Motley Moose – Archive

Since 2008 – Progress Through Politics

The Deal

Business Hand Shake

Ok since everyone here knows I work with OFA you know where my loyalties lie. I make no bones about it and no apologies for it. So below I give the deal as outlined by the White House.

Now given that this is the White House’s fact sheet understand that this is their spin in it. You can go find, in numerous places, a more negative spin, like almost any diary at FDL or DKos.

WhiteHouse.gov

Bipartisan Debt Deal: A Win for the Economy and Budget Discipline

*Removes the cloud of uncertainty over our economy at this critical time, by ensuring that no one will be able to use the threat of the nation’s first default now, or in only a few months, for political gain;

*Locks in a down payment on significant deficit reduction, with savings from both domestic and Pentagon spending, and is designed to protect crucial investments like aid for college students;

*Establishes a bipartisan process to seek a balanced approach to larger deficit reduction through entitlement and tax reform;

*Deploys an enforcement mechanism that gives all sides an incentive to reach bipartisan compromise on historic deficit reduction, while protecting Social Security, Medicare beneficiaries and low-income programs;

*Stays true to the President’s commitment to shared sacrifice by preventing the middle class, seniors and those who are most vulnerable from shouldering the burden of deficit reduction. The President did not agree to any entitlement reforms outside of the context of a bipartisan committee process where tax reform will be on the table and the President will insist on shared sacrifice from the most well-off and those with the most indefensible tax breaks.

Mechanics of the Debt Deal

*Immediately enacted 10-year discretionary spending caps generating nearly $1 trillion in deficit reduction; balanced between defense and non-defense spending.

*President authorized to increase the debt limit by at least $2.1 trillion, eliminating the need for further increases until 2013.

*Bipartisan committee process tasked with identifying an additional $1.5 trillion in deficit reduction, including from entitlement and tax reform. Committee is required to report legislation by November 23, 2011, which receives fast-track protections. Congress is required to vote on Committee recommendations by December 23, 2011.

*Enforcement mechanism established to force all parties – Republican and Democrat – to agree to balanced deficit reduction. If Committee fails, enforcement mechanism will trigger spending reductions beginning in 2013 – split 50/50 between domestic and defense spending. Enforcement protects Social Security, Medicare beneficiaries, and low-income programs from any cuts.

1. REMOVING UNCERTAINTY TO SUPPORT THE AMERICAN ECONOMY

*Deal Removes Cloud of Uncertainty Until 2013, Eliminating Key Headwind on the Economy: Independent analysts, economists, and ratings agencies have all made clear that a short-term debt limit increase would create unacceptable economic uncertainty by risking default again within only a matter of months and as S&P stated, increase the chance of a downgrade. By ensuring a debt limit increase of at least $2.1 trillion, this deal removes the specter of default, providing important certainty to our economy at a fragile moment.

*Mechanism to Ensure Further Deficit Reduction is Designed to Phase-In Beginning in 2013 to Avoid Harming the Recovery: The deal includes a mechanism to ensure additional deficit reduction, consistent with the economic recovery. The enforcement mechanism would not be made effective until 2013, avoiding any immediate contraction that could harm the recovery. And savings from the down payment will be enacted over 10 years, consistent with supporting the economic recovery.

2. A DOWNPAYMENT ON DEFICIT REDUCTION BY LOCKING IN HISTORIC SPENDING DISCIPLINE – BALANCED BETWEEN DOMESTIC AND PENTAGON SPENDING

*More than $900 Billion in Savings over 10 Years By Capping Discretionary Spending: The deal includes caps on discretionary spending that will produce more than $900 billion in savings over the next 10 years compared to the CBO March baseline, even as it protects core investments from deep and economically damaging cuts.

*Includes Savings of $350 Billion from the Base Defense Budget – the First Defense Cut Since the 1990s: The deal puts us on track to cut $350 billion from the defense budget over 10 years. These reductions will be implemented based on the outcome of a review of our missions, roles, and capabilities that will reflect the President’s commitment to protecting our national security.

*Reduces Domestic Discretionary Spending to the Lowest Level Since Eisenhower: These discretionary caps will put us on track to reduce non-defense discretionary spending to its lowest level since Dwight Eisenhower was President.

