We are just one week away from when the Super Committee needs to deliver a deficit-reduction proposal to the Congressional Budget Office and the group is stuck on -- you guessed it -- the question of whether or not to remove tax loopholes for the richest Americans. Does this feel like déjà vu?
The 12-member Super Committee of Congressional and Senate leaders was formed as a compromise when budget negotiations went south last summer. The Committee was tasked with finding $1.2 trillion in savings by Thanksgiving or an automatic provision would kick in reducing Medicare by $600 billion and defense by the same amount -- a stinger to both sides of the aisle. To make the November 23rd deadline the Committee has to deliver its proposal to the CBO to "run numbers" two weeks ahead of time -- i.e. in the next few days. But just like last summer, both sides remain in a heated debate, which is looking more and more like class warfare.
Thus far, the Committee has been largely secretive about negotiations. What we do know comes from leaks and this week's first public hearings: Democrats have proposed $3 trillion in savings; Republicans have proposed $2.2 trillion. In Erskine Bowles' (co-author of the Simpson-Bowles plan) speech to the Committee this week encouraging both sides to embrace their common ground, some specifics emerged, including that both plans propose:
What, then, accounts for the $800 billion difference between what the Democrats are offering and what the Republicans are willing to accept? You guessed it -- taxes.
Over the summer, House Speaker John Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor were invited to the White House to meet with President Obama and Secretary of the Treasury Tim Geithner to hear their plan to close tax loopholes and restructure the tax code. If implemented, the effort could find $800 billion in savings. It was nicknamed "the grand bargain."
Back then it wasn't something Boehner could sell to his Tea Party caucus. But given the political backlash his members felt then and some repackaging now, he's hoping he can sell it. The idea is to present this to his folks as a "tax restructuring" rather than a tax increase. That way, a Republican who had signed the Grover-Norquist-no-new-taxes pledge (including himself) could keep their promise.
Enter Grover Norquist. According to Talking Points Memo, "The well-funded anti-tax crusader has secured pledges from the vast majority of Republican members of Congress, including all six GOP members of the Super Committee, to never raise taxes." As such, Norquist is doing everything in his power to stop Republicans from folding on this issue.
What is likely to be at issue are two main points.
First, Democrats want $200 billion in tax revenue increases upfront, which, they say, could be achieved in some significant part by eliminating deductions that benefit the wealthiest Americans -- corporate jets, race horses and carried interest. Second, Democrats want a firm commitment to end (once and for all) the Bush Tax Cuts of 2001, which are up for renewal next year. Republicans (read Grover Norquist) are not amenable to either.
In recent days, a gaggle of Republicans have tried to talk some sense into their Republican brothers. Former Wyoming Senator Alan Simpson, Georgia Senator Saxby Chambliss and former New Hampshire Senator Judd Gregg, have all made presentations to the Committee arguing that the Republicans are nuts to walk away from a deal in which the Democrats are willing to cut treasured programs like Social Security and Medicare. Simpson even took a personal poke at Norquist saying, "If Grover Norquist is now the most powerful man in America, he should run for president," Mr. Simpson said. "There's no question about his power. And let me tell you, he has people in thrall. That's a terrible phrase. Lincoln used it. It means your mind has been captured. You're in bondage with your soul."
But, Mr. Simpson, that's just where the Republicans are -- in bondage to Grover Norquist and to all those monied interests who want to keep their tax credits for corporate jets and their low tax rates courtesy of George Bush. It's greed -- plain and simple -- and at the hand of that greed the rest of America will suffer.
It's time for Republican themselves -- at the call of their elders this week - to stand up to the bullies and the tea-partiers and harken back to the wisdom of old. You can't get what you can't pay for -- even if you are rich.
Follow Meredith Bagby on Twitter: www.twitter.com/bagbyreports
IMHO, the stuff the Dems are putting on the table are absolutely anathema to the left wing of the party, particularly the change to the chained CPI index for SS.
But, again, IMHO, they knew going on, by who the Repubs put on the committee, that they would NEVER give a single dollar of new taxes on the rich in return. They are playing with house money, they can put almost anything on the table, to appear like the only reasonable party in the talks.
You can see Simpson et all BEGGING today's Republicans, for a victory that NO OTHER REPUBLICAN ADMIN, even those in POWER, was able to get, massive cuts to SS and Medicare.
But, they won't do it, and because they are SO determined to protect the tax cuts for billionaires, they are potentially giving a President that literally should have almost zero chance of winning re-election, with unemployment still in double figures, fresh life in 2012.
First of all, in almost all proposals, anyone close to retirement will get everything promised in SS. But for those with more time to prepare, cuts must be made. Cost increases in Medicare must be controlled, with various parties taking a hit (insurers, providers, and yes, patients).
There is also much low hanging fruit in spending still to grab and cut - much disguised as tax breaks (hence Bagby points out, held hostage by those who claim eliminating agricultural and energy subsidies, even with prices near records, would be tax increases).
An ounce of sanity would give a pound of results, to the economy, to the fiscal health, and then free up our ability to help those suffering now.
The results are obvious. Rather than allowing the constant drumbeat of more, more, more, we should be demanding better results for the massive amounts that they are already taking from us to perform today only an adequate job.
Democrats John Kerry, Max Baucus, Jim Clyburn, Xavier Becerra, Chris Van Hollen, and Patty Murray
reduce the deficit keep and it would eliminate the need to make job killing budget cuts.
We're working harder for less, they're earning more than ever while paying the lowest rates in decades and they can't possibly afford a small tax increase? Cantor or Ryan (same difference) last week called these "devastating" tax increase to the wealthy....really they would be devastated by a small tax increase? Really? How many meals would they do without or long would they delay a needed trip to the dentist?
Boehner said last year, social security and medicare/caid MUST be cut to pay for the wars, there will be NO tax increase.....clearly he meant what he said.
The rich make fortunes on wars the working class/poor fight, now the working class will pay for the war debt and their fortunes, with cuts to the programs we'll need more than ever before....what a concept...
If this isn't class warfare and cruel heartless governing, I don't know what is.