http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/08/1...e+Raw+Story%29
meanwhile, Reid names Blue Dog/Dino Max Baucus as one of the 3 Senators.
So it looks like the votes are gonna be all 4-2 (oops, the super panel is top secret!) and/or totally deadlocked with nothing exiting the panel, so all the triggers will be pulled (except the military cuts, they'll cut only the poor, sick, old, young, disabled).
is anyone surprised? this "commitee" was bull for "let's both stall and then see what we can get from these idiot americans in the next election"
this next election will be as brutal as they come. In the end the only one paying for this mess is the american public exempting the top 1% of course.
If Democrats insist on tax increases there will never be a deal. It simply can't pass the House. Democrats know this. If they want to play politics with class warfare and fall on their sword for tax increases they know it will result in the trigger being pulled on across the board cuts.
Do you realize every expert in economics has stated without revenue increase this country is still ed?
I'm just stating facts. Tax increases will not pass the House. All your internet bluster won't change that.
Most Human-Repugs poll that that taxes must go up.
oh I agree. that's why this country is ed until real rock bottom is hit
If revenue was increased we'd still be ed. I wish we'd just take our lumps. You never grow anything on mountain tops.
So you're in the "we're screwed" camp?
I'm not saying I'm against tax changes. Not necessarily Obamas bull "corporate jets" and "fat cat" rhetoric, but I'm ok with revising the tax code to increase revenue as long as there is like a 5 to 1 ratio of spending cuts.
Since all 6 Repugs have "pledged" never to raise taxes, and Reid said tax raises were going to be required by the Dems (except of course DINO Baucus), it sure looks like the super's gonna fail and automatic cuts to be triggered (but I'm sure there'll be waivers for MIC and corps).
Reid has already conceded tax increases with his selections to the debt panel.
Because, as we all know, there's only one variable that contributes to the debt.
STOP SPENDING!
Reid didn't "concede" anytting.
The morning after the superpanel was announced, and before he appointed anyone, he said absolutely the tax increases would be proposed by the Dems.
But Republicans upfront saying they won't pay any tax increases ISN'T playing politics. Interesting idea of compromise you have there.
Wait, you actually thought there was going to be a deal?
We are screws until we put people back to work.
Of course they will propose, that's not the question. The question is who will blink to avoid a deadlock...Baucus is already a shoe in.
"we put people back to work."
"Where are the jobs, Obama" --- Repugs in 2010 campaign.
How many jobs programs from the House Repugs?
The good middle class jobs are gone, either engineered out of existence with technology, or exported, and they aren't coming back because the UCA doesn't want or need them back.
The Repug insistence on cutting spending, aka pro-cyclical, is guaranteed to kill jobs and deepen and prolong Banksters' Great Depression.
Poll: Majority wants super committee to tax the rich
Republicans appointed to a congressional deficit panel will have to buck public opinion if they intend to block tax hikes on the rich.
A CNN poll (PDF) released Wednesday found that a majority of Americans want Congress to compromise by raising taxes on the rich and cutting government spending.
In all, 62 percent believed that "[t]axes on wealthy people should be kept high so the government can use their money for programs to help lower-income people." Only 34 percent believed that taxes on the rich should be "kept low because they invest their money in the private sector and that helps the economy and creates jobs."
Sixty-three percent said they would like to see higher taxes on businesses and higher-income Americans, while 36 percent disagreed. Major cuts in spending and domestic programs should also be part of a compromise, according to 57 percent of those polled.
Only 47 percent wanted major cuts in military spending. At 35 percent, major changes to Medicare and Social Security were even less popular.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said Monday that he favored cuts to popular safety net programs but opposed tax hikes on the rich as part of a plan to rein in galloping U.S. debt.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/08/1...e+Raw+Story%29
Four House Republicans Soften Stances on No New Taxes
ounter to more than six months of House Republicans insisting that they would not raise taxes ever, four House Republicans indicated they might be willing to accept tax hikes to help reduce the deficit Tuesday night. At at town hall in Virginia Tuesday night, The New York Times' Jennifer Steinhauer reports that three of the four men floated specific tax increases they would consider. The congressmen were responding to audience questions about the bipartisan congressional "super committee"--created by the debt ceiling compromise--which is tasked with coming up with a way to cut the deficit by $1.2 trillion in order to raise the debt ceiling by $1.5 trillion.
The maybe-tax-revenue-raisers were Virginia's Scott Rigell, a freshman*, Indiana's Larry Bucshon, another freshman, Georgia's Phil Gingrey, and Tennessee's Phil Roe. Gingrey and Roe are members of the Tea Party Caucus; all four are members of the conservative Republican Study Committee.
The possible revenue raisers:
Rigell: Cutting subsidies to oil companies.
Gingrey: Letting the Bush tax cuts for people making more than $700,000 a year expire.
Roe: Closing loopholes. Roe cited General Electric, which paid no taxes in 2010, saying "GE ought to pay some taxes."
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/polit...w-taxes/41097/
St Ronnie and Ike would be considered flaming socialists by today's extremist smash-mouth Repugs. Example of the pro-rich, extremist migration to the right:
FLASHBACK: In 1990 Campaign Ad, McConnell Said ‘I Think Everyone Should Pay Their Fair Share, Including The Rich’
‘Unlike some folks around here, I think everyone should pay their fair share, including the rich,’ Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., says in a campaign ad.”
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/201...ich-flashback/
It was a campaign ad, so we can assume he was lying.
