Policy and Debt Collide

After failing to pass a "clean" debt vote, Republican's in Congress are looking for a compromise. The Hill reported today that Senator Jon Kyl said "the GOP would look to a shorter-term increase in the debt ceiling if the talks fail to produce more than $2.5 trillion in cuts." The Treasury has been dipping into reserve funds to forestall the worst case scenario, but those funds will run out in July, and it looks like the GOP is still willing to play politics until the very last moment.

It left me with two questions. 1) What is Kyl thinking? $2.5 trillion worth in cuts?! In a time where most states are strapped for cash Republican's have decided that cutting social programs that millions of American's rely on is OK by them.

Plus, what is a "short term" increase? Congress has voted to raise the debt ceiling every year for the past decade. If the time period is any shorter than that, it means the Republican's aren't kicking the can down the road, they're crushing it.

If you're a politician, the rule of thumb you follow in any crisis is to do no harm. Well, many families are in a crisis right now, and by not raising the debt ceiling Congress will be doing them harm. All the positive "estimates" that economists made for 2011 will be wiped out because, as the U.S. is already broke, there won't be any room to make the investments it needs to execute programs that will help create jobs or make sure families are taken care of. As the majority of the debt is for paying programs such as Medicare and Social Security, asking for $2.5 trillion in cuts means these vital programs will be a part of it.

2) Can the Republican's do math? Even though the Congressional Budget Office has stated numerous times The Affordable Care Act will reduce future deficits, all the GOP talks about is how it will ruin America. But as it will help our fiscal situation, it also saves lives. The law forbids insurance companies from saying no to certain medical treatments, and giving parents the ability to keep their children insured under their plan until they are 26. It also includes tax credits for small businesses, and makes sure seniors can pay for their prescription drugs. I'm not making this up.

But politics has succumbed over policy once again. The Affordable Care Act is better known as Obamacare, and recent polls show 47 percent of American's do not want the debt ceiling raised. A Pew study also found the majority of people are not in favor of raising taxes or cutting benefits. But this is not because they are irrational people, it's because they don't have enough information. Our "leaders" in Congress are supposed to tell us what we need to know so we understand the actions they are taking. Instead, it has become a battle of words and trying to figure out which ones will position their party or candidate to win the next election. Instead of calling them out on it, the media focuses on it and polls the candidates that don't even try to have credibility.

If the emergency funds run out and the debt ceiling isn't raised, it means America will have to default on its loans, leading to an even worse economic down turn than the one we're still recovering from. President Obama has said his decision to vote against raising the debt ceiling while still in the Senate was a mistake; it's the Republican's turn to stop playing politics and deal with the matters at hand.

Boehner’s Pork

If you are arguing with your friends about how John Boehner doesn't wield much power, here's some ammunition. When the Republican's took control of the House of Representatives last year, Speaker Boehner said he would put an end to all earmarks. Well, guess what? Lawmakers found a loophole for their own rule.

Instead of directly asking money from a committee, the committee members have set aside money for lawmakers where they can request money to be allocated for their district. Walter Pincus reported that the House Armed Services Committee reserved one billion dollars (that's twenty zeros) for what has been dubbed the Mission Force Enhancement Fund (MFEF). In this Fund, members of Congress could request money for projects in their districts through the appropriate federal agency within the Defense Department. Ironically, or maybe not, even before the bill could be passed half of the money within MFEF was already allocated for members who sit on the House Armed Services Committee.

This proves two things. First, Speaker Boehner can't handle his job. You don't run on reducing the deficit and the size of government, then allow your members to spite you on those very issues. In the 90's Tom Delay threatened to remove members of his own caucus of their chairmanship if he didn't like what they were doing. If Boehner had the same control like The Hammer once did, the Committee chairs would be afraid of applying this run around.

