As the clock ticked closer to a default on the nation's debt obligations, Democratic and Republican leaders in Congress scrambled to round up the necessary votes to pass an increase to the federal debt ceiling that also includes over $1 trillion in spending cuts. They met the deadline, but neither side was pleased with the outcome. The silver lining: the United States of America did not shake the world economy by breaking its financial promises.
From the beginning, President Obama has laid out the vision and provided the guidance on what needs to be done to right our financial ship and avoid economic disaster. Unfortunately, Congress has been impotent when it comes to serving the American people. Political gamesmanship, strategic brinksmanship and the preservation of rigid and untenable ideological positions have made Speaker John Boehner and his Republican caucus members impossible to work with. Indeed, an agreement in the works between President Obama and Speaker Boehner -- that included new revenues -- was imminent, until the Speaker was strong-armed by the radical fringe of his caucus and forced to walk away from negotiations with the President.
The deal passed by Congress is not ideal. It does not include new revenue even though the wealthiest people in our nation pay the least in taxes. It does not close tax loopholes that benefit the largest corporations and the richest executives that run them.
But Democrats must do more than lament what we're not getting in the deal. The governing of our nation requires a long-term view -- in essence, it is a marathon and not a sprint. Instead, we must rally to our President and continue the fight to get where we want to be.
It's important to note that most of the cuts in this deal are back-loaded, meaning the first two years will see minimal cuts to avoid damaging the rebounding economy. A 12-member "super committee" will identify $1.5 trillion in additional deficit reduction measures, including tax reform. And if that panel does not agree to a deal, a strong enforcement mechanism, known as an automatic sequester, will be in place to assure that real, balanced savings are achieved.
Such a mechanism has forced bipartisan agreements in the past because its provisions would be disliked by both sides. In this case, it would trigger a $1.2 trillion across-the-board cut that includes both defense and non-defense programs. However, Social Security, Medicaid, unemployment insurance, programs for civilian and military retirement, and programs for low-income families (i.e. Supplemental Security Income (SSI), federal earned income tax credits (EITC), State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)) would be held harmless.
Additionally, as this process moves forward, the tables will have been turned in terms of who can hold out and for what. The automatic sequester will have the added impact of being triggered on January 1st, 2013 -- the same day the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% of Americans is set to expire. This means that absent an agreed-upon, bipartisan, balanced deal, the president will have the power to use his veto pen to ensure nearly $1 trillion in deficit reduction by not extending the super-high-income tax cuts.
No self-respecting legislator should be an automatic rubber stamp for any administration. And no conscientious citizen should blindly trust his or her leaders. But now is not the time to circle the wagons around our Democratic family. Between Congressman Paul Ryan's budget plan (which I've denounced several times in the Michigan Senate and have introduced a joint resolution doing the same) and the obstructionist House Republicans' tactics on the debt ceiling, 2012 has become a year ripe for Democratic gains, including the retaking of the Congress.
Enormous damage has been done to John Boehner's speakership. He put his credibility on the line and spent nearly all his political capital convincing and cajoling his caucus members to sign on to his plan that was scrapped in the U.S. Senate the moment it arrived from the House. For the first time in recent memory, national Republicans are not walking in lock-step. Numerous House and Senate Republicans recognize the need for more revenue, while others would prefer to see the nation default on its financial obligations. No Democratic representative or senator would allow that to happen to our country, which is why we have the current deal in front of us.
But look at the Ryan budget as the indicator of what a Republican-controlled government would achieve. Medicare would be ruined. Medicaid would be turned into a federal block grant program that would leave tens of thousands of Americans behind. Unemployed Americans would see their assistance cut short. Mental health programs across the country would cease to exist. All this and more would happen while leaving the wealthiest 2% of Americans with no obligation to sacrifice anything for the good of the country. This stands in stark contrast to President Obama's vision of real savings and deficit reduction: a plan that does not balance the federal budget on the backs of hardworking Americans and our most vulnerable citizens.
While I wish the final contents of this bill were different, turning our ire on our president, as Rep. John Conyers and a handful of his colleagues unfortunately have done, is the wrong thing to do. The responsible course of action instead is to focus on those who took the economy hostage and were willing to let hundreds of millions of Americans become collateral damage in their ideological crusade. Each day, President Obama has to contend with right-wing obstructionists in Washington D.C., a constant barrage of slanted news coverage from Fox News and talk radio and the antics of attention-grabbers like Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin who've done their diligence in trying to paint him as an un-American, socialist, Manchurian candidate. And at the end of the day, he has to govern this country. Frankly, attacks from the left will do nothing to advance an agenda that helps the American people. Like any responsible family, we should keep our fights amongst ourselves behind closed doors.
And, call me crazy, but not too long ago a first-term U.S. Senator with an unusual name made millions of Americans believers in the seemingly impossible. Faced with possibly the most formidable primary opponent in a presidential election any candidate could face, he proved that he had a game plan and the competence to execute it successfully. I think it's clear that his long-term plan today is one rooted in the shared values of our Democratic family. We should not pull the rug out from underneath the president when he needs our solidarity the most.
State Senator Bert Johnson (D - Detroit) is in his first term representing Michigan's 2nd District, which includes northeast Detroit, Highland Park, Hamtramck, Harper Woods and the Grosse Pointe Communities.
Big Mandate, Low Expectations Greet 'Super Committee' on Debt Reduction
Fallout From S&P Downgrade Could Add Heightened 'Super Committee' Focus On ...
Can the super-committee deliver deficit reduction?
So, What is a 'Super-Committee'?
