GOP Looks Up Pyrrhic Victory...

From The Washington Post:

GOP On Verge of Huge, Unprecedented Political Victory

Article describes how the GOP used the threat of national catastrophe that they themselves wanted to avoid at all costs to push Democrats to cave once again.  Tax increases?  Gone.  Clean debt ceiling bill?  Never happened.  Entitlement programs protected?  Nope.  The Democrats basically entered the fight already blinking because to not blink in the face of national default strikes people as lunacy.  But that's exactly the tactic the GOP employed and somehow it worked.

The question remains, will the American people hold the GOP accountable for crushing ideas through our political system that a majority don't support?  If there was ever something to motivate Americans to go to the polls and send these people home, it should be this psychotic power grab.  Sure they may get the victory in this debate, but they may all get voted out of office after dragging the GOP name through the mud.  Every time Boehner mentions how the American people won't stand for X or Y, I feel a little ill.  As an American, I absolutely would have accepted compromises he dismissed out of hand, and I don't think I'm the exception.

I've come to realize that I don't appreciate many members of Congress speaking on my behalf because they are either too dishonest or too stupid to do so.

Airplane! v. Congress

Here's the latest on the debt ceiling...

GOP Leaders claim debt deal is close

Am I the only one getting flashbacks to this scene from the movie Airplane!

I predict that Thursday lunch time as the markets spiral into the toilet, we'll still get calm reassurance from those in charge that a deal is just on the horizon.

Male Full-Frontal Lobbying

An gritty, naked, raw bit of reporting from the Washington Post:

Undecideds Endure Tough Hours of Lobbying on Debt

First paragraph brings you right into the world of completely naked white guys showering like a thunderclap punching you in the mind's eye.  Shower begging, that has to be a new criminally low point in human social evolution.

Beyond that, the article makes the process of winning over votes sound no different than either college kids making sure their Bro's are going to the Chi Psi kegger this weekend or a dumped boyfriend who can't understand where it went wrong.  In the dumped column:

“I need your vote. I want your vote,” Walberg recalled House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) telling him at one point during the day. “Why can’t I have your vote?”

In the Chi Psi kegger column... yelled in the shower referenced at the beginning:

“Hey, Walberg!  Are you with us?”

The article goes on to cover some of the representatives who changed their minds from a No on Boehner's plan to a yes.  What's frightening is how arbitrary it all feels.

Rep. John Campbell (R-Calif.), a former car dealer, mulled his decision over a glass of Jack Daniel’s whiskey. “Jack and I think about things now and then,” he said. He was a “yes.” 

That covers action movie cliche, how about we saddle on up to incoherently insane:

A few days ago, Rep. Mike Kelly (Pa.), a car dealer and a freshman legislator, had seemed dead-set against a compromise like this one.  Now, he was literally shouting for it. “Buckle your chin straps. Run out on the field. Let’s knock the [expletive] out of them!” Kelly, a former Notre Dame football player, told the group, a witness said. 

In the end, a lot of the tactics described run parallel to high school peer pressure.  These legislators don't seem to have any more rational thought behind their changes in stance than a skittish cat does when it decides to sprint randomly under the couch.

Legislative WMDs

The following was posted by Tea Party Member on freerepublic.com.

Boehner Needs a Reasonable, Effective Tea Party Compromise

Here is what this particular poster suggested as a compromise for Boehner:

