In the previous posting, I borrowed from British history the frustrated outcry, "In the name of God, go" to characterize what must be the growing national frustration in this country about the inability of the Washington political self-interest establishment to resolve the debt ceiling issue. The posting was particularly aimed at House Speaker John Boehner and his Majority Leader Eric Cantor whose lack-of-leadership strategy seems to be, "if we can't have it our way, we walk away" from any negotiations on proposals that have "compromise" attached or implied. And for Boehner it has become increasingly evident that he is unable to control the tea party (TP) members and their fiscal extremist supporters.
In their efforts to appease the TP and the fellow travelers, which they don't seem to be able to do, both Boehner and Cantor have rejected any proposals that require or imply increasing revenues in any form. The basic GOP idea of a deal is to make deep spending cuts in exchange for increasing the debt limit, and the cuts-only approach will make the deficit go away. For many in the TP and its supporters, however, the demand is to cut spending deeply BUT don't raise the debt ceiling at all. The result is a floundering House GOP leadership with the resultant inability of Congress to enact any resolution of the problem, at least to this point.
Congress and the White House have for some time been floating numerous proposals to raise the debt ceiling, with new ideas coming out almost daily, adding to the bewilderment and frustration of the public. In addition to the cut spending/raise revenues division between the GOP and the Democrats, there is also the politically driven issue of a short term fix to meet the August 2 deadline for default on the national debt versus larger, longer term plans. The GOP wants a short term fix to keep the issue alive to be trotted out again next year in hopes of damaging the re-election of President Obama. The Democrats want a solution that will carry beyond the 2012 elections, giving the voters an opportunity next year to register their party preference before the issue would return to the congressional agenda in 2013.
So as of today, July 27, the parties are deadlocked on both the substance and the time frame of a solution with the default deadline just five days away. And just three days after that, lawmakers are scheduled to leave Washington to begin a month-long unearned summer vacation. It is possible that the vacation could be delayed or canceled to keep Congress in town to do whatever needs to be done to clean up their mess.
The title of this posting is based on the expectation that some kind of minimal band-aid fix will be agreed to and the congressional vacation will occur. Thus another concluding note of frustration. Most of the nation is tired of partisan deadlock and political posturing with the White House and congressional eyes fixed on getting re-elected. The lawmakers will, of course, come back in September but contempt for Congress by many voters at least requires a concluding characterization of frustration. Thus, "And don't come back" -- until you reach adulthood or at least go through puberty.
0-0-0-0-0
And while at it, how about applying the title of the previous post, "In the name of God, go" to Afghanistan, specifically President Hamid Karzai.
Once again Karzai's chutzpah amazes. Despite his depending on the U.S. and NATO for his government's preservation, and U.S. and international money for its fiscal existence (not counting what goes on with the opium trade in Afghanistan), he has once again rammed a stick in our eye. Now, according to a recent U.S. Treasury report, Karzai has blocked U.S. officials from checking on funds being stolen through government corruption or diverted to the Taliban as a bribe not to attack our truck convoys traveling through the war zone.
So for Karzai, it's also "go," but, like Congress, since that doesn't seem likely the message should go to Obama in modified form. "In the name of God, get out" of that pit of corruption and war-without-end which keeps sucking out money we can't afford and killing young men and women which the nation and their families can afford even less.
I think there are some in congress fighting the good fight but there is too much political posturing to overcome. I think that the world. is watching. It has been a big topic for the media that Obama won't accept a short term solution for reelection reasons and the opposite for the GOP. I am planning a break from the news as it isn't good for my blood pressure.
ReplyDeletedpchuck
ReplyDeletePerhaps we should all be taking a break from the news.
On the short-term vs. longer-term resolution of the problem, I think the Democrats are on the side of the angels on this aspect of the issue. Raising the debt limit enough to get beyond the next election may be politically oriented but the GOP's idea of bringing up the issue again in 8-9 months, also politically driven, is definitely a loser. We've had enough politics and posturing this round without having to do it all over again next year. At least give us a break until late 2012 or 2013, after the elections.
It sounds like there is going to be a compromise with a combo of the Reid and Boehner bills. But it doesnt sound like anyone is happy about it. It will just be a cut to additional spending and not a true cut to existing spending. WHy can we not just not approve any extra spending and cut a little each year off current levels. What gets me is all the money we are now spending on a third "non" war in Libya.
ReplyDeleteJeffrey
ReplyDeleteThat's the way the talk seems to go but first they have to get the Boehner bill out of the House and that doesn't seem to be easy. If it became that critical to get it passed, I'm sure you could find the new needed Democratic votes to make the difference.
Not sure, however, that compromise will be that simple. Both have different gimmicks for future spending cuts but the real sticking point is the GOP wanting a short term fix and then come back and do it over in 6 months or so while the Democrats want to get the issue beyond the next election.
The idea of shaving a bit off now and then a bit more each year doesn't really get at the depth of the problem. We do need to face up to the huge deficit spending problem which will only get worse in the years ahead as more people retire and start using the entitlements which are a very big part of the problem, particularly health care.
I suspect that we are not spending too much extra on the Libyan adventure. Many of the troops and surveillance planes involved would be out there in any case. If we are contributing much of the munitions, then there is a price attached.
I seem to remember a posting after the last election wherein Charley pondered the impact of the newly elected Tea Party members. Now we see the results: a completely dysfunctional Congress. Compromise is the key to getting things done in a democracy but the TP ideologues don't grasp that fundamental concept. Now Boehner is trying to revive TP support for his bill by adding the need for passage of a constitutional amendment to balance the budget before the next round of budget cuts and raising of the debt ceiling. Such an amendment is guaranteed to fail, so Boehner is moving from the ridiculous to the completely absurd. The country's only hope is a Senate bill. Meanwhile, the stock market continues to sink and investors start questioning the value of Treasury bills. I don't think I've ever been as upset with Congress as I am today.
ReplyDeleteCosmo
ReplyDeleteA book was written sometime in the 60s called "Deadline Every Minute" about life as a reporter for a wire service, in that case it was United Press International. Keeping track of congressional politics with the debt limit is kind of like that. You have to keep on top of the news every minute if you want to keep current. So the news now has moved, as you talked about, to the Senate which has rejected the Boehner bill but still expects to use it for some kind of basis for a "compromise", if that hasn't become a dirty word.
It would be difficult not to be really turned off with the Congress and its endless political posturing. I'm almost with those who are encouraging Obama to use some obscure language of the 14th amendment that supposedly allows him to go ahead on dealing with the debt issue himself. My only misgiving about that it is it would get entangled with judicial politics and then end up in the Supreme Court with Scalia writing the majority opinion.
It is beyond the understanding of mere mortals of how the Congress operates behind the scenes to work out still one more deal when everything seems to be at an end. Probably we'll see that on the debt issue sometime on Monday or Tuesday. Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't one of Woodrow Wilson's 14 points "open covenants, openly arrived at"? We need a bit of that in Congress.