I think Obama may have just flim-flammed the Republicans;

[hedgehog]

OK - the super committee has 6 Democrats, 6 Republicans. Do they need a unanimous vote, or a simple majority or super majority to approve their proposal?

If it's a simple majority - the Democrats only need 1 Republican vote.

If it's anything else, then we will have to depend on McConnell and Boehner putting pressure on the people they put on the committee. At this point, I think they will be listening to Wall Street.

So - if the Democrats on the committee are not DINOs, we have a fighting chance.

Now, as I understand it, if the committee fails to come up with a plan or Congress fails to approve the plan (no amendments, no filibusters), then there are automatic cuts to Medicare providers and Defense contractors. So, two of the biggest lobbying groups in the country will be putting pressure on the Republicans to come up with a plan.

We just came through a process in which we were playing chicken with people who didn't care if we crashed. For the upcoming round, the Republicans have real skin in the game.

Now - if McConnel and Boehner decide taking down Obama is worth cutting defense spending 50%......
the all bets are off. McConnel may go for it, but will Boehner?

The beauty of the plan is that I think Obama wants to cut spending with Medicare providers anyways. That's where the "waste, fraud and abuse" is.

[Skittles]

1. if anyone is getting flim-flammed, it is WE THE PEOPLE

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[11 Bravo]

53. During Basic Training another boot told me that our DI, although an asshole, was always behind us.

My responsse was, "I know, I've felt him there many times."

[texanwitch]

37. I know the feeling.

Ouch.

Better get used to it.

[MzShantal]

51. Try Preparation-H instead of....

Capzasin-TP...and stop going to their parties and drinking their tea.

[roguevalley]

58. show me where this star chamber is in the constitution and I won't

pace all night. God, I am glad I am not young. flim flammed. Ha! Obama? Can't find his ass with both hands.

[villager]

2. That's your definition of "flim-flamming the Republicans?"

Give the track record of Democratic cave-ins, GOP intransigence, and mere majority needed to pass anything from this "super committee?"

Well, we may differ here...

[babsbunny]

15. is that what the kids are calling it these days?

My heart can't take much more of obama.

[CakeGrrl]

That's why the TRIGGERS favor the Dems.

If they don't act, there will be cuts to DEFENSE and Medicare PROVIDERS.

Not "Benefits". PROVIDERS.

The MIC and the healthcare industries will be pressuring this committee to do their jobs and find other areas to curb spending.

[villager]

27. in other words, a majority of 7 can vote for whatever they want and head off those oh-so-progressive

..."triggers?"

Again, not much of a flim-flam.

[elleng]

4. Yes, hedge, I think you're right.

Some threads here recently recognized that.
GREAT to recognized POTUS flim-flammed them.
ALSO encourages thoughts about why boner 'bragged' and said he got 98% of what he wanted. Superficially, maybe, but in reality? NO.

Thanks

[proud patriot]

5. k and r

:thumbsup: yep

[proud patriot]

7. Sharpton was calling it "rope a dope"

:-)

[Cronus Protagonist]

20. Based on this OP, I'm not clear who's the "dope" in this scenario

.

[CakeGrrl]

6. You got it. It's an end-around the obstructionist GOP and hits them where THEY live

if they continue to obstruct.

And it puts the microscope directly on the super committee.

I wonder who will want to go under that microscope?

[woolldog]

8. um, doesn't that work both ways?

They only need 1 democratic vote to gut the safety net. And history has shown over and over again that Dems are more likely to cave than Republicans. So I don't know how you're comforted by that.

Most likely though there will be a deadlock and across the board cuts in December.

[elocs]

26. Got to admit, if I were putting money on someone to cave it would be on a Democrat

before a Republican. This falls in line with: "the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior".

[hedgehog]

43. But where is the pressure for a Democrat to cave? A real Democrat

is being offered a choice between whatever the committee wants and taking a big chunk out of defense spending, a win-win situation. A Blue Dog is offered the same choice, but for a Blue Dog it's win-lose.

[Citizen Worker]

9. We the people were flim-flammed in November 2008!

[MzShantal]

52. No, no, no...

you flim-flammed yourself back in 2009 when you turned your back on him, picked up your toys and went home and stayed home but left the door open and let all those red ants in the house. And then you started drinking tea....

[DCBob]

10. One thing I like about this deal is that this may be our only chance to begin cutting defense budget

in a serious way.

[C_U_L8R]

11. Why do rightwingers deserve 50% of the seats at the table?

it just seems silly to grant them equal status - they sure don't represent US.

[valerief]

The electoral college isn't fair either. nt

[Recursion]

They have a lot more than 50% of the House

But that's how joint select committees usually work

[hedgehog]

19. They've been in control of the Senate for decades already.

The way the Senate is run, a minority "NO" beats a majority "YES" almost every time!

[CakeGrrl]

24. Because you can't make them magically disappear from Congress.

And I'd bet if they didn't get 50-50, they would have sat back and let the default occur.

I wonder what YOU would tell them, and what you would reasonably expect them to say in response?

[C_U_L8R]

50. I'm not in congress but I vote

Our elections aren't set up with 50% of the seats automatically going to
Republicans and 50% going to Democrats and I simply hope that our
votes (both R & D) are fairly represented in congress.
I'm not super confident that this "super congress' or "super committee"
represents any of us. It's just convenient.

[DCBob]

29. should at least have one voting represenative from the WH..

and that should have been Biden.. to break the tie votes.

