If a good political compromise is one that has something for everyone to hate, then last night’s bipartisan debt-ceiling deal is a triumph. The bargain is nonetheless better than what seemed achievable in recent days, especially given the revolt of some GOP conservatives that gave the White House and Democrats more political leverage.
***
The big picture is that the deal is a victory for the cause of smaller government, arguably the biggest since welfare reform in 1996. Most bipartisan budget deals trade tax increases that are immediate for spending cuts that turn out to be fictional. This one includes no immediate tax increases, despite President Obama’s demand as recently as last Monday. The immediate spending cuts are real, if smaller than we’d prefer, and the longer-term cuts could be real if Republicans hold Congress and continue to enforce the deal’s spending caps.The framework (we haven’t seen all the details) calls for an initial step of some $900 billion in domestic discretionary cuts over 10 years from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) baseline puffed up by recent spending. If the cuts hold, this would go some way to erasing the fiscal damage from the Obama-Nancy Pelosi stimulus. This is no small achievement considering that Republicans control neither the Senate nor the White House, and it underscores how much the GOP victory in November has reshaped the U.S. fiscal debate.
No wonder liberals are howling. They have come to believe in the upward spending ratchet, under which all spending increases are permanent. Not any more.
…One reason to think tax increases are unlikely, however, is that the 12-Member committee will operate from CBO’s baseline that assumes that the Bush tax rates expire in 2013. CBO assumes that taxes will rise by $3.5 trillion over the next decade, including huge increases for middle-class earners. Since any elimination of those tax increases would increase the deficit under CBO’s math, the strong incentive for the Members will be to avoid the tax issue. This increases the political incentive for deficit reduction to come from spending cuts.
…The debt ceiling is a political hostage the GOP could never afford to shoot, and this deal is about the best Republicans could have hoped for given that the limit had to be raised. The Jim DeMint-Michele Bachmann-Sean Hannity alternative of refusing to raise the debt limit without a balanced-budget amendment and betting that Mr. Obama would get all the blame vanishes upon contact with any thought. Sooner or later the GOP had to give up the hostage.
The tea partiers pride themselves on adhering to the Constitution, which was intended to make political change difficult. Yet in this deal they’ve forced both parties to make the biggest spending cuts in 15 years, with more cuts likely next year. The U.S. is engaged in an epic debate over the size and scope of government that will play out over several years, and the most important battle comes in the election of 2012.
Tea partiers will do more for their cause by applauding this victory and working toward the next, rather than diminishing what they’ve accomplished because it didn’t solve every fiscal problem in one impossible swoop.
It’s a start in the right direction, but I would not call it a win for America. We are still in massive debt with no end in sight as to how to realistically tackle it. And as for another committee, well it will just be one more to add to that ever-growing list of committees that politicians use to justify their sorry existence. But I do agree that now the Tea Party should not lose sight of its primary object, to getting rid of the debt. And that means focusing on 2012 and all senate, congressional seats. More Rhinos have to see the light, or be voted out of office. And then a majority of Americans are bidding their time to see if the real conservative candidate will step forward. And will the conservatives split into two warring factions at election time? The in fighting is bad now, but if we don’t get a candidate that can unite the conservatives a weakened Obama will keep his throne for another four years. Its going to really be interesting in more ways than one. So now we wait for the next Doomsday Bill! The next crisis that we must rush through, or the world will explode before our very eyes! God! How our elected politicians have handle these emergencies that they themselves created has become soooo predictable. But at least old Nancy P. said she had to wait to read this one! Thats a small improvement over the last one for her.
It’s a baby step by the Tea Party elected representatives in a world where they are surrounded by vicious, unscrupulous, and devious predators. Right now, we can hope that they will in solidarity hold true to their purpose and not be corrupted as others have.
TEA PARTY ADVANCE BY DETERMINATION,
they hold their ground, It’s a win for the middle earth people
good show conservatives
I would agree,considering the small percentage of T.P members (less than 20% House less than 5% Senate) this is a victory for the T.P. Boehner and the G.O.P. are on notice.BTW what’s the surprise about Boehner compromising with B.H.O.? They golf together.ESTABLISHMENT.
