More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Dan Glickman

GET UPDATES FROM Dan Glickman
 

On the "Death" of the Super Committee

Posted: 11/22/11 02:48 PM ET

As of the writing of this blog, the super committee -- 12 members of the House and Senate, which was established several months ago by Congress and the White House to come to grips with the nation's mounting and unsustainable debt -- closed up shop without reaching any agreement whatsoever.

This special committee, extraordinarily inappropriately named, was created by Congress in a last-ditch effort to resolve the deficits of the past years. And its creation was a recognition that the regular order, the normal congressional processes by which legislation is passed, was not working. The super committee was at best an unorthodox and last ditch effort to reach consensus on fiscal issues. Unfortunately, the optimism of the summer has again turned to gridlock and deadlock, and the current paralysis which grips the Capitol continues to the present day.

In my judgment, there are many reasons causing this paralysis. Failure of leadership at all levels of government is apparent to almost anyone who examines our current political crisis. Democrats and Republicans are unable to confront the ideological extremism occurring in the political base of each of their parties to enable them to compromise on tax and spending decisions. Modern media and campaign spending make it difficult for members of Congress to do anything which involves political risk, as political extremes are likely to pounce quickly and aggressively on the actions of most congressman and senators who want to take responsible action which just might enrage the folks at home. And frankly, there is not a lot of political courage left in our system. Harry Truman once counseled his advisors that the art of political leadership is getting people to do what they know needs to be done but do not want to do; seems like Truman's advice on courage and leadership are bygones of another era.

But probably the biggest obstacle to reaching agreement on the debt is the very strong and widening ideological differences between the parties, and the public at large. The Republican Party has become much more conservative in recent years, and much less prone to any compromise on raising taxes and cutting defense spending. And many in the Democratic Party have dug in more than ever on long-term reductions in Medicare and Social Security, where most of the big spending decisions must be made. The result is paralysis, and an American government incapable of governing for its most basic functions and needs, in large part because there is such a massive divide on so many of the issues. But historically we have always had deep and significant divisions in America, whether on issues of war and peace, civil rights, or health care reform, and the mark of a great country like ours is the ability to reach consensus on these divisions. We have always done so in the past. But in today's environment, reaching consensus on any of these issues is often viewed by partisans in the context of weakness, passivity, and even unilateral disarmament.

Perhaps the most reasonable outcome to all of this is a serious presidential and congressional election where the public can speak clearly and unequivocally on where they want their government to take them. Smaller or bigger government. More or fewer taxes. Smaller or larger entitlements. Ultimately, it is the public who have to send a less ambiguous direction for their country. Right now they are at 50/50. Part of the gridlock is caused by an American public which is equally divided and not sending clear signals to their elected officials. Maybe the only real solution to all of this is for the public to take the 2012 elections very, very seriously, and send a more definable mandate to the politicians on the decisions they are entrusted to make.

 
As of the writing of this blog, the super committee -- 12 members of the House and Senate, which was established several months ago by Congress and the White House to come to grips with the nation's m...
As of the writing of this blog, the super committee -- 12 members of the House and Senate, which was established several months ago by Congress and the White House to come to grips with the nation's m...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 91
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Robert SF
03:04 PM on 11/23/2011
"Maybe the only real solution to all of this is for the public to take the 2012 elections very, very seriously . . ."
===

I don't see how that will make a difference. We're going to vote for one of two people, and it won't make any difference who wins. Would the Super Committee have worked differently had McCain been elected? No.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Briteleaf
11:39 AM on 11/23/2011
We live in a plutocracy. Our government is of the corporate, by the corporate and for the corporate. Members of that committee have already said that they wouldn't allow 90% of the deficit to be covered by program cuts if 10% would be covered by tax increases. The corporate don't want tax increases. Big corporations like Exxon and GE PAID ZERO TAXES LAST YEAR. That's the important thing. This committee was doomed from the beginning.
11:17 AM on 11/23/2011
"Perhaps the most reasonable outcome to all of this is a serious presidential and congressional election where the public can speak clearly and unequivocally on where they want their government to take them."
I haven't laughed this hard since I don't know when...thanks for that! Priceless.
10:52 AM on 11/23/2011
The illusion of having democratic election where great issues are decided on their merits instead of the auction it really is as evidenced by the president seeking to raise one billion dollars the overwhelming percentage of which will come from corporate donors despite the official line and where his republican opponent will be showered and bribed by another obscene amount coming from the other side of the wealthy elite who actually run the country. No matter which side wins their supporters will be disappointed once they realize how hollow their promises were because they must pay back their real masters once the auction is over. Choosing between two parties whose first priority has little to do with the public interest will remain a farce until the money is taken out of politics.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jumpinjezebel
I'll show U mine if U'll show me urs
10:50 AM on 11/23/2011
Dems 2012 campaign slogan: "Do We Need More Defenders of the Super Rich"?
photo
rflctammt
War doesn't prove who is right, only who is left.
09:20 AM on 11/23/2011
King Norquist and his minions never had any intention of reaching a compromise.