LOL, when has the will of American voters meant a damn thing? The 2008 bailouts are about as clear a picture as there can be of what public opinion is worth in this nation.
Meet The GOP's Not-So-Super Committee: 6 Members Of Congress Shaping Your Economic Future
Here’s what you need to know about each of the GOP super committee members:
REP. JEB HENSARLING (TX): Super committee co-chairman Hensarling only has a tenuous grasp on economic facts, repeatedly making false claims about the deficit and debt and “falsely characteriz[ing] the debt limit fight as a consequence of spending policies enacted by President Obama and past Democratic congresses.” He has called Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid “cruel Ponzi schemes,” and believes that recessions are just “a part of freedom.” Hensarling has said corporate tax dodging is a good reason to cut the corporate tax rate. He also consistently carries water for Wall Street’s biggest banks, saying that bank profits should trump consumer protection.
SEN. JON KYL (AZ): Kyl is the number two Republican in the Senate and takes a hard line on taxes. He walked away from debt ceiling negotiations because Democrats wanted to raised taxes on those who make more than $500,000 a year, but he insisted there should not be a dime of increased revenues. He has also strongly defended tax subsidies for oil companies, and opposed ending an accounting gimmick that deprives the Treasury of up to $72 billion over the next five years incorporate taxes. He is also a staunch defender of military spending and is not afraid to twist arms to get it. For example, he held up the START treaty and extension of the Bush tax cuts late last year to extract more money for nuclear weapons. Like many Republicans, he has voted to privatize Social Security and supported the House Republican budget, which would effectively end Medicare. To his credit, however, he said he did not support tying an increase in the debt ceiling to a Balanced Budget Amendment.
SEN. PAT TOOMEY (PA): Toomey firmly believes in the GOP fantasy that tax cuts don’t actually cost anything, telling Fox News that “it’s not clear” that extending the Bush tax cuts and cutting corporate taxes would decrease revenues. He is firmly in favor of privatizing Social Security because he believes that “personal [Social Security] accounts lead to personal prosperity.” He has said he supports the budget passed by House Republicans (which would effectively eliminate Medicare) andreleased his own budget proposal that would turn Medicaid into a block grant, severely slash domestic discretionary spending, and likely result in a big tax increase on the middle-class that would fund tax reductions for the rich and corporations. However, Toomey does support cuts to defense spending, saying, “There is waste pretty much everywhere in the government, and that includes the Pentagon. Part of the problem is Congress voting on systems the Pentagon doesn’t even want.”
SEN. ROB PORTMAN (OH): President George W. Bush put Portman in charge of his Office of Management and Budget in order to meet “our goal to cutting the budget deficit in half by 2009.” Under Portman’s watch, the deficit nearly tripled. During the debt ceiling debacle, Portman was one of the GOP senators who actually entertained defaulting as an “opportunity to get our fiscal house in order.” Considering privatization “the greatest force in the universe,” he also suggested privatizing Social Security to bail out bad investors and voted in 2005 to divert Social Security dollars to create private accounts. He did hedge on all-out support of Ryan’s budget plan, but ended up supporting it. Believing that “spending, not tax cuts, causes future deficits,” Portman ran on the idea that “any tax increase would hurt the fragile economy.” As such, he’s continually advocated to make the Bush tax cuts permanent and is pushing to balance the budget in 10 years without a single tax increase. However, Portman did state in the past that he would support defense cuts as “the Pentagon has to be part of the discussion.”
REP. DAVE CAMP (MI): As the lower chamber’s chief tax writer, House Ways & Means Committee Chairman Camp is a dogged defender of the wealthy. During the debt ceiling debacle, Camp actually declared that he’d rather have a bigger deficit than see taxes go up on “rich people.” In his struggle to find “a least damaging place” to raise revenue, Camp landed on one “free-riding” group of people that could stand to pay more: the poor. Of course, the preservation or pursuit of tax cuts — like the Bush tax cuts — will further increase the deficit. Camp, however, offers the familiar GOP idea that their expiration creates “uncertainty” and point blankly stated, “I don’t think you have to pay for extensions of current law.” Indeed, the only tax policy Camp seems to be (rightly) wary of is a tax repatriation holiday. Having already declared tax increases “off the table” on Obama’s previous debt commission, Camp is more likely to push a balanced budget amendmentand the other disastrous cuts he backed in the House Republican “Cut, Cap, and Balance” plan. As for en lement programs, Camp waveredand then voted in support of Rep. Paul Ryan’s (R-WI) plan to end Medicare.
REP. FRED UPTON (MI): Though best known for his hard shiftrightward toward global warming denial, Upton also backed the radical House Republican budget, the even more radical “Cut, Cap, and Balance” plan (which would take spending to a level not seen since the 1960s), and a balanced budget cons utional amendment. However, his position on revenues is a bit wishy-washy. He has said tax increases are “just not going to be part of the equation,” but has not ruled out tax reform that lowers rates but brings in more revenue through the elimination of tax loopholes and credits.
All of the GOP members of the super committee, meanwhile, have signed anti-tax activist Grover Norquist’s pledge not raise any taxes under any cir stances and support a Balanced Budget Amendment, which even former Reagan economics adviser Bruce Barlett calls unworkable, “dopey,” and “mind boggling in its insanity.”
http://www.alternet.org/module/printversion/151981
and public opinion expressed in actual votes is worth the same: nothing
100% disenfranchisement of Human-Americans.
Government of the UCA, by the UCA, for the UCA.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