1. Short term, immediate increase in the debt ceiling in exchange for Boehners spending cuts, as trivial as they might be. This will trigger a temporary debt ceiling increase enough for three months.
2. Put constraints on the committee-created spending cuts. In three months, there should be an up-or-down vote on the bill that will trigger another temporary debt ceiling increase, enough for another three months. Constraints like the following *MUST* must be stipulated:
   1. No taxes or tax expenditure actions are to be included. Tax-related actions must be included in a separate tax reform bill (see below).
   2. The plan must require that they come up with $500 billion in short term cuts (as scored by the CBO) and $3 trillion in cuts over the next five years and $8 trillion over the next ten years. The mix of those cuts is left to the committee
   3. At least 30% of the cuts have to come from entitlements.
   4. There *must* be an open debate: not just politicians standing by themselves talking to an empty room on C-SPAN, but formal debates on primetime, open to all the major news channels, where all sides (including the Tea Party, Progressives, Libertarians, etc) present and discuss their proposals. In the final week, the leaders of each party and their champions will debate the details of the bill.
   5. All appropriations bills in the future (including the one for 2012) will be frozen for one week and subject to scrutiny by the public and open to debate as described above during that period.
   It would be absolutely moronic to agree to committee-formulated spending cuts without any constraints. It would degenerate into the same silly “tax billionaires, throw grandma over the cliff” debates. If Boehner agrees to a committee without constraints, we would have to seriously question not only his political savvy, but his overall intelligence, just like when he started off the negotiations by declaring that the McConnell proposal was the backup plan. If he does that, he probably shouldn’t be the Speaker of the House.
   
3. The House of Representatives will come up with a comprehensive Tax Reform Bill, hopefully something towards a flat tax or even replacing the income tax completely with a national sales tax. Six months from now, the Senate will vote on the bill. Before the vote, there *must* be open debate during primetime on national television. The up-or-down vote on the bill will trigger another temporary ceiling increase in three months.
4. The House of Representatives will come up with a Balanced Budget Amendment which the Senate will vote on nine months from now. Before the vote, there *must* be open debate during primetime on national television. The up-or-down vote on the amendment will trigger another ceiling increase .

A couple of things stand out here for me.  While this may be a suggested compromise for Boehner to make with the Tea Party, I'm curious what this person would suggest as the compromise Tea Party members should make with Democrats?  I'm also assuming that if all these bullet points got shot down, the Tea Party would be respectful of the outcome of the vote and move on in some capacity.

In the end, whether or not I agree with the specifics of the post, I can't dispute that the post has some deliberate, rational thought process behind it.  What throws it all into question is a statement near the end.

Just as the citizen army during the Revolutionary War used Kentucky Rifles and guerilla warfare, the Republicans need to use the debt ceiling as a weapon. The debt ceiling leverage is the only way to force the Senate to come out of their holes (like Hobbits) and address the spending problems in a serious, straightforward, non-game-playing way in order to avoid the real Armageddon we are undoubtedly headed towards.

My fear is that once the Tea Party starts considering the debt ceiling a weapon (too late), they might not show enough restraint when they push for change.  Is it enough to put forward Tea Party measures under threat of national default even if they lose?  How slippery is the slope to use that threat not just to bring issues to national attention, but to coerce legislative will?

It may not be fair to take a post I found on freerepublic.com and act as if it speaks for the entire Tea Party.  I do feel, however, this wartime mentality does exist in the Tea Party.  Weapons are needed for this fight, instead of rational, adult debate.  The notion that you win some, you lose some, may not be acceptable to some members of the legislative branch.  Could they find grounds to compromise on or is an all-or-nothing approach intrinsic to the Tea Party platform?

WWJD

Does this debate know no shame?  Now they had to go and bring Christmas into it.

House GOP Plan Will Ruin Your Christmas

David Plouffe stated on MSNBC this morning that the GOP plan would ruin the Christmas by forcing this whole debt ceiling debate back on the country during the most important shopping time of the year.

The republicans' response?  Bullshit, we're ruining January... learn to count to six Obamacare.

Old Time-y Religion

An interesting article from The Economist citing Professor Michael Munger of Duke University who compares our current tax climate to Catholic church that sparked Martin Luther to act.

Fiscal Indulgences

The short of it... the article compares high taxes to purgatory, and tax credits to indulgences.  Congress creates the tax rates, then allows those who lobby and benefit Congress the most to escape those rates.  The Church, in a way created purgatory, and then allowed those who donated the most to avoid it.