The plan was to lay a cracked egg and hope it would land at the president's feet. No way they would take a chance on delivering something sound for the country that could possibly be attributed to him.
photo
shawshank
The unseen ones prop up the visible world...
09:20 AM on 11/23/2011
It's folks like this author who make things worse for progress. Turning a blind eye to the unprecedented obstruction by the republicans, while claiming that it is both parties' fault. BS.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Izzy66
Agree to Disagree
09:19 AM on 11/23/2011
When the GOP Governors and legislatures are passing onerous voter I.D. laws (such as elderly women having to bring birth and marriage certificates) and Voter Registration restrictions (Third party Voter Registration - helping get others registered - is now faced with FINES if the completed forms aren't submitted within 48 hours to the Registrar's office) in addition to ending same day registration, not accepting State Driver's licenses, preventing early voting and even some reports of robo calls to democratic voters telling them wrong polling times and election days.

But hey, no one's listening. We'll just ignore the GOP cancer eating away at our democracy and pretend everyone gets a voice. The Right Wins again due to disinterest.
08:38 AM on 11/23/2011
"Perhaps the most reasonable outcome to all of this is a serious presidential and congressional election where the public can speak clearly and unequivocally on where they want their government to take them." Wrong. There was a serious election in 2008 and a mandate but the winner, Obama, unfortunately lied to the public and failed to implement almost all of his major policies. You miss the fact that our political system is broken: both parties are to blame and both are owned by major corporations. As Gore Vidal said long ago, America has one party, the corporate party and it has 2 wings, one Democratic, one Republican. Structural changes are necessary. The Senate (like the British House of Lords) needs to be abolished. A constitutional amendment allowing the Feingold-McCain restrictions on campaign donations, needs to be implemented. Presidential candidates should be forced to take public money only (no private donations)(note that Obama is the guy who turned down public funding in 2008). Term limits need to be put in place for all politicians. The problems we are facing now are structural and much bigger than the columnist alludes to.
photo
Dreamking
Madman Across The Water....
10:25 AM on 11/23/2011
FFL:

I was going to address the glaring absurdities in the author's article, but you seem to have beat me to it. Thanks for saving me the typing.

Great post! F&F'd

DK
07:51 AM on 11/23/2011
The Super Committee was just a Republican scam to end run the expiration date on the Bush Tax Cuts.
08:40 AM on 11/23/2011
Wrong, actually Obama was one of the people pushing the Super Committee. He's also the guy who set up the "cat food commission" and appointed right wing hacks to it like Alan Simpson. In 2006, when Goldman Sachs bought Obama, he was talking about the need to cut entitlements. Obama could have ended the Bush tax cuts as president; he didn't want to.
04:08 PM on 11/23/2011
You have some good points. Change you can't believe in.
06:09 AM on 11/23/2011
Thanks for your informative post.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
orcinous
Obama has made things better.
02:15 AM on 11/23/2011
Firs,t let's remember that SS is not a debt problem, it is fully funded for the next 25 or so years with a two trillion fund. Wish people would get this right and not use it to distort things. Secondly, medicare had a chance to be reformed but the republicans resisted and the democrats caved to insurers. If you want a free market then get rid of the insurance companies. Both parties cave to big money interests. Third, a mandate was sent to congress in 2010 about jobs, yet not a single job has been created in two years through any help from the government. Republicans lied to get elected and now continue to cater to big money interests. The madate sent to congress should be "no jobs for us, no job for you, you're fired!".
10:58 AM on 11/23/2011
SS and Medicare are not entitlements. They're paid for investments of the workers,expecting a ROI when the time comes. The DOD is an entitled government function. Defense is what the citizens pay for,not offense. Congress needs a definite overhaul of many members and their rules of conduct.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:43 PM on 11/23/2011
I don't medicare was ever sold as a paid for investment like SS. It's a transfer program everyone is taxed and a certain group get's the benefits. Which honestly Social Security is probably the same thing now.
01:16 AM on 11/23/2011
And who, exactly are we supposed to vote for? No one running represents the people of the United States.
10:44 AM on 11/23/2011
Don't vote for anyone. Abolish Congress and create a national voter draft to fill the seats created. Let "we the people" make the decisions,not corporate or special interest elected employees.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jumpinjezebel
I'll show U mine if U'll show me urs
10:52 AM on 11/23/2011
Try Bernie Sanders.
01:07 AM on 11/23/2011
This article is BS. Social security does not contribute to the debt. This deadlock is not a failure to compromise. Obama has done nothing but. It is Right wing fanatical ideology and hatred for Obama ( probably partially because he has some African american blood) and a determination by the Rebubs to win even if it destroys the country. This article is biased.
photo
shawshank
The unseen ones prop up the visible world...
09:19 AM on 11/23/2011
Thank you.
11:00 AM on 11/23/2011
A Republican author,obviously.
12:40 AM on 11/23/2011
Exactly. As long as Republicans think the majority of the country agrees with them and they can take over in 2012 no progress will be possible. So, they must be soundly defeated if the country is to move forward in 2013. However, if the election is a draw then we can expect more intransigence from the right and, continued gridlock in Congress
11:02 AM on 11/23/2011
The only "majority" that Republicans represent are the 1%.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:46 PM on 11/23/2011
Doesn't matter what the majority thinks only what majority of voters think.