I’d expect Perry to jump in steal Bachmann’s thunder (she wins Iowa,Romney wins N.H) in S.Car and fight Romney to the finish for the nom.Palin backs Perry,Giuliani backs Mitt. FUN
Heavy casualties were inflicted and no one really won. But they know who the Tea Party is and they know we’ve come to fight. This was politics as usual but with a twist. The silent majority is fed up with Washington and we need to vote the Rino’s out of office and continue to elect conservative Americans that understand that the Constitution is not just an option, it’s mandatory.
This article sounds like the establishment GOP cheerleader squad has been dispatched.
Really? $22 Billion in immediate cuts, when looking at a $1.5+ Trillion deficit this year? And $900 Billion or so in immediate cuts over ten years, when spending increases, due to baseline budgeting, were set to be $9.5 Trillion?
This “deal” does NOTHING to reduce the size of government, particularly considering that much of those “immediate” cuts come from the Defense Dept, and won’t result in less personnel, but less money spent on equipment for the servicemembers in harm’s way overseas. And that will make our ops overseas less efficient, and less effective.
Really? It doesn’t address what will happen to the so-called Bush tax cuts that are set to “expire” in 2013. And make no mistake about it. If those tax cuts “expire”, it will be a tax increase, no matter how one parses words and phrasing.
The immediate spending “cuts” are so small as to be nearly inconsequential, and even if the ‘Stupidcommittee’ is able to finagle another $1.2-1.5 Trillion in “cuts”, we will still be increasing by a rate of 3.5% per year, due to the baseline budgeting process. And, as I stated yesterday in another post, revenues would have to increase at a nearly 6% rate, per year, just to maintain the deficit at $1.5 Trillion per year. The government will NOT ever get close to balancing the budget with such small spending “cuts”.
No, it won’t. $900 billion in “cuts”, over ten years, is $90 Billion a year. The Stimulus was nearly $900 Billion in spending over a couple years, with much of it added into the government’s baseline budget amounts. Over ten years, the Stimulus will have cost the country many times more than $900 Billion. There is no way one can claim these spending “cuts will do anything of significance to erasing the Stimulus boondoggle.
What!? That statement makes absolutely no sense at all. If the ‘Members’ avoid the tax issue, taxes will rise due to the expiration of the “Bush tax cuts”. It does NOT increase political incentive for deficit reduction to come from spending cuts. It makes it more likely that the liberal/progressives in both chambers will sit and sit and let those tax increases happen, so that they can claim victory and ‘fiscal responsibility’. Not to mention that if Obama wins in 12′, there is a near guarantee he will veto any extension to those “Bush tax cuts”, in order to be seen as “responsible”. As I said earlier, this “deal” has tax increases.
The cheerleader here has taken the rhetoric from the left and is using it to describe the actions of the conservatives in the GOP. They will NEVER be able to control the narrative by doing this. The reality is that the debt ceiling was never the “hostage” in the whole debate. Raising it was the goal of everyone involved, including those TEA Party conservatives. The question, and discussion, was what to do about spending in order to raise it, and the meager “cuts” in this “deal” don’t come close to being fiscally responsible in addressing runaway spending. Conservatives should be mad as hell about this “deal”. I know I am.
Conservatives didn’t expect the problem to be accomplished in one swoop. To do that, the debt ceiling would need to remain where it is, permanently. Due to obligations, that would have been irresponsible. But the meager cuts in this “deal” are more irresponsible than if nothing had been done. As I have repeatedly stated, this “deal” will never bring spending and revenue close to one another. The government will continue to incur massive amounts of debt, and in ten years the total debt will be well over 100% of GDP, even if those tax increases happen and revenue increases. I don’t accept this as a small “victory”, or even a step in the right direction. It’s nothing more than playing footsie with the liberal/progressive crowd in DC. Stupid, stupid, stupid.
The TEA Party needs to push even harder to vote out the RINOs, the establishment GOP, and any Democrat they can.