An interesting quote from Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) on this imbalance:

Tax expenditures are not tax cuts. Tax expenditures are socialism and corporate welfare. Tax expenditures are increases on anyone who does not receive the benefit or can’t hire a lobbyist…to manipulate the code to their favor.

The Economist articles cites Senator Coburn's loose dropping of the S-bomb, but agrees with his claim concerning the underlying unfairness of our current tax code, often based on who can contribute to those who control said code.

Bring It

NPR's Planet Money discusses the possibility of a ratings downgrade should an agreement not pass before the August 2nd deadline (or if one does that feels too temporary),

3 Reasons A Downgrade Might Not Be A Big Deal (And 1 Big Reason It Might)

Brief synopsis... there's a big difference between getting downgraded and defaulting outright.  Going from a AAA to a AA rating probably wouldn't shake investors too badly.  A downgrade would still be embarrassing and indicative of genuine internal problems that could continue to pull down confidence.

Also, I can't recommend the Planet Money podcast enough.  A great listen, some of the best coverage of this continuing economic crisis out there.

Credit Default Swaps... You Fickle Beasts

Here's an article from CNN Money going into the $4.8 billion that stands to be made if the U.S. goes into default.  The method?  Credit default swaps (CDS).

Betting $4.8 Billion on a U.S. Default

It's not that I blame the investors for taking this chance, and the article clearly makes it sound like the possibility of collecting on these swaps  is essentially zero, but it disturbs me to see CDS's still lingering around after all they have done for us in the last 5 years.

One memorable quote, responding to the notion that some investors lacking faith in the bureaucratic romcom that is the U.S. Government are about to hit it big ...

"I think we're a long way away from considering this hypothetical [case]," said Otis Casey, director of credit research at Markit.

So my overall take away from the article is that "a long way away" equals about two weeks in Earth time.

Truth be told, a number of stumbling blocks seem to stand between investors and their money even if the U.S. does technically default, making it sound impossible to ever cash in.  But that's the rub with issuing CDS's... you're insuring against something that would just be too crazy insane to actually happen and then Lehman Brothers goes under.

A Picture Worth a Thousand Words... or Trillions of Dollars

From Ezra Klein of the New York Times.

One of the biggest differences that Klein highlights?  Obama's expenditures are temporary where Bush's seem more and more long-term.  Second, if the Bush Tax Cuts were left to expire in 2012 as they should, our deficit problem would have been cut in half.

A shorter version of the NY Times article can be found at The Washington Post.

John Boehner... A Peek Behind the Curtain

Jonathan Alter broke down the claims in John Boehner's speech last night point by point and wrote it up for Bloomberg News:

Boehner's Response is a Work of Political Fiction

You may be shocked to learn that, according to Alter, Mr. Boehner's command of the facts was mixing-booze-and-firearms shaky at best.  I'll let the article speak for itself, but it did highlight a line from Boehner's speech that I think could be explored further.

The President would not take Yes for an answer...

The article addresses that specific point in context, but I thought it might be interesting to take a look at what Boehner himself has said yes to since President Obama took office.  This is specific to bills concerning the budget.

• Releasing Funds for Economic Stabilization Act (H J Res 3)
• Prohibiting Federal Assistance to ACORN (HR 3221)
• Extending Federal Emergency Unemployment Benefits and Providing Business and Homebuyer Tax Credits (HR 3548)
• Prohibiting 2010-2011 Congressional Cost-of-Living Pay Increase (HR 5146) 
• Fiscal Year 2009-2010 Supplemental Appropriations (HR 4899)
• Temporary Extension of Tax Relief (HR 4853)
• 2011 Budget (HR 1473)

The first one on the list is oddly worded since that bill actually attempted to block the release of TARP funds already approved- there may be a pattern here.  

