"Privatizing" Debt Ceiling Negotiations

07/25/2011 04:00 pm ET | Updated Sep 24, 2011

I had my fill of the political pundits last evening (the 22d), announcing as "Breaking News" House Leader Boehner walking out of talks with President Obama over raising the debt ceiling and cutting the federal deficit, and now taking his "ball" to those in the Senate -- maybe someone there will want to make nice with the House Leader, huh? Boehner once more described dealing with the White House as nothing more than dealing with a bowl of jell-o (he actually was speaking about the WH being "jelloesque." Then in further analysis, we find out that the Republicans balked at Obama supposedly moving the goal line by looking to add another $400 billion in revenue on top of supposedly $800 billion in ways to increase revenues over ten years to which Boehner's caucus supposedly had provided some affirmation. Who knows what the hell is going on, but one thing is certain -- those in glass houses (opposing Obama) should not throw stones. Yes, I disagree with our President on proposed cuts to the big three social entitlement programs he said he would support -- Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid -- but at least he was putting forth a good faith effort to avert a for-certain financial meltdown of the country within days now even if it was politically disadvantageous to his party and to himself politically.

Even though it readily appears that Obama has been the only responsible adult in the room, it matters not what he does if those with whom he is negotiating do so without one iota of intent to return his good faith by not negotiating for the good of the majority of the country -- only for, and exclusively on behalf of, the wealthy fat cats of the nation. It has become equally clear that our elected officials are behaving no greater than school-yard kids in a sand box, throwing sand in one another's faces and calling each other liars and dishonest. So what else is new when it comes to politicians? To you all: stop this behavior and grow up! We put you in office to help the country; but now because of how you all are acting, and as they said long ago at baseball games, (the American electorate) should "throw the bums out" come November 2012.

While at the end of the day, it may well be that those opposing Obama are doing so with the descriptive moniker of "jelloesque" hanging around their necks, perhaps the only solution our elected officials can come up with is a one line bill (called a "clean" bill) that merely says the debt ceiling is raised to such and such a level for the next number of months. Obama continues to say any debt ceiling must be into 2013, or after the 2012 elections. But if that results, what a monumental waste of time (and our tax dollars) all Americans have seen federal legislators expend and then waste.

But has anyone considered "privatizing" a solution to the debt ceiling discussions? My wife, Elena Cinthia Zaremski, has, so read on.

Americans now know that our elected representatives cannot possibly even tie their own shoes if they had to in order to save their skins. We also know that the White House cares more about the working "stiffs", as Obama referred to the middle class in his remarks in the White House Press room late on the 22d, but realizes that spending cuts not seen before in many years must be made. These would have to include the entitlement programs without interfering with benefits provided citizens who need and rely upon them. Republicans do not want to see taxes raised, i.e., new revenues come into the treasury. BUT everyone wants to see more jobs! We also know that when elected officials are acting like adolescents, maybe the private sector now needs to jump in.

To all those corporate titans like those with the private jets, who reap billions from oil and gas, and big pharma, by those who will be affected by having the Bush-era tax cuts expire in 2012 and/or those who earn in excess of, let's say, $250,000.00 who have hiring authority to hire additional workers -- in order for you each to avoid having to pay additional tax dollars by either having your tax rate increased or dishing out more from your pocketbook by having tax loopholes closed, all you have to do is hire an additional 10% (or x-%) of your present workforce. Doesn't this seem like a fair tradeoff for you and your companies?

In this way, Americans can get back to work and more work means more worker spending that then goes back into the economy; taxes do not have to be raised on those and their companies who hire the out-of-work Americans. Obama can still reduce spending in the general dollar amount he has been talking about, ensuring, however, that present benefits in entitlement programs are not touched. Of course, the debt ceiling can then be raised as Obama wants. The key, of course, is getting the super wealthy in control of hiring to add employees as a sort of quid pro quo for not having the administration seek more revenues. If those folks can buy off on this proposal, what arguments would Republicans who do their bidding have for not smoking a peace pipe with Obama and the Democrats. The Republicans should go away with a whimper; if they do otherwise they would continue to be perceived as out of touch legislators who deserve nothing more than being tossed out of office the next time around? Privatizing the debt ceiling/deficit reduction talks seems a prudent way to go.

Calling upon the private sector as suggested above takes the sand out of the sandbox for the kids in Congress, should make everyone happy, averts a nationwide financial crisis, and solves the pathetic nature of what we are all observing now. How about it Speaker Boehner? How about it President Obama?