Super Committee likely to super disappoint
How the super-committee can strike a Grand Bargain
On Defense, Congressional Super Committee Has Its Work Cut Out for It
Lobbyists are scurrying to figure out how to influence the new super committee ...
 |
 |
|
| Obama | Romney | |
|---|---|---|
| Electoral Votes (270 to win) |
332 | 206 |
| Obama | Romney | |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 65,899,660 | 60,932,152 |
| Percent | 51.1% | 47.2% |
| Democrats* | Republicans | |
|---|---|---|
| Current Senate | 53 | 47 |
| Seats gained or lost | +2 | -2 |
| New Total | 55 | 45 |
| Democrats | Republicans | |
|---|---|---|
| Seats won | 201 | 234 |
Bry Holds it Down
Dig!
President Obama has done a lot and accomplished a lot; however, it has all been drowned out by people who could do no better and have no new ideas. President Obama puts the country first above politics. If he did not, imagine how much worse it would be. If you think things are bad now, elect republicans or do not vote at all. Then you will really have something to whine about. Think President Obama is not protecting the programs you care about (education, healthcare, Medicare, Medicaid, SS, environment)? Just wait, if the republicans/tea party gains control of the White House and Senate, you will no longer have to worry about any of these programs because they will no longer exist.
Right now it seems like these programs are safer with a Republican President with a Democratic Congress than Obama with a Republican Congress.
Let's see what happens with this Super Congress thing. We will know soon enough.
*imho*
This is his idea, not the Republicans.
Fine if you want to argue that he cannot just care about his base because he is supposed to represent all of us, or that he is obstructed by the opposition party.
But this payroll tax cut is his idea, not the Republicans.
So why is he trying to destroy SS when even the Tea Party does not want him to touch this program?
This is total BS. The Tea Party hates SS. The GOP hates SS. That's why both are angry over the debt-ceiling deal that protects Social Security more from cuts than it does defense. I can't believe you can ask that question with a straight face!
A 2% tax cut isn't going to destroy SS or seriously defund it. And why makes you think this tax will be permanent? The GOP wants way more damage done to SS than just a 2% cut.
Also, during economic crisis, tax cuts are appropriate. So, conservatives are right about that. What they seem to forget is that government spending is also suppose to go up as well. You increase taxes during an economic boom and lower government spending.
"Even tea party supporters, by a nearly 2-to-1 margin, declared significant cuts to Social Security 'unacceptable.'"
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704728004576176741120691736.html
"despite their push for smaller government, they think that Social Security and Medicare are worth the cost to taxpayers."
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/15/us/politics/15poll.html
As for payroll tax cuts, Obama is seeking to extend it (thus defunding SS further) and mix it up with the general fund that will make it look more like a welfare program.
"White House Renews Push to Extend Payroll-Tax Cut"
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903454504576490623948066948.html?mod=googlenews_wsj#articleTabs%3Dcomments
"Top Obama Economic Aide: Social Security Reform Not A Part Of Discussion On Fiscal Future"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/22/obama-social-security-reform-not-on-table_n_826767.html
Im voting for Ron Paul. He may be a republican but unlike other Republicans he doesn't stand for corporate interests and imperialism.
End Corporate welfare, End the Patriot Act, End ALL wars, close Gitmo, END THE DRUG WAR!!!!
We hadn't anticipated the many forces lurking in the background blocking that change at all costs. Yet, Obama was expected to undo 8 years of damage in 2-3 years? Actually, it's more like 30 years. That’s right folks. The mess we’re in today was 30 years in the making.
Besides, I remember Bill Clinton being cut a lot more slack when he moved the economic policy of the Dems further to the right. Remember NAFTA? Repeal of Glass-Steagall? Cuts to low-income programs? And on the social front – remember DADT? Or DOMA?
The deal is not ideal, but it’s a huge coup. The anger from the GOP and Tea Party is real. I will be voting for Obama in 2012. And I’ll let you right now – I wasn’t going to until this bill. You see, I understand the conservatives and the GOP more than I care to so I could hear their frustration with McConnell and Boehmer as I read the deal. But then again, McConnell and Boehmer are politicians. The Tea Partiers are not. McConnell and Boehmer saw what happened when the last GOP congressional leader forced the government's hand. The Tea Partiers don't seem to care.
And don’t think this battle is over. It’s just beginning.
I too WILL be voting for President Obama in 2012. He DESERVES another term. If for nothing else, his reelection will make millions of head EXPLODE.
Faved already a fan
Obama appointed them.
It's got to the point where the financial services industry (the one that got us into this crisis) has actually corrupted the study of economics in the United States. So, Obama appointing anybody that would have a better understanding of economics AND be politically astute was highly unlikely.
The economists preaching this deregulation nonsense are more politically astute than those who knew the score. So, as much as you may want to condemn Obama for his choices - there were still other forces at play. And actually, this is the one thing I'm still upset with Obama about. However, considering how pervasive the deregulation mindset had become - it would be pretty hard for one person (even a POTUS) to break through it.
a) Has America's best interests in mind and at heart
b) Has demonstrated to have an actual spine
c) Has demonstrated an ability to use said spine for the good of the nation
Can we get a real leader please?
"President Barack Obama presented a reassuring assessment of the U.S. economic situation Monday, calling the country's problems "imminently solvable."
Obama spoke as the Dow continued its day-long slide, falling below 11,000 at one point for the first time since November.
"No matter what some agency may say, we've always been and always will be a triple-A country," Obama said."
Is this man totally devoid of reality? This sounds mroe like Herbert Hoover and his, "Prosperity is just around the corner". I suppose if Obama says it though, it must be so.