*Includes Funding to Protect the President’s Historic Investment in Pell Grants: Since taking office, the President has increased the maximum Pell award by $819 to a maximum award $5,550, helping over 9 million students pay for college tuition bills. The deal provides specific protection in the discretionary budget to ensure that the there will be sufficient funding for the President’s historic investment in Pell Grants without undermining other critical investments.

3. ESTABLISHING A BIPARTISAN PROCESS TO ACHIEVE $1.5 TRILLION IN ADDITIONAL BALANCED DEFICIT REDUCTION BY THE END OF 2011

*The Deal Locks in a Process to Enact $1.5 Trillion in Additional Deficit Reduction Through a Bipartisan, Bicameral Congressional Committee: The deal creates a bipartisan, bicameral Congressional Committee that is charged with enacting $1.5 trillion in additional deficit reduction by the end of the year. This Committee will work without the looming specter of default, ensuring time to carefully consider essential reforms without the disruption and brinksmanship of the past few months.

*This Committee is Empowered Beyond Previous Bipartisan Attempts at Deficit Reduction: Any recommendation of the Committee would be given fast-track privilege in the House and Senate, assuring it of an up or down vote and preventing some from using procedural gimmicks to block action.

To Meet This Target, the Committee Will Consider Responsible Entitlement and Tax Reform. This means putting all the priorities of both parties on the table – including both entitlement reform and revenue-raising tax reform.

4. A STRONG ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM TO MAKE ALL SIDES COME TOGETHER

*The Deal Includes An Automatic Sequester to Ensure That At Least $1.2 Trillion in Deficit Reduction Is Achieved By 2013 Beyond the Discretionary Caps: The deal includes an automatic sequester on certain spending programs to ensure that-between the Committee and the trigger-we at least put in place an additional $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction by 2013.

*Consistent With Past Practice, Sequester Would Be Divided Equally Between Defense and Non-Defense Programs and Exempt Social Security, Medicaid, and Low-Income Programs: Consistent with the bipartisan precedents established in the 1980s and 1990s, the sequester would be divided equally between defense and non-defense program, and it would exempt Social Security, Medicaid, unemployment insurance, programs for low-income families, and civilian and military retirement. Likewise, any cuts to Medicare would be capped and limited to the provider side.

*Sequester Would Provide a Strong Incentive for Both Sides to Come to the Table:  If the fiscal committee too
k no action, the deal would automatically add nearly $500 billion in defense cuts on top of cuts already made, and, at the same time, it would cut critical programs like infrastructure or education.  That outcome would be unacceptable to many Republicans and Democrats alike – creating pressure for a bipartisan agreement without requiring the threat of a default with unthinkable consequences for our economy.

5. A BALANCED DEAL CONSISTENT WITH THE PRESIDENT’S COMMITMENT TO SHARED SACRIFICE

*The Deal Sets the Stage for Balanced Deficit Reduction, Consistent with the President’s Values: The deal is designed to achieve balanced deficit reduction, consistent with the values the President articulated in his April Fiscal Framework. The discretionary savings are spread between both domestic and defense spending. And the President will demand that the Committee pursue a balanced deficit reduction package, where any entitlement reforms are coupled with revenue-raising tax reform that asks for the most fortunate Americans to sacrifice.

*The Enforcement Mechanism Complements the Forcing Event Already In Law – the Expiration of the Bush Tax Cuts – To Create Pressure for a Balanced Deal: The Bush tax cuts expire as of 1/1/2013, the same date that the spending sequester would go into effect. These two events together will force balanced deficit reduction. Absent a balanced deal, it would enable the President to use his veto pen to ensure nearly $1 trillion in additional deficit reduction by not extending the high-income tax cuts.

*In Securing this Bipartisan Deal, the President Rejected Proposals that Would Have Placed the Sole Burden of Deficit Reduction on Low-Income or Middle-Class Families: The President stood firmly against proposals that would have placed the sole burden of deficit reduction on lower-income and middle-class families. This includes not only proposals in the House Republican Budget that would have undermined the core commitments of Medicare to our seniors and forced tens of millions of low-income Americans to go without health insurance, but also enforcement mechanisms that would have forced automatic cuts to low-income programs. The enforcement mechanism in the deal exempts Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare benefits, unemployment insurance, programs for low-income families, and civilian and military retirement.

