Debt Bill To Be Voted On This Afternoon….Likely To Pass; Update: Republicans “Proud” of Boehner; Update: Bill Passes House 269-161

Last night our lawmakers got a deal done to balance the budget and raise the debt limit. A powerpoint was released by Boehner’s officer:

But here are the highlights from Jake Tapper:

• More than $900 billion in deficit reduction over 10 years through discretionary spending caps . $350 billion of that comes from the Pentagon;
• Debt limit increased by at least $2.1 trillion — through 2013…see below for more on how that happens;
• Bipartisan super-committee is tasked with finding $1.5 trillion in deficit reduction by November 23 presumably through tax and entitlement reform. There will be 12 members of the super-committee. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., each get to pick three members;
• Congress must vote on recommendations made by the bipartisan Congressional deficit reduction committee by December 23;
• If Congress fails to pass the committee proposal, triggers are enacted that spur at least $1.2 trillion in cuts and those will be close to 50/50 split between domestic/defense spending. But the triggers exempt cuts to Social Security, Medicare beneficiaries and low income programs. The cuts will take effect on January 2, 2013.

The way the debt ceiling is raised is very complicated:

• Immediately after passage of this bill, the president certifies the US government is within $100 billion of hitting the debt ceiling and is given authority to raise the debt ceiling by $400 billion.
• That also triggers a request to increase the debt ceiling by $500 billion — with a process in which Congress can vote to disapprove. The expected outcome: the president vetoes the disapproval, Congress fails to override the veto, and the President is given the authority to raise the debt ceiling by $500 billion.
• The second tranche comes in December. If the super-committee fails to produce a path to reduce the deficit by $1.5 trillion, or Congress fails to pass it, the president makes a request for the authority to raise the debt ceiling by $1.2 trillion. Congress votes to disapprove, the president vetoes it, Congress fails to over-ride the veto, he gets the authority to raise the debt ceiling by $1.2 trillion.
• OR the super-committee succeeds in finding anywhere between $1.2 trillion and $1.5 trillion in deficit reduction and Congress passes it. The president automatically is given the authority to raise the debt ceiling by an equal amount, with no disapproval process.

Lots of people from both sides of the aisle like the deal, or like it just enough to give it a yes vote. Of course it hasn’t been voted on yet but I find it unlikely that they would even schedule a vote if they thought they couldn’t get it through. Biden was conferring with both chambers to ensure they have the necessary votes and Boehner has supposedly scheduled a vote for 2pm EST. But all that can change if it seems the votes aren’t there.

Like Wisconsin Republican Sen. Ron Johnson:

“Even right now we are supposedly talking about a deal that will be $2.4-trillion worth,” Johnson said. “Think about what that is: $2.4-million-million worth. You just have a couple people negotiating this. I mean, it is ridiculous. We’re talking about the federal government’s budget here.”

One of the problems, he said, was that the deal didn’t meet the rating agencies’ requirements for the federal government to hold on to its pristine debt rating.

“Here’s the first problem — the rating agencies, everybody is keying in on that,” Johnson said. “You know, they say we need $4 trillion, you know, to afford it, to avoid a downgrade in our debt. This is only going to be about $2.4 trillion.”

The freshman Wisconsin Republican, who was an accountant before coming to Washington, said there was some fuzzy math in the first few years of the deal.

“Let’s put it a different way then: What is happening right now is we have doubled spending in just the last 10 years,” Johnson said. “Ten years ago we spent $1.8 trillion. This year we will spend $3.6 trillion, and more. What the president’s budget would do after 10 years: Increase that from $3.7 to $5.7 trillion. He would spend $46 trillion. And all we are doing is lowering that by, what, $900 billion?

“We have got to begin controlling spending in Washington. This is business as usual. I mean, this is a spending culture in Washington and it is bankrupting America. I came here to see if I could do something about changing this culture.”

The problem with the deal, he said, was that it was too small on a relative basis.