The second involved stopping ACORN from destroying the free world, so that obviously held earth-shattering importance.  

The third did what it said and helped give some relief to people during this tough economic times, plus it involved lowering taxes so voting yes was a given.  

The fourth was a nice gesture, something that would have probably outraged many Americans had it passed.  As someone who hasn't received a cost-of-living pay increase (or really, any increase) in years, I appreciate that Congress put themselves in the same boat as many Americans.

The fifth made sure to provide additional funding to the military, veteran affairs, and the Department of Homeland Security.

The sixth extended the Bush tax cuts to the wealthy, but it also allowed for a number of other tax breaks that affected small businesses and the middle class.  Things like the marriage tax penalty, tax breaks for making your home more energy efficient, tax breaks on the amount of social security withheld, and extended unemployment benefits.  

Finally, he voted for the 2011 budget, obviously the same budget he is now threatening to let default.

So seven yes votes out of roughly sixty bills affecting the budget.  Okay, might make sense when you are a republican and the president is a democrat... but let's take a look at some of the bills Boehner didn't say yes to over that same time while he remembers times as a small business owner with two daughters of his own and wanting to look out for everyday Americans.

• Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization and Expansion (HR 2) - will someone please think of the children...
• Oversight of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (HR 384) - can't bitch about how TARP is a waste of money and then shoot down the bill trying to make sure money isn't wasted.
• Mortgage Restructuring in Bankruptcy (HR 1106) - will someone please think of the banks that made poor lending decisions...
• Hate Crime Expansion (HR 1913) - not budget related, but seems like the right thing to do.
• Cash for Clunkers (HR 3435) 
• Student Aid Program Modifications (HR 3221)
• Science and Technology Funding (HR 5116)
• Seniors Protection Act (HR 5987)

I'm not saying these were all great bills but I feel like they all could have benefited everyday people during these tough times.  Some could create jobs, some could ease financial burdens, some could take a bit of the sting off of a large, but usually necessary purchase.  

His voting record isn't necessarily inconsistent with the GOP platform, but it feels inconsistent with his concern for the average American.

Battle Dancing... Washington Style

Last night, July 25th, both President Obama and House Speaker John Boehner took the time to address the American people and lay out their current view on the debt ceiling crisis.  President Obama described his path to a solution as balanced, involving spending cuts and removing loopholes that allow the wealthiest people and corporations to escape tax burdens they ought to be shouldering.  John Boehner described his plan  as following the common sense of not spending more than you take in.  The solution isn't to take more in, it's to get our spending down to a level we can afford based on what we already receive.

President Obama conveyed to me a compassionate, sensible tone that convinced many voters back in 2008 that real change could be on the horizon.  Boehner went with some folksy vibes about being a small business owner and common sense money management.  Since demorcrats are the new centrist republicans, Obama's rational tone made sense.  And since some republicans are the new mouth-foaming illiterati, Boehner's over-simplification and folksy approach also made sense.  Those two sentences may not seem fair and balanced, but that's because when I hear Boehner claim that this crisis is of Obama's making, I get angry that he won't admit the fairly large role the Tea Party constituency of his own party had in bringing us to this point.  I sincerely believe Boehner is willing to cut a deal with Obama that works out for everyone to some degree.  But as a career politician, I believe Boehner wants to remain Speaker of the House more than he wants to do his job correctly or stand up to the ignorance throwing gas on this particular fire.

Everyone already knows that the debt ceiling covers a budget already in place, passed by Congress.  Everyone should already know that Congress already agreed to these expenditures and to renege on them comes off as either absurd, or stinking of the type of dementia that usually pushes family members to sue for power of attorney.  And everyone should also already know that the time to tackle these problems is during the budget debate, not months after the fact.  I feel that both sides had turned this simple, usually forgone conclusion, into an opportunity to make political moves with a lit stick of dynamite.