Based on what I am reading could the deal have been worse? Yes. Could it have been better? Absolutely. However, in order to be better I think President Obam would have had only two courses of action. Allow default to happen in the hopes that it would have been bad, but no so bad as to not throw us into a depression or invoke the 14th.

The first choice was so fraught with unknowns as to be a impossible choice. The second while it would have sent a tingle up the legs of Progressives I am not nor have been convinced it would have solved the problem.

In order for it to work the bond markets would have had to believe that the full faith and credit of the US was still sound on Obama’s say so. The House would have immediately moved to impeach. Yes the impeachment move would have been stupid, but  . . . have you seen signs of intelligence life in the House? And yes the Senate would have never voted to convict. Still it would have been a three ring ring circus causing doubt in the markets. And if US investors and Sovereign funds still wouldn’t have bought T-bills because of this doubt that the President did not have the authority to ignore Congress we would have defaulted.

All this said I will agree with every Progressive out there that this is a terrible time to be doing deficit reduction. However given the outcome of the 2010 mid-terms I would would like to know how it was going to be avoided. Oh I know the Democratic youth voters and the Democratic minority voters shouldn’t have stayed home.

Finally, before we all breath a sigh of relief that this is finally over. It isn’t! The House Progressive caucus might join with the rabid Tea Partiers in blowing up the deal and voting NO.

TPM

Even if the bill passes the Senate it still has to make its way through the House. Speaker John Boehner provided the GOP caucus with a power-point presentation to try to sell them on the plan. However, he faces a sizable conservative rump that is still unsatisfied, largely because of concerns about defense cuts and the now-downgraded (and ludicrous) Balanced Budget Amendment.

On the other side of the aisle, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has to hand her Democrats a plan that many regard as an utter capitulation to the Republicans. A progressive backlash is already underway. The bill has until Tuesday to clear both chambers and land on the President’s desk.

It’s been a remarkable few hours, but this thing ain’t over yet. Keep holding that breath..

A final word. I admit to being way off the mark  in my previous diary on this subject – http://motleymoose.com/showDia…


106 comments

  1. virginislandsguy

    of this:

    … this is a terrible time to be doing deficit reduction.

    Because of the long lag time of fiscal policy, most of the cuts will take place after we are in a self-sustaining recovery. Too often, governments have waited too long to apply the fiscal brakes and ended with high inflation.

    So far, I am pleased with the compromise. Pres. Obama took this as an opportunity to put some long term structures into place, much like the pay-go system helped create a surplus in the 90’s.

  2. jsfox

    I am [outraged/fed up/fixin’ to vomit] at the news of this [sellout/betrayal/Chekovian drama of political adultery]. While I have yet to see all the details of this plan, it may be the worst piece of legislation since [the Kansas/Nebraska compromise/the Enabling Act/the one that renamed a rest stop in New Jersey after Howard Stern]. We all agree that the deficit needs to be reduced, but it should not be done [on the backs of our seniors/in the dead of night/until we reach 4 percent unemployment again]. Instead, we Democrats are being asked to support a [Satan sandwich/Hitler hoagie/bin Laden banh mi], with a [mayonnaise of betrayal/chipotle glaze of mistrust/pesto of austerity]. If this is passed, our president – whom I [supported/strongly supported/had to suck it up and support, even though I liked Hillary Clinton and saw all this crap coming, because if I didn’t the Daily Kos comment section would have made me out to be a racist, and I’m totally not] – risks becoming a new [Jimmy Carter/Grover Cleveland/Emperor Palpatine]. Let’s [go back to the drawing board/head back to the table/find some new sand, draw a line in it, and borrow a can from my friend Bruce that we can kick around]. America can do [better than/slightly better than/not quite as terrible as] this.

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/wei

  3. DTOzone

    I’m already getting asked who should primary Obama. I fully expect someone will take the bait, or Ralph Nader will run again and throw the election to a crazy right wing Republican nut

    and the Democratic Party will, in response, move even more to the right, we’ll have a bloody primary fight in 2016 that will lead to another John Kerry candidate and liberals will further make themselves irrelevant. Someone will emerge and liberals will pretend s/he is the second coming in 2020, s/he will get elected and the whole thing repeats itself again.