“This is totally inadequate,” Johnson said. “You know, it’s sad: It may be a step in the right direction but it is not fixing the problem.

In the House there are some conservatives who have already stated they will not vote for the bill such as Rep. Joe Walsh (R-Ill.)

“I am probably a no,” freshman Rep. Joe Walsh, R-Ill., a tea party favorite, told Fox News. ” … We need a bold solution and this isn’t it.”

and Rep. Louis Gomert (R-Tex.).

Rep. Louie Gohmert, of Texas, one of the few remaining holdouts, emerged from a caucus meeting Wednesday feeling the pain McCarthy promised. “I’m a beat-up ‘no,'” he reported.

Much of the opposition is because of the possible cuts to defense which take effect if Congress fails to follow through with recommendations the “special commission” gives to reduce the deficit.

Completely understandable because any cuts to defense is totally inappropriate. But the Democrat yes votes will more then make up for any incoming no votes from conservatives so in the end I think we have a deal done and voted on by this evening.

UPDATE

Michael New from the Cato Institute likes the deal:

…I am on largely board with Speaker Boehner’s compromise debt-ceiling plan. Politics is the art of the possible, and this plan avoids a government shutdown while offering some spending cuts with no real tax hikes. As most NRO readers know, the long-term fiscal health of this country depends largely on entitlement reform. Unfortunately, the Obama administration never really proposed anything serious in this regard.

On the good side, the spending limits are a positive development. Spending limits can be useful at reinforcing a broad consensus to limit the growth of government. Furthermore, when budget deficits are a salient political issue, Congress has shown the ability to limit non-defense discretionary spending. Adjusting for inflation, non-defense discretionary spending actually fell during the 1980s. In fact, between 1981 and 1996, non-defense discretionary spending increased by only three percentage points in real terms.

…Overall, in the absence of Obamacare, I might have urged the Republicans to take a harder line in these negotiations. However, as I have argued previously, the best thing that could happen for the long-term fiscal health of this country is a repeal of Obamacare. If the 2012 elections are about the faltering economy and Obamacare, Republicans have a good chance to win. Conversely, a focus on Medicare and entitlement reform would not work to the advantage of Republican candidates. Since the window of opportunity to repeal Obamacare will probably close after the 2012 elections, Republicans would do well to accept this compromise and not risk the political fallout that might accompany a partial government shutdown.

UPDATE

Everyone is proud of Boehner it appears and some Republicans who said they were going to vote no yesterday, will vote yes today:

“I’m doing great.” So said Speaker John Boehner as he left this afternoon’s GOP conference meeting. He was all smiles, for good reason: Numerous House Republicans appear to be supportive of the debt-limit deal and of Boehner’s leadership, just days after his speakership was potentially in peril during a tense vote for his revised debt-ceiling plan. “I’m pretty amazed that he got the deal he got,” says Rep. Paul Ryan (R., Wis.), the Budget Committee chairman.

“We are going to be okay,” says Rep. Allen West (R., Fla.), a tea-party star who supports the deal. He denies that Boehner is in trouble with conservatives. “No, he is not,” West says. “The president is in trouble — the president surrendered.”

Freshman Rep. Joe Walsh (R., Ill.) admits to being disappointed with the final deal, “to a degree.” Still, he says, conservatives should not be throwing a tantrum. “We fought a fight as hard as we could fight,” he says. “This thing will probably pass today. I am not going to vote for it. But look at how the world has changed.” In that, he says, “I take heart.”

Looking at the big picture, Walsh adds, “this is clearly a win for all these troublesome conservative Republicans who came here to change the world.” Boehner, he notes, retains his popularity behind closed doors. “Everyone in that room loves him,” he says.

Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R., Utah) confirmed the love-fest. “In fact, I stood up at the end and said, I could not be more proud of how our leadership has handled this,” he says. “Even to those of us who oppose the bill, he has been exceptionally good. I am a bigger supporter of John Boehner now than I’ve ever been.”

UPDATE

269-161

Curt

See author page