Here are links to both speeches if you'd rather hear their speeches directly rather than allowing me to uselessly blog-filter it down for you.  Just to prove my bias, Obama's link has an HD option, Boehner... 480P.  Take that right wingers.  There's a new force on the interwebs.

Competing Plans Emerge

Just a quick article offering a break down of the current competing plans:

Reid, Boehner Offering Competing Plans to Raise Debt Ceiling

In summary, Boehner offers the following:

• Immediately raise debt ceiling by one trillion dollars to avoid default. 
• Enact 1.2 trillion dollars worth of budget cuts now.
• Revisit the debt ceiling next year for another potential 1.6 trillion dollar increase.
• Enact at least an additional 1.8 trillion dollars in budget cuts.

Reid offers:

• Immediately raise the debt ceiling by 2.4 trillion dollars, pushing the debt ceiling off the political table until after the 2012 election cycle.
• Enact 2.7 trillion dollars worth of budget cuts now.

The democrats get one trillion of their savings from winding down Iraq and Afghanistan wars, $400 billion from reduced interest payments once that first trillion disappears, $40 billion from waste and fraud elimination, maybe $15 billion from cuts to agricultural subsidies, and around $15 billion of income from selling spectrum.  Boehner's first round of cuts are actually caps on future spending.  Both plans spread the cutting over ten years.

Cuts without really cutting anything.  Where's that Orsen Welles slow clap... here we go.

Asking Tough Questions

Journalists serve as our collective conscience.  When it comes to government, the press acts as the microscope used to scrutinize political decisions so that real-time accountability exists.  Doing so requires tough questions, and today's Tough Question of the Day comes from the CBC:

Is Politicking Getting In The Way Of Solving The U.S. Debt Crisis?

There's even a poll at the bottom.  Current candidates for tomorrow's CBC online poll:

Is The Sun Hot?
Is The Pople Catholic?

Our Current Situation

Let me start by stating that I recognize two things.  First, it's not entirely fair to single out Congress when so many facets of our governing body feel like they often work against the country they govern.  It's probably more accurate to reference pre-sex-tape John Edwards and his "Two Americas" platform... Congress and the political system seem to fight very hard for a tiny sliver of our population.  Second, my views tend to have a liberal bias, but I'd like to believe spotting the shortcomings of our political system is independent of ideology.

Having said that, lets get to where we currently stand.  It's July 25th, eight days away from the August 2nd deadline.  The upside is that America loves countdowns, and this one is no different.  Bloomberg TV has a countdown graphic.  I expected the graphics to draw inspiration from the Times Square Ball that counts down the last ten seconds before the arrival of a new year - or course, replacing the ball with something phallic and having it move toward some orifice connected to American dignity and common sense.  But alas, it's just a clock.

The heart of the issue seems to revolve around raising taxes.  Congressional republicans apparently refuse any package that involves raising taxes, ignoring the fact that many changes they want to make act as a tax on the people affected by said change (often the poor and middle classes).  They're tax raising cowards because they don't recognize the impact of their proposed changes for what they really are.

The democrats strike me as more courageous ideologically, stating a need for revenue increases to help solve our country's problems.  It's their gelatinous approach to affecting their ideas that frustrates so many people.  If there are liberals out there who don't already know what was concessions were offered up to republicans, they might want to strap on an adult diaper before reading that list.  It was offered in the spirit of compromise, and that's one area that democrats excel in.

So that leaves us inundated with pointless press conferences that play out like a teenage twitter fight.  Rep. Boehner has a press conference scheduled  for 4pm today, probably to tell us how republicans are going to Rambo this problem on their own since the democrats can't be rational and just sign off on whatever republicans want.  Senator Schumer just finished a press conference talking about how republicans refuse to budge an inch even if it means crashing the country despite every effort the democrats have made to put out on this date.

I know that if I did my job as badly as many people in Congress, I would never stop crying.

A brief introduction, hopefully future posts in this experiment get to the point and get out.