. If they really raise taxes, the economy will falter, and California will be a swing state.

    Dustin (b7410e)

  17. I apologize
    if you’ve just eaten dinner
    but I like this guy!

    http://youtu.be/J7cZf9QJ1FQ

    ColonelHaiku (cc5c75)

  18. anyone who gets
    Chrissie Matthews to shut yap
    is a friend of mine

    ColonelHaiku (cc5c75)

  19. About the best possible spin I can try to put on this from the GOP’s perspective is that it pushes the debt ceiling issue past the 2012 election, and it puts the Obama Administration and the Dems on record as officially supporting some spending caps (not cuts, unfortunately). If this is the best that we can get, then my suggestion would be the following:

    1) The House should refuse to vote on this until it is scored by the Congressional Budget Office, even if that means that the August 2 date will slip. Don’t be bullied into accepting the Gang of 6’s numbers.

    2) If the numbers from the CBO come back close to the Gang of 6 estimate, the House should pass this bill but then start working on the 2012 budget with real spending cuts and entitlement reforms. They should make it clear that the Gang of 6 bill is a down-payment, not the end of the road.

    3) If the CBO comes back with a lower estimate (apparently Jeff Sessions thinks that spending is only reduced by $1.2 trillion), the House should refuse the deal until the Dems put entitlements (including ObamaCare) on the table. If this means passing a 30-day debt extension, then so be it. Dare Obama to veto it.

    JVW (39c649)

  20. Anyone who can shut Chrissy Matthews up is one tough son of a gun.

    DohBiden (d54602)

  21. Death to the GOP turncoats in the Gang of Six.

    ropelight (338845)

  22. i like to inside out my pockets
    and say
    kiss the rabbit between the ears

    pdbuttons (25ef24)

  23. What a plan, the typical, across the isle plan for when hard choices need to be made.
    Kick it as far down the road as possible while “promising” to make cuts and effectively raising taxes by at least 1.5 trillion dollars.

    Any plan that doesn’t meet the Reagan standard of trust and verify does not cut it.
    No need to go into the taxing part of the plan at the moment since everyone and their mothers want details, rock solid details on how they are going to “cut” the wasteful spending and just as importantly, how they are going to severely limit and future spending to the absolute bare minimum.

    Now anything less and we are screwed so yes, gird the loins.

    justavoter (b2ea2a)

  24. After they fence the border, repeal ObamaCare, kill light rail, come clean on Gunwalker, kick Obama’s czars out, and lock-up Eric Holder and his band of crooks and liars, we can discuss the budget, if they have one.

    ropelight (338845)

  25. Rampage in California!

    In wake of Bin Laden’s death, radical Muslims have gone on rampage in Southern California, killing anyone who’s a legal US citizen.

    Police fear death toll could be as high as 2.

    Colonel will keep you posted on any future developments…

    ColonelHaiku (cc5c75)

  26. Crossposted under a different handle (TheRealGrant) at NRO:

    I disagree with this post, as well as the majority of the commenters.

    (1) Fundamentally, any economic harm that would occur after the failure to raise the Debt Ceiling would be placed, politically, on the Republicans. The media would participate (you can see that they already are by falsely calling August 2nd the “default” date), and Obama would get his 2nd term with the House of Representatives back, too.

    (2) The Gang of Six deal contains three parts: (1) REAL spending cuts, including to entitlements, (2) ILLUSORY spending cuts, and (3) ILLUSORY tax modification (revenue increases – maybe, and tax rate decreases – maybe). The later two things would require committee actions and then more votes.

    (3) The real cuts in the plan, including chained CPI, are much greater than what the Biden plan contained. Just as importantly, they kill the Dems “scare the seniors” political attacks – the Dems and President would have endorse the reality that the entitlements are broke and need to be reformed. No more: our plan is medicare or Social Security is fine for the next 30 years lies.

    (4) The Republicans MUST note that this plan DOES NOT fix the deficit or size of government problems. Instead of spending 1.60 for every dollar we take in, this plan moves us down to 1.50. But then the Republicans can make 2012 about CUT, CAP, & BALANCE. Say: “we FORCED Obama to cut spending AT ALL – but that plan doesn’t fix everything, it still plans annual deficits, and an ever increasing debt, as far as the eye can see. President Obama’s only plan to deal with this would be to increase taxes on you by maybe 30% still and gut America’s ability to defend itself. We’ve got a better plan – one that would allow us to make sure that the mortgage interest deduction gets back to where it was, etc.” The president had no plan, so we forced the Dems in the Senate to do something that they rejected just months prior.

    (5) I want everyone here to think about that one more time. The Republicans could run in 2012 on (a) restoring/saving the mortgage interest deduction, (b) making sure we don’t have deficits forever without massively hiking taxes, and (c) CUT, CAP and BALANCE.

    CenterRightMargin (fd3d4c)

  27. CenterRight, if the GOP goes along with a tax increase enough TEA Party patriots will break out in open revolt to kill any chance of a GOP victory in 2012.

    Democrats know that, it’s their one hope to win in 2012. They’re counting on the Stupid Party to self-destruct again. Don’t allow yourself to fall into the trap. Keep in mind that George HW Bush foolishly allowed himself to be taken-in by the Democrat’s false promises and it cost him a second term.

    ropelight (338845)

  28. This reminds me of Lucy pulling the football away from Charlie Brown. Tax cuts today, with a promise for gimmick cuts that will never happen in the future. No thanks.

    JD (ce7dc6)

  29. This is yet another farce coming from the establishment Republicans. We need to purge them from the Senate over the next 4 years. These people are obviously incapable of shame…

    WarEagle (08c61f)

  30. If this goes through I AM Done. Good riddence GOP

    Jackosan (4ff715)

  31. I don’t understand Coburn. He may have a point on some tax subsidies but now is not the time and the need now is to control spending.

    Mike K (8f3f19)

  32. Mike, subsidies are spending, even if they take the form of taxing someone less than they should be.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  33. This reminds me of Lucy pulling the football away from Charlie Brown. Tax cuts today, with a promise for gimmick cuts that will never happen in the future. No thanks.

    Comment by JD — 7/20/2011 @ 5:24 am

    More like Popeye’s friend Wimpy: “I’ll gladly pay you Thursday for a hamburger today.”

    in_awe (44fed5)

  34. So if this is such a bad deal, how did Coburn get involved? He’s one of the good guys, the true believers. What is he missing?

    Milhouse (ea66e3)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0781 secs.