Liberal Groups to Propose Routes to Smaller Deficit

Source: NY Times

WASHINGTON — As President Obama’s fiscal commission faces a deadline this week for agreement on a plan to shrink the mounting national debt, liberal organizations will unveil debt-reduction proposals of their own in the next two days, seeking to sway the debate in favor of fewer reductions in domestic spending, more cuts in the military and higher taxes for the wealthy.

The proposals from two sets of liberal advocacy groups highlight the deep ideological divides surrounding efforts to deal with the nation’s budgetary imbalances, even as Mr. Obama’s bipartisan commission works to finalize its recommendations by Wednesday — and struggles for a formula that would get the backing of at least 14 of its 18 members, the threshold for sending its proposal to Congress for a vote.

Inside the commission, expectations remain low that a supermajority can agree on a plan, given most Republicans’ opposition to raising taxes and most Democrats’ resistance to deep spending cuts and reducing future retirees’ Social Security benefits.

Yet the panel’s proponents hope that agreement among even a bipartisan minority can be the basis for future action to arrest the unsustainable growth of government debt in coming years.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/us/politics/29fiscal.html?_r=1&hp

the single narrative about deficit reduction being placed on the masses stays in place.

and it's very possible few will garner that super majority.

why they keep calling it a 'bi-partisan' commission.
There is no ideological divide between the chairmen of this commission.
There was a preconcieved agenda going in and the same coming out; cut social programs and social insurance, and club the working class.

Hopefully these liberal group proposals will gain some traction.

typically, it refers to a republican plan that a right-wing democrat or two has signed on to.
using the term "bipartisan" is designed to thrust joint responsibility onto the entire democratic party, thereby making any reasonable, moderate/centrist criticism of the right-wing republican plan appear more like a left-wing partisan attack against a moderate/centrist agreement.

I was being kind of snarky.
Thanks though!

to one recently proposed by Representative Jan Schakowsky, a liberal Democrat from Illinois who is a member of the Bowles-Simpson commission. Ms. Schakowsky opposed the chairmen’s draft as too hard on the middle class.'

Bravo, Jan!

(I hadn't notice how good an acronym the cochairs initials would make - until I typed it out of laziness.

So.... do it all. Do deep spending cuts AND military cuts. If you're gonna reduce future retirees’ Social Security benefits, then raise taxes on the top earners as well.

There's no need to do one or the other. Won't doing it all just get us on track faster? Then you can see what did the most good and keep those while restoring SS.

I know...too logical. Besides, I'm pretending the Repugs actually want to do something that will work. They don't.


It's a sham from the start because the Repugs aren't serious.