Second, the Tea Party doesn't have as much influence as they like to believe. If members really cared about reducing the deficit and America's debt, they wouldn't take place in this practice. Instead, Freshman members like Congressman Joe Heck walk a tight line between getting the funds their district needs, and making sure they don't get a primary challenge for doing so. Congressman Heck, who is a member of the Armed Services Committee, realizes if a terrorist attack does occur in the high tourist area of Las Vegas, it could be detrimental to the local economy. As someone who recently went there for the first time (I broke even), and wouldn't mind going back one day, I would like to know that I'm safe doing so. Also, as a tourist attraction for people and businesses around the world, you could give a good argument for why terrorists would want to attack the city.

If the Tea Party really had a major influence over what the Republicans were doing, these funds never would have been created. They only represent a tiny proportion of conservative Americans, and the GOP knows they can't retain their majority by exclusively pandering to them. The current speaker hasn't figured out how to handle either of these issues, and instead has let his caucus take votes that he knew would hurt them at the polls leading to its recent defeat in NY26.

Personally, I don't mind members of Congress asking for money. It is part of their job, and if they weren't their constituents would be asking them why they haven't been doing anything. Which happens to be the case for this Congress anyway.

Boehner Wields A Little Gavel

Ever since Barack Obama became President the Republican Party’s argument to everything was simply no. No to raising taxes on the wealthy, no to the Affordable Care Act, and now it is no to raising the debt ceiling. While it is important for all politicians to make sure their base is happy, they still need to pass legislation. Of course that is easier said than done with a divided Congress, but what doesn’t help is when their isn’t strong leadership that is capable of herding the cats.

In a recent article from The Hill, it describes how some members of the GOP have missed the old days of Tom Delay where they were able to get things done without much bickering. While at times upset with the leadership style of late 1990’s and early 2000’s, these members are eager to get things done and don’t see Speaker John Boehner being able to. Tom “the hammer” Delay and Dennis Hastert were never shy of wielding their power to get what they wanted. “In 2004, then-Transportation and Treasury Appropriations subcommittee Chairman Ernest Istook (R-Okla.) tried to rescind Amtrak earmarks, sparking a heated fight with then-Rep. John McHugh (R-N.Y.) and other GOP legislators. Istook’s subcommittee was reorganized in the next Congress, stripping him of his gavel and ‘cardinal’ status.”

Coming back to today, we still don’t have a full budget, not many appropriations have been passed, and can I ask you to name one thing Republicans have done since taking over the House that has helped you? Of course Paul Ryan’s budget was passed, which would have ended Medicare, cut taxes for the wealthy and businesses, plus increase defense spending when all the major players within the Pentagon are calling for cuts. But this isn’t a sign of strength for Boehner.

Ryan’s budget proposal is being used right now by Democrat Kathy Hochul running in a special election in New York’s 26^th district, far far away from the liberal city. In fact, no one thought this race would even be close, but since Hochul started running against this budget she has picked up a large amount of momentum. It has gotten so bad for the GOP that Boehner had to head to Buffalo to try and help the Republican candidate Jane Corwin. But the election is Tuesday and recent polls show Hochul with the lead.

Boehner is struggling with members that are afraid they will be facing Tea Party candidates, and they know their “leader” won’t be able to help them. Since coming out in favor of the bailout in 2008, and accomplishing nothing to decrease the debt, he won’t be able to speak for the candidates who came into office saying they will make the government smaller. While many Democrats believe the GOP tends to agree on everything, they clearly haven’t, otherwise more legislation would have passed the House. The major accomplishments of the GOP since Boehner was minority leader had been getting his entire party to vote against the Affordable Care Act and the stimulus when Democrats took over. But most of the credit for was given to GOP Whip Eric Cantor.

When Truman was running for reelection in 1948, he branded the “Do Nothing Congress” as the reason he was not able to enact policies that will help the American people. So far in this first session of Congress, the House has passed twenty-nine pieces of legislation, compared to 2001 under Speaker Hastert, where seventy-five pieces of legislation were passed in its first session. While some of these bills are to change the name of a court room or post office, the majority of them were appropriations for member’s districts. Appropriations, (or pork, whatever you prefer) that could create jobs and stimulate the economy.

