|
|
May 16, 2012 · By Robert Romano · 3 Comments
Following a meeting of the House Republican Conference, Speaker Boehner comments on ongoing discussions regarding the president’s request to raise the debt limit. July 12, 2011.
Here we go again.
Speaking to the Peter G. Peterson Foundation 2012 Fiscal Summit on May 15 , House Speaker John Boehner once again called for offsetting spending cuts in return for increasing the $16.394 trillion debt ceiling later this year.
This follows the failed attempt in 2011 to do precisely the same thing.
All the American people got in return for the $2.1 trillion increase in the borrowing limit, the largest such hike in the nation’s history, was a slight reduction in the growth rate of spending via sequestration — which Congress is busy crafting legislation to overturn — and the ill-fated Supercommittee that achieved exactly nothing.
Well, that’s not fair. We did lose our Triple-A credit rating. And the $15.6 trillion debt is now larger than the entire $15.4 trillion economy.
But besides the downsides, last year’s debt deal produced nothing positive whatsoever. No entitlement reform. No tax code simplification. No sizable spending cuts. No balanced budget. No spending cap.
Which, if Republicans never had any intention of achieving real spending cuts and substantially reducing the size of the $3.7 trillion budget, they should have just rejected the concept of using the debt ceiling as leverage in the first place.
Instead, after the 2010 election, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell told Fox News’ Brett Baier that the debt ceiling “will not be [raised] without some strings attached, if it happens, because they’re going to have to seriously address spending and debt.”
McConnell added, “The American people want it, they expect it. That was a big issue in yesterday’s election.”
Later on, Boehner, this time speaking to the Economic Club of New York, said, “Without significant spending cuts and reforms to reduce our debt, there will be no debt limit increase. And the cuts should be greater than the accompanying increase in debt authority the president is given. We should be talking about cuts of trillions, not just billions.”
Of course, none of that ever happened.
But now Boehner is at it again. At the May 15 Fiscal Summit he said, “When the time comes, I will again insist on my simple principle of cuts and reforms greater than the debt limit increase. This is the only avenue I see right now to force the elected leadership of this country to solve our structural fiscal imbalance.”
Okay, fine. But this time let’s dispense with the bull.
When the House cedes its constitutional power of the purse to a grand committee with no mandate that then achieves nothing, it makes it look like the GOP was bamboozled.
When House Republicans pretend that mere reductions in the growth rate of spending are “cuts,” they take actual cuts to the budget off of the table. Such proposals only undermine the GOP’s credibility, and limit the range of proposals that might be considered.
And when Republicans of both chambers concede the false talking point that the nation would default on its debts if the debt ceiling were not raised, they take their valuable leverage off of the table.
In fact, so long as the Treasury uses existing revenue to make interest payments on the debt, and refinances existing debt up to the limit, we would never default.
That’s the line Republicans must take in order to keep their credible threat on the table. If Boehner truly wants to achieve significant reforms this time — and restore confidence in the House Republican majority — Obama and Reid have to actually believe that the House will allow the debt ceiling to be reached.
Else, they will just call Boehner’s bluff. And taxpayers will once again be left with the bill.
Note: Reader comments are reviewed before publishing, and only salient comments that add to the topic will be published. Profanity is absolutely not allowed and will be summarily deleted. Spam, copied statements and other material not comprised of the reader’s own opinion will also be deleted.
This is a very interesting and telling interview from Rep. Mike Kelly (R-PA) of IRS Commissioner Steven Miller over the Obama Administration scandal involving IRS harassment of Tea Party and other conservative groups. I don't know why Kelly isn't trying to extend an olive branch. Why isn't he trying to find common ground? Why isn't he trying to persuade this guy to see things his way? Why is he being so mean?
The front: homosexual marriage. The end: schoolchildren. This week, Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton (labeled one of America’s worst senators by TIME) signed homosexual marriage legislation into un-law after the un-lawful House and Senate approved it. In concert these branches of the Minnesota government have proven themselves to be in defiance against the laws of Nature and Nature’s God, as found in the Declaration of Independence.
Sarah Hall Ingram, the woman in charge of the IRS during it's high period of harassment of Tea Party and other conservative groups, is now going to be running ObamaCare. Joseph Grant, the IRS commissioner who became the fall guy for the Obama Administration in this scandal, is just a patsy. He was going to be done with the job in less than a month anyway, and he wasn't in charge during the time when the IRS was busy muzzling Tea Party groups.
“We were simply doing what our bosses ordered.” So say the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) employees in Cincinnati who were charged with targeting tea party and other conservative groups with improper and invasive scrutiny, according a Fox19 in Cincinnati exclusive report on May 15. If true, this seemingly contradicts a Treasury Inspector General report on the matter released earlier that day.
Hillary Clinton has successfully regained popularity (and a following) after doing or saying something totally stupid -- like the "under sniper-fire lie" during the campaign. However, I'm betting it is not going to be so easy for Obama and his friends to come out of the present scandals that, among many things, involve lies told to the American people.
|
"We don't intend to turn the Republican Party over to the traitors in the battle just ended. We will have no more of those candidates who are pledged to the same goals as our opposition and who seek our support. Turning the party over to the so-called moderates wouldn't make any sense at all." - Ronald Reagan, Nov. 10, 1964 |
