Debt reduction Super Committee will lose favor

[henryclay]

Everybody in the recessed Congress apparently knows how the committee's work should turn out, (everybody has an opinion), but few are anxious to take on the job. If they have solid proposals by November 23rd the Congress is mandated to vote straight up or straight down on them. If the Congress votes their proposals down, the Bill Obama signed on Tuesday will cut Defense and Medicare.

If the Committee can't arrive at what to cut, once again the Bill Obama signed mandates cuts to Defense and Medicare, and as I understand it the Bill Obama signed has provisions in it for that possibility and Congress won't even have to vote because the cuts are already in place.

I heard Stuart Varney say yesterday the final decision, , , the full Congress's final vote on it, , , , has to happen by December 23rd.

Simply based on the make-up of the Congress, (Democratic Senate and Republican House), it seems to me what the past two weeks accomplished was about a 60/40 chance that Defense and Medicare will take the cuts, and there's so much muddy water and room for denial that everybody will be able to run for re-election and truthfully say they didn't vote for any of it.

www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44019748/ns/local_news-anchorage_ak/t/congressional-deficit-committee-faces-rough-road/#.Tju6V1vdKSo

[djAdvocate]

brilliant

[thyme4change]

Isn't the super committee going to be declared unconstitutional?

[djAdvocate]

Aug 5, 2011 11:24:43 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

Isn't the super committee going to be declared unconstitutional?

on what basis? i am not doubting you, in fact, i can see some basis, myself. i am just curious what yours is.

[thyme4change]

Don't quote me - I'm a bad source with "pre-coffee" level of reading comprehension and retention - but I thought I read something about the supreme court considering the constitutional-ness of the Super Committee. I guess I need to figure out what I read. Maybe it was because the thought was some of their decisions would be binding, instead of recommendations. That might be one of those technicalities that blows up the process.

Well - here it is - proof that everything you read on the internet isn't true.

[BeenThere...DoneThat...]

...I, for one, will be ticked if SCOTUS hears a case about the super committee before it hears a case about income tax, ACA, the birth certificate, and several others that they have turned the other cheek to...

...but who am I kidding... I'm ticked at them now...

[deziloooooo]

Aug 5, 2011 11:49:31 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

Don't quote me - I'm a bad source with "pre-coffee" level of reading comprehension and retention - but I thought I read something about the supreme court considering the constitutional-ness of the Super Committee. I guess I need to figure out what I read. Maybe it was because the thought was some of their decisions would be binding, instead of recommendations. That might be one of those technicalities that blows up the process.

Well - here it is - proof that everything you read on the internet isn't true.

Not being a learned member of that legal profession I don't really know either, but as a layman..I see a committee appointed..come up with a bill , and it's voted on by Senate and House members..bi partison which many bills are, or i should say use to be..so I can't see constitutional problems.

Interesting article on the committee in the paper the other day...

How all are running away from serving... Senators who are appointed will most likely NOT be up for reelection in 2012, to save them from fallout immediately from constituents who are unhappy with committees decisions , what ever they are..House members will most likely be appointed from very , very safe for reelection seats..
Those appointed will most likely be very, very, very set in their thoughts, not moderates who believe in compromise or if not a strong believer of , at least could go along with if needed and ideas made sense to themmore , both sides by the way, think more from the party of "No "..and very loyal to the leaders of their partys..House and Senate, no loose cannons.

How this , if true is going to help the country and the legislatures is beyond me...

It will be interesting to see if these predictions of the type of members of the committee appointed pan out as suggested.

[djAdvocate]

Aug 5, 2011 12:09:51 GMT -5 BeenThere...DoneThat... said:

...I, for one, will be ticked if SCOTUS hears a case about the super committee before it hears a case about income tax, ACA, the birth certificate, and several others that they have turned the other cheek to...

...but who am I kidding... I'm ticked at them now...

the SCOTUS has already passed on hearing the ACA, siding with SEVERAL lower court rulings, i believe. ditto on the birth certificate issue.

what is it about income tax that is pending?

[handyman2]

A libertarian Judge said on it's face it would be unconstitutional. That was just his first read of the committee proposal.
The reasoning is that it usurps the authority of congress.

[djAdvocate]

Aug 5, 2011 13:18:04 GMT -5 handyman2 said:

A libertarian Judge said on it's face it would be unconstitutional. That was just his first read of the committee proposal.
The reasoning is that it usurps the authority of congress.

that is how i read it as well. if it were "non binding recommendations", then there would be no issue. but binding recommendations are a different can of worms entirely.

[thyme4change]

handy - that sounds familiar.

[Value Buy]

By ALAN FRAM

updated 8/11/2011 1:47:17 PM ET 2011-08-11T17:47:17
Font: +-WASHINGTON — House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi's appointment Thursday of three Democrats to Congress' new debt-reduction supercommittee completes the roster of a panel whose members are already being tugged in competing directions.

Pelosi selected Reps. James E. Clyburn of South Carolina and Xavier Becerra of California, who both are members of the party's House leadership, and Maryland's Chris Van Hollen, the top Democrat on the Budget Committee. The choices bring racial diversity to the supercommittee because Clyburn is black and Becerra is Hispanic.

The 12-member panel, divided evenly among Democrats and Republicans, has until Thanksgiving to propose $1.5 trillion in 10-year budget savings. If it does not propose a package or if Congress doesn't approve it, $1.2 trillion in automatic budget cuts will be triggered.

In a statement, Pelosi, D-Calif., said the supercommittee's goal should be "to grow an American prosperity enjoyed by all Americans." She said it should aim at producing jobs and economic growth that reduces budget deficits.