Even as the Republicans took over the House, Boehner was pushed to the sidelines by the RNC because he wasn’t good at using the talking points they gave him. Obama needs to do the same as Truman. The election isn’t going to be won over Iraq, Israel, or Osama Bin Laden, it’s going to be about the economy and the state of the nation. The reason why Tom Delay was able to keep his majority was because he got things done. But while the president has tried to get Congress to pass legislation that will help millions of Americans, all John Boehner has said is no, without offering an alternative, and unable to form a consensus for his party.  

Did The Republicans Really Win?

Like all political junkies, I wake up early on Sunday's to watch the political talk shows to see what news, if any, is going to be made. This week consisted of the budget battle and the last minute deal that was reached on Friday. So I'm watching Meet The Press and This Week, and the consensus among the reporters was that because the Republicans pushed the Democrats around, and got the cuts they were asking for, they were the winners. But then I wondered: what else is new? While getting an agenda through Congress can sometimes equal a political victory, this policy victory won't equal a political victory for the GOP.

Collectively, Congress has always had low approval ratings. It doesn't matter what they do, people watch the debates on C-SPAN and see the overblown rhetoric used by politicians on the news, and guess what..they don't like it. It gets to a point where both parties are looking like they are trying to save face (which they are) and really aren't doing what they were elected to do, represent the people. The way the negotiations took place this week didn't give American's any more confidence in their government, and instead, showed both sides to be spoiled brats.

We still don't know what the particulars are of the $38 billion that was cut, but who cares?! All the Republicans cared about was appeasing the Tea Party and cried for more cuts after getting what they originally asked for. I'm sure when John Boehner met with Harry Reid and President Obama at the White House, it was pointed out to him that polls consistently showed the majority of Republicans wanted a compromise. But all we got was more rhetoric and statements that argued for more cuts because it will help the economy or because abortions are bad. Both arguments are the crutch Republicans turn to when they know they reached too far, and people are sick of it.

The Republican's also liked to say elections have consequences, which is true. If the Democrats kept the House last year none of this would have happened. A Continuing Resolution would have been passed to keep spending levels where they were and no one could have complained. It's been done many times before. Even though they got their sound bites out there, the GOP never came up with one policy solution to help end the situation. If the government shut down it would have been their fault because they are the ones complaining.

In the meantime, Democrats looked like they didn't even know what they stood for. Even though they still control the Senate and White House they weren't able to get a strong message out. The way Boehner was acting was a gift for them. When he says that Government is the problem, Democrats should have reminded him of TARP (which he was in favor of) and how the program has actually earned America money. It was probably just easier for him to support it while George W. Bush was going to have to sign it into law. While Democrats can't totally claim it was their idea, there is no reason they can't use it to argue against Boehner's assertion that government programs were hurting the economy.

I'm not going to go as far to say the Democrats won, but it's hard for me to believe the Republicans took the trophy. American's want to see their government work for them, and when they see both sides bickering over an issue that really isn't going to help anyone, it makes them feel they don't have the right people representing them. As both parties tried in the aftermath to position themselves as "winning" they need to realize at some point they are going to get booed off the stage.

The Politics of Budgets

Did you know that America doesn't actually have a budget? It's true. Congress does not pass one big bill where all the spending is voted on. Instead, all the appropriations are voted on separately and the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) adds them all up. There are so many convoluted ways in which Congress creates America's spending it is no wonder how it has a debt of thirteen trillion dollars.

Every year, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) reports to the President on spending levels, the debt, and what economists are predicting for the coming year. After this analysis is complete, the President makes his priorities known. Decisions are made on what the tax levels should be, where spending should be cut, and where spending should be increased. Then the president starts pushing these ideas at the State of the Union address.