    At least I come from a rich family.  

  4. Kysen

    and, upfront, let me admit that I have not read much the past couple of days on this because the Hair On Fire crowd gives me heartburn (so does the thought of giving ANYTHING to the Tea Party/Republicans as reward for their hostage taking).

    My question is this.

    There will be a ‘Super Congress’ formed….bipartisan….WHO gets to choose the Dems who will represent our side?

    Is there any hope at all that we will have Real Dems with spines fighting for us…

    or will be be stuck with the likes of Conrad or Nelson ‘fighting’ for us?

    I think that the answer to that is the difference between actual positive reform…and grabbing our ankles yet again.

    Anyone know anything on this?

  5. Shaun Appleby

    That the Obama administration misjudged Republicans seems akin to the argument that the pilot of a hijacked flight misjudged the passengers, even so it is clear we’ve been rolled.  On the other hand, the game isn’t over:


    Republicans signaled last year they’d rather kill off the entire Bush tax cuts than sacrifice the portion that only benefits the rich. Holding firm on the Bush tax cuts would let Obama maneuver Republicans into the position of killing off all the Bush tax cuts. That would provide all the revenue he needs – some $4 trillion over a decade, as opposed to the $800 billion he’d raise merely by ending tax cuts for the rich.

    What’s more, going to the mat over the Bush tax cuts would provide Obama with a strong political message for 2012. He can’t run on the economy. He needs a contrast election. Republicans will try to pass some version of the Paul Ryan budget, cutting taxes for the most affluent and laying waste to Medicare and Medicaid. Obama can run as the candidate insisting on shared sacrifice – and having already agreed to $3 trillion in spending cuts would give him credible to draw that line.

    Jonathan Chait – Did Obama Get Rolled? TNR 1 Aug 11

    On the other hand the reality that the Republicans are prepared to wreck the country to win the presidency is a sobering diagnosis; it’s like finding termites.

  6. jsfox

    I think Obama seriously believed that they can’t be this insane. I also think it took him a bit too long, at least by outward appearances to come to the realization that they were just as insane as they were projecting. They weren’t posturing.

    That said I still don’t think we got as rolled as some are broadcasting, especially not as much as the left is certainly stating.

    I keep coming back to the budget fight that when all the numbers were finally added up it didn’t add up to a win for the Republicans.

    Next to those saying there SHOULD BE NO CUTS AT ALL. Well in a perfect world this would hold some water. In the world we live in it doesn’t. Elections do have consequences and the 2010 election had a big one. The Tea Party, the no nothings and the pledge takers won and they controlled just enough of the process to wield a lot of power. Especially in a hostage situation.

    And while this is anecdotal. My brother a life long Republican and a number of his life long Republican friends are in high outrage about what these folks have done to the party and will not be voting Republican this time around. So have they won a battle maybe, but I think they are well on their way to loosing the war.

    I am often reminded if you look at Obama only in terms of what is happening immediately you are liable to form the wrong opinion. He plays a longer game than most of use are willing to view or have the patience to understand.

  7. Shaun Appleby

    So the Tea Party threw the military-industrial complex to the wolves to preserve their ideological purity on taxes?:

    Hard to see the dark side is.

    Yoda

    The one fatal flaw in this hostage drama is that by staking everything on Tea Party ideology, such as it is, they have left their flank exposed among their corporate constituency.  Honestly, the wheels of influence move slowly but inexorably.

  8. Shaun Appleby

    If this were “wheels down” on some airborne hostage drama we would be giving the pilot a round of applause.  No matter what was promised.  I fear we haven’t been able to see clearly what has just happened here through the polarising filter of our national media.

  9. DTOzone

    this popped up on my Facebook feed

    I think bringing Gabby Giffords in to vote is disgusting and morbid. She has no clue as to what she is voting on. Cheap emotion ploy

    Responding by saying “she wanted to go there,” my nice friend responded “she doesn’t even know where she is, half her brain is gone”

    I’ve met some interesting people in my life.  

