3 Big Victories for Obama & Dems in Debt Ceiling Fight – Republicans Just Trying to Save Face

[Kurmudgeon]

Source: dailykos.com

"White House/Democrat Wins:

• Spending cuts ($2.4 trillion over 10 years) are a little more than half of what was originally on the table.

• Nearly 40% ($350 billion) of the initial $900 billion in cuts comes from the defense budget. The remaining $550 billion over 10 years results from caps on discretionary spending (not itemized cuts), so expect the President and Dems to fight to spread those losses out to places where they’ll have the least impact.

• Of primary importance to Obama’s base, all entitlement benefits and many programs for the poor are exempt from current cuts and the trigger cuts.

• The “triggers,” or fail-safe plans, heavily favor Democrats. If the bi-partisan commission fails to agree to a balanced plan – or Congress fails to pass a balanced plan – the Defense budget alone will take half the spending cuts ($600-750 billion). This trigger gives Democrats significant leverage.

• The process is gimmicky and allows Congress symbolic votes of disapproval, but essentially the agreement will raise the debt ceiling through 2012, one of Obama’s biggest sticking points – meant to settle financial markets and to avoid repeating this charade before the election.

• Did you notice that repealing the health insurance individual mandate – Boehner’s big last-minute sticking point – is no longer part of the deal? Don’t think that wasn’t a hard-won battle."

Read more: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/08/01/1001645/-3-Big-Victories-for-ObamaDems-in-Debt-Ceiling-Fight-%E2%80%93-Republicans-Just-Trying-to-Save-Face

---

Amidst all the complaining that's been going on, I figured this was worth sharing.

[jpak]

Oh stop it - Dems and Obama caved

not

[bluestateguy]

1. A lot of progressives would have favored repealing the health insurance individual mandate

That would be a worthwhile tradeoff to make if it meant sparing discretionary spending from cuts.

[The_Casual_Observer]

2. How does any of this affect/address the "Jobs" problem in this country?

Except that lots more people will lose their jobs due to programs cuts?

[EFerrari]

9. Takes money out of economy, horrible for job creation. n /t

[damntexdem]

3. Talk about trying to save Dem face.

The Repukes won -- they just don't believe it because they wanted more.

[TheWraith]

4. This is, all things considered, a pretty fucking good deal for us.

No itemized cuts on specific programs, so we can go back and fight to protect individual items later on in the budget process.

Big cuts to defense and homeland security.

And this is done though 2013, so with luck, the next time this gets revisited we'll have a Democratic Congress.

[cstanleytech]

5. I think they just tossed the health insurance part in there to

appease some of the more vocal fruicakes from the mad (mad crazy not mad angry) tea party people and will continue to go after it via the courts, I'm not sure how effective that approach will be in the end though when its still constitutional for states to require people who drive to have insurance.

[drm604]

6. A victory would have been a straight debt ceiling bill with nothing else attached.

Anything more than that sets a dangerous precedent. It signals that you can force issues by holding essential government functions hostage.

Now they're trying to do the same thing with the FAA in order to push their anti-union agenda. Are we going to end up hailing as a victory the fact the they didn't get to put as many limits on unions as they would have liked?

What's next after that?

Are we going to face one crisis after another as they threaten critical financial, regulatory, and physical infrastructure in attempts to pass their radical agendas?

[JAnthony]

15. You are precisely correct! Worse than the $ plans, it sets a ...

terrible precedent for the teabaggers.

It also puts every Democrat in Congress, (House and Senate) on notice that their seats in Congress will be challenged from the further progressive/liberal elements in primaries.

[EFerrari]

7. Not LBN but a reworking of the White House press release. n/t

[Demonaut]

8. I'm voting whig

but if that's not an option then Dem

[Vinnie From Indy]

10. Shameless nonsense

The Obama people must believe that huge swaths of progressives will choose to be willfully ignorant. That will be their undoing as times get even tougher.

[SemperEadem]

11. I'm sorry, but I don't see anything close to saving face

saving face would have been for Obama to say "fuck you" to bonehead and his myrmidons and to use the 14th amendment. If he was being truthful in saying that "I might just be a one term president", then he needed to act like it and act boldly in the best interests of the American people. He CHOSE not to.


This bi-partisan "super congress" is not constitutional. We the People do not elect a "super" anything. We elect representatives and senators to serve us. Yes I understand they're bought by big corporations, that's not what I'm discussing. I'm discussing what the constitution spells out in plain English as to what the President can do--and he CHOSE not to do it. I did not vote for a republican but goddamn! that's exactly what we got. He's worse than Clinton--both of them.

all these idiots in the "super congress" need do is take their orders from the kock brothers, dither and dally about until those mandatory cuts go into effect and there goes SS, Medicare, etc. The very pool from which these clowns will be drawn waited until fucking TODAY to get their shit in order. That is unacceptable from a bunch of supposed "adults".

[CakeGrrl]

12. But the GOP Congress is celebrating!

...even if they forgot to tell their Freeper/'bagger constituents to do so.

K/R, especially for this:

all entitlement benefits and many programs for the poor are exempt from current cuts and the trigger cuts.

Statements from Al Franken and Patrick Leahy back that up.

[Kaleva]

20. And their teabagger base is threatening to rip them a new one.

[uponit7771]

13. FUDrs reply - FUCK FACTS!!!

[Obamanaut]

14. Looks just like this one, even the subject line ->

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1633077&mesg_id=1633077

[librechik]

16. FYI--during high unemployment, govt should not cut programs--leads to more unemployment

2 T in cuts is a death sentence to our being able to make jobs programs. This is just a cave to madness becasue you can't talk mad people out of being insane, all you can do is give in.

[Moosepoop]

17. Huge K&R!!!

Thanks for the OP, Kurmudgeon! The excerpts you posted from the linked article are good, and reading the entire article was even better!! Excellent, excellent analysis of the proposed deal. I highly recommend reading the entire thing, for anyone who hasn't done so.

Thanks again, Kurmudgeon :hi:

[Kurmudgeon]

24. Much obliged!

[seabeyond]

18. dailykos is NOT a friend of obamas. and look what they conclude. nt

[B Calm]

19. Stop It. . . We won. . .LOL. . Did we get floor mats by paying full sticker price?

[BlueCheese]

21. Don't fall for it.

It happened like this:

GOP: In order to raise the debt ceiling, you have to agree to massive spending cuts over the next ten years.
Liberals to Obama: Don't do it! Get a clean bill!
Obama: How about we make a grand bargain. I'll see your massive budget cuts, add on a chained COLA for SS and raise the Medicare age. All you need to do is agree to a few revenue increases.
Liberals: NO! No Democrat should ever put SS and Medicare at risk.
Tea Party: NO! No new taxes, period!
Obama: Okay, how about just the massive spending cuts then?
Liberals: Didn't we say already that's unacceptable?
Obama defenders: See, we saved Medicare and SS! Obama is a genius!

[Guilded Lilly]

22. Is IS worth sharing.

We are just as succeptable to doom and gloom here as everywhere else.
In the absence of perfection or anything near it, I am always open to the devil (or not so devilish) in the details.
Thanks

[emulatorloo]

23. Thanks for posting, just read full article n/t