The CBO and OMB can sometimes come up with different numbers for how much a program can cost, how much the debt will be, or how much the economy will grow, but there usually isn't that big of a difference. The CBO is a non-partisan office, and because of that, their recommendations carry a lot of weight. During the healthcare debate, the CBO estimated that if the healthcare bill passed Congress it would reduce the deficit. The Democrats jumped on this and the Republicans had no reason or will to fight this fact. Of course, they still managed to find other things to complain about.

In Congress, the appropriations committees are filled with members who have a direct interest in seeing money going to their districts. For instance, the House committee on Science and Technology (which oversees NASA), had to deal with one of President Obama's priorities this past year. The president wanted to cut NASA's budget in order to reduce the deficit. But the members of that committee refused to let it happen, and it didn't. NASA was still fully funded for years to come, and for the members whose constituents didn't have a direct effect on the vote, they got a big IOU from those that it did. Needless to say, it is very hard to reduce the deficit this way.

One of the most effective ways the deficit was reduced occurred was when President Nixon was in office. When Nixon was living in the White House, he had the ability to cut spending that he did not think was necessary. Similar to a line-item veto but after the budget was passed. However, while he was in office Democrats controlled Congress, and eventually took this ability away from him, and claiming he wasn't cutting funding in Republican districts.

Before Obama introduces his budget and sets his priorities at the State of the Union, Congress is going to have to vote on its debt ceiling. A lot of pundits are making a big deal out of this because the debt was a big issue in the last election. But this same vote has happened every year for as long as there has been a deficit. And every year the minority party blames the majority party for increasing the deficit. But really, the ceiling is based on the coming years interest on what the government owns. So if a member voted for an appropriation last year that the CBO said would increase the deficit, they only have themselves to blame.

But that does not make it any less important for the debt ceiling to be raised. If it is not, the Treasury will be forced to default on the loans from China and other countries around the world. If you thought the financial crisis was bad, this will be one-hundred times worse. If the United States defaults (which amounts to claiming bankruptcy) the entire world economy will go into an unprecedented tail spin. It won't be just where people invested that will be hurt, this time it will be all the businesses that borrowed money from banks (which is all of them) from all around the world.

If John Boehner wants to give a fight about this, he will be playing a very dangerous game. I know he will be all high and mighty after Pelosi hands him the gavel, but unless he wants to be responsible for what I just described, he will raise the roof.

The Three Rules

What was Robert Gibbs thinking? It's almost been two years since President Obama has taken office and his administration still hasn't learned you never state the reality, the obvious, or the truth.

The basic rules of Washington is to make yourself look better then everyone else, distort the other guys message, and never take responsibility unless people like what you're taking responsibility for. By admitting defeat in the coming election, Gibbs broke all those rules and managed to piss off the entire Democratic Party at the same time.

Give him some slack though, he's lasted a lot longer then some of his predecessors and when you're talking to the media every day you're bound to screw up at one point or another. Of course the reality (and what any political consultant in the district will tell you) is that the Democrats are going to lose seats in Congress this coming election, it is only a question of how many.

However, I don't believe it is as obvious or gloomy as Gibbs had stated it on Meet The Press. The problem with the Democrats messaging is that they have been on the defensive, always trying to explain what they are doing. This is especially dangerous when people are anxious and need help. But the fact is this Congress has done a lot of good. Between health care reform and the new Wall Street regulations they have accomplished a lot, and when people look back on it, they will be grateful this reforms were passed.

But now it's time to get back on the offensive. Get a clear message and don't be afraid to defend your vote.

A recent poll conducted by the moderate think tank Third Way showed how bringing former President Bush back into the picture, voters are much more willing to vote for the Democrat.

David Broder wasn't so convinced. He thought the Republicans could just bring back Reagan since the same poll showed most people also wanted more tax cuts. But don't forget, this Congress gave 95% of Americas a tax cut and Reagan raised taxes in his first term.

When the two parties debated these issues this past Sunday on Meet The Press, the Democrats were clearly back on the offensive and had the upper hand. So while Gibbs may have been telling what he thought to be the obvious truth, there's still a lot of time before the next election becomes the reality.