  10. http://bobcesca.com/blog-archi


    While everyone is fixated on how terrible this debt-ceiling deal is for Democrats, If one pauses long enough to really analyze the details and all of their implications, one finds that, in the long term, this deal is actually wildly in favor of the President’s position.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    If you view this deal from the perspective that there is a guarantee the Bush Tax Cuts will expire, then suddenly the deal swings wildly in favor of President Obama.

    The president offered John Boehner a 4:1, cuts:revenue deal, but what he ended up getting instead is a 1:2, cuts:revenue deal.

    The Bush Tax Cuts account for roughly $3.7 trillion dollars in additional revenue over 10 years. The spending-cuts tentatively agreed to in the deal account for only $2.7 trillion dollars over 10 years. This means there is $1 trillion more dollars in revenue contained inside the deal over 10 years than there are spending cuts.

    Furthermore, the spending cuts contained inside the bill do not come into effect until 2013, after the Bush Tax Cuts expire, meaning the revenue and cuts come into effect at roughly the same time.

    ~~~~~~

    President Obama knew this would look bad for his administration in the short term, but he took that risk in exchange for winning further along down the road. As I mentioned above, none of this policy actually comes into effect until 2013. Not even the spending cuts. Only 1% of the spending cuts will be felt in 2012.

  11. creamer

    We protected entitlments.

    Boner walked away from 4 .7 trillion dollar deal.

    Bachman and Romney say they would have let us default.

    We protected seniors.

    My job will not go away because some tea bagging moron in the house doesn’t understand economics.

    Half full? Maybe. Politicaly wins and losses are often determined by claiming victory. Personaly Krugman will do enough whinning for me, he’s my designated whinner.

  12. Strummerson

    Sharpton has Buchanan on.  Buchanan just referred to Obama as “your boy” to Sharpton.  I KID YOU FREAKING NOT.  Sharpton responded by saying: “My what?  He’s YOUR president?”

    If I wrote that script, no one would find such stupidity believable.  They’d tell me to tone it down in the re-write.

  13. jsfox

    over at Booman tribune. ( http://www.boomantribune.com/s… ) It was in response to this comment.

    I simply DO NOT agree (none / 0)

    that Obama could do nothing.

    This “helpless Obama” shit is absolutely annoying. HE CAUSES HIS OWN PROBLEM. Obama is helpless and at the mercy of the Repukeliscum BECAUSE HE HAS SET IT UP THAT WAY.

    Concessions breed further hostage dramas. And the other thing that breeds hostage drama? When he comes out at the end of being absolutely mugged, destroyed, and totally screwed over, and says “We have a deal that no one is happy with” or more of that happy bipartisanshit shit that he loves so much.

    My response:

    That’s fine, so what should Obama have done to create a different outcome? The 14th? The route that folks wanted, not because it solved the problem, but just because it made him look like the sheriff at High Noon.

    Certainly would have been cool from an optics stand point and sent a tingle up the legs of Progressives, but to achieving the goal of keeping the country from defaulting or strengthening the Presidents hand not so much.

    Why we would have defaulted anyway. In order to avoid default the bond markets would have had to believe the full faith and credit of the US was Ok just on Obama’s say so. And thus bought T-Bills to get the cash flowing back into Treasury’s coffers. Questionable at best they would have done so. Next, The House would have moved to impeach almost immediately. A stupid move yes, but it would have thrown further doubt into the mix and really created a three ring circus dragging the economy down further.

    The other option? Just say to the Republicans – fine go ahead bring the country down, I dare you. And you know what they would have done it. Why? Too many of the Republican House members thought default was actually a good idea.

    So Progressives have a choice they can get in their circle and commence firing as they are doing now. Or they can actually stop looking at the big numbers and see what this legislation actually does and does not do. What it does short term is not much. A $7 billion dollar reduction in the 2012 budget of 3.7 trillion is not slash and burn. They can wake up and realize almost all of this can be undone or re-written by the next Congress before any of it takes effect, but that of course would mean they need to get out of their damn armchairs, stop whining and work to win back the House and hold the Senate. Will they? Maybe, but first they need to get over their poutrage at Obama and constantly thinking the world has come to end.

Comments are closed.