Free Markets, Free People

Deficit “super-committee”? Dead on Arrival

One of the smoke-and-mirrors aspect of this debt deal that experienced observers noticed immediately was the “super-committee” that would negotiate the cuts before the December 23 deadline.  If that committee doesn’t agree upon suitable cuts, then the meat-axe of across-the board cuts, mostly focused in the defense area, will take effect.

Everyone with any sense understands that part of the process of making meaningful cuts in spending and thus the debt must address entitlement spending.  But apparently the liberal left is fine with gutting defense instead. Nancy Pelosi has basically declared that any committee members she appoints will oppose all entitlement benefits cuts.

The debt limit fight is over, but the fight over entitlement programs will continue for months. In the weeks ahead, the leaders of both parties in both the House and Senate will name three members each to a new committee tasked with reducing the deficit by at least $1.2 trillion.

The ultimate makeup of that committee is key. It will determine whether this Congress will pass further fiscal legislation, and, thus, what the major themes of the 2012 election will be.

At a pre-recess press conference Tuesday afternoon, TPM asked House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) whether the people she appoints to the committee will make the same stand she made during the debt limit fight — that entitlement benefits — as opposed to provider payments, waste and other Medicare spending — should be off limits.

In short, yes.

"That is a priority for us," Pelosi said. "But let me say it is more than a priority – it is a value… it’s an ethic for the American people. It is one that all of the members of our caucus share. So that I know that whoever’s at that table will be someone who will fight to protect those benefits."

Right.  “Benefits” make up their “value” and “ethic”, meaning  they’ll decide what you owe others and what you’ll pay for it and you just shut up, sit back and be quiet.  That’s their “ethic”.  Their “values” lie in redistributing wealth they don’t earn but they certainly find no problem in dividing yours out to those who they favor and/or who will vote for more “benefits” from your pocket book (or in this case, out of borrowed money).

Obviously Ms. Pelosi hasn’t yet quite figured out that the “benefits” that are key to her political agenda and provide her political power are no longer affordable.  Claiming she’s clueless is an insult to the really clueless of the world.   The welfare state has run out of money and all that is has promised is no longer affordable.

Until these people are replaced with people who actually understand the concept of limited government, property rights and the fact that they don’t have the right to anyone else’s earnings, nothing will change in DC or for us.

~McQ

Twitter: @McQandO

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

9 Responses to Deficit “super-committee”? Dead on Arrival

  • “Until these people are replaced with people who actually understand the concept of limited government, property rights and the fact that they don’t have the right to anyone else’s earnings, nothing will change in DC or for us.”
     
    Might I recommend then, considering sale of San Francisco to the People’s Republic of China as a way of reducing our debt to them AND removing Pelosi from Congress, because that’s about the only way I see her NOT being re-elected to Congress.
    She can’t die, she has too much botox in her to allow for that.

  • These people or what passes for leadership behind the scenes for these people must really want to drive off the cliff.  The denial is indescribable if they don’t realize they are choosing to very soon to have nothing to give out in the near future over giving out less today but potentially ongoing for decades more. 

  • Have you considered that the super-committee failing is likely the best option on the table?  If it happens, we see a $1.2T cut to defense and Medicare, and no new tax hikes.
    I think the super-committee is just as likely to come up with a ‘balanced’ plan as to fail, and if their plan results in a tax hike, I say my hope is for them to fail.

  • The best outcome that can be expected is that it goes to across the board, and I expect the Democrats to makes a pile of noise when that happens.
    I seem to recall from reading that entitlements or mandatory payments are not part of the across the board cuts.  These are only included if the super committee votes them in.

  • If i ever met that woman … why i just don’t know what i might say. She is like the evil step mother, i could be polite to Obama, even Reid (He is simply a simpleton anyhow), but i just don’t think i could be cordial around Pelosi. She embodies everything i dislike about her home district. And her smug cloud stretches for mile around her. I can see it out here in Gaithersburg some days i think.

  • ” If that committee doesn’t agree upon suitable cuts, then the meat-axe of across-the board cuts, mostly focused in the defense area, will take effect.’

    That is exactly what Obama wants.  The defense cuts along with the medicare cuts.  Then Obama and the MSM can blame the republicans.

  • Might I recommend then, considering sale of San Francisco to the People’s Republic of China as a way of reducing our debt to them AND removing Pelosi from Congress, because that’s about the only way I see her NOT being re-elected to Congress.

  • This just in from Politico

    The debt ceiling agreement could jeopardize millions of dollars, and perhaps billions, in initiatives from President Barack Obama’s health care reform law if the super committee can’t come up with required spending cuts.

    … excuse me while a laugh off a lung