[craigmatic]

46. Basically it's an upfront admission that we'll probably lose the senate next year.

[valerief]

12. Reid will put in DINOs and they will capitulate to the Republican demands.

That's when Social Security and Medicare are on the chopping block.

[DevonRex]

22. That's why we have to pressure Reid and we have to start now.

We can't let Baucus do to this what he did to HCR.

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bahrbearian]

13. any revenue increases, go to the regular congress and senate for approval

where the bill can be filibusted, no revenue in creases will get through, but cuts to the Big Three only require the super congress approval, and can not be fillibusted. No win there.

[Vinnie From Indy]

14. The stupidity burns!

I hope all Du'ers understand that the "super committee" is the mechanism which will be used to begin dismantling the New Deal. Social Security and Medicare are now officially on the endangered species list and BOTH parties in Congress are to blame.

the way ot will work is this. The "triggers" for defense cuts will be stripped from the committee's control while the triggers for reductions in Medicare and Social security spending will be left in. The vote to reduce benefits is coming as sure as the Sun rises in the East. Pelosi and other Dems will have the perfect cover by claiming they are being forced to do these things by this committee and the GOp will get their first real shot at killing the legacy of decades of struggle by the poor, elderly
and working class in America. Also, do not be distracted by the initial claim that the cuts will ONLY be for providers in the Medicare system. These cuts will be passed along as higher prices, less coverage and they will be followed by cuts in benefits in very short order.

Do not be fooled!

[Recursion]

17. DU is currently 0 for 4 in predicting entitlement cuts

You can only cry wolf so often, you know?

[hedgehog]

28. So, the problem with the deal is that everyone will renege on the deal.

It's also possible that the Big one will hit California, or a hurricane take out the Gulf Coast or Argentina and the UK will go to war over the Falklands. Let's try to keep focused on the current framework and not speculate on possible future changes.

Among other things, why would Pelosi, Obama and Reid want to change the deal?

AS for the Medicare providers; if it's a straight cut in fees, that will be a problem if some doctors limit or refuse Medicare patients. On the other hand, it could be a measured look at what surgeons charge, at the mark-up for equipment, etc. It might even get into issues such as doing hip replacements on people who are too sick to ever benefit, etc.

[Samantha]

32. Social Security cuts are exempt from the trigger

and Medicare cuts will be to the providers, not the recipients.

[hedgehog]

16. Not to call people out, but do you honestly think Harry Reid

and Nancy Pelosi can't come up with 6 Democrats who will protect the New Deal?

If you really think that, it's time to go 3rd Party!

The way this is set up, the stick that keeps the Republicans in line applies just as well to any Blue Dogs!

[CakeGrrl]

21. You'd think the people who were lauding Reid and Pelosi for protecting Medicare agains

Evil Medicare Slasher Obama would be more optimistic about their ability to select Dems who will protect it.

But that was three days ago or something.

[DevonRex]

33. Shh. :)

We should come up with a list of those we'd like on the committee and those we don't want on it. And then we should start calling Reid. We could be a positive influence if we tried. :hi:

[CakeGrrl]

35. Excellent idea - keep the pressure on Congress to make GOOD selections.

[DevonRex]

25. We need to pressure Reid so he doesn't let Baucus anywhere near this committee.

Baucus hurt us on HCR. So let the pressure begin!

[hedgehog]

30. Now that's an excellent suggestion!

[DevonRex]

34. Why thank you! Let's do something positive together.

We can be polite but firm. That's what Reid will listen to.

[Kind of Blue]

69. +1000! n/t

[Big Blue Marble]

18. What are the odds that there will be no DINO's?

All it will take is one, oh say Nelson, and we are in big trouble.

[Cronus Protagonist]

23. Lieberman is available for that position

He's very experienced at lying down and rolling over.

[chill_wind]

41. These are just a few that worry me

http://thirdway.org/co_chairs

[hedgehog]

42. Reid's not on that list.

[chill_wind]

48. He's going to pick people that will be

very supportive of the commission's mandate. Which he bragged about yesterday as being his own proposal.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2011/aug/2/picket-lawmakers-remain-leery-super-congress


He couldn't find a better bunch of centrist deficit hawks. I'll be very surprised if at least one of them doesn't end up on it. There aren't going to be any tax and spend liberals, you can take that to the bank.

[OHdem10]

36. McConnell and Boehner have promised their 6 members will

be the most conservative members.

I do not see Democrats doing much against ultra
conservatives.

[hedgehog]

40. If the committee locks, we cut defense spending big time while

making the kind of cuts to Medicare we had in mind in the first place. It's not cutting Medicare, it's going after Medicare profiteering.

[DFLforever]

38. And the Republicans have conceded as much

Saying all six of their members will resist tax increases and will then have to work to make 'responsible' defense cuts.

I think you're right about the medical provider portion too. That's where real health cost savings will be found.

[johnaries]

39. It only requires a simple majority. AND both houses still have to

vote on it, AND Obama can still veto.

So, yes, he flim-flammed them.

edit to add: also, Republicans can't filibuster in the Senate. That's MAJOR!

[hedgehog]

44. The filibuster is a major weapon used to force Deomocrats to give concessions.

For that matter, it's a major weapon used by the Blue Dogs as well. When Reid needs every vote, two Blue Dogs beat 1 Democrat!

[craigmatic]

45. The committee is a sham and we don't have any real progressives who'll get appointed to that

committee. It's more like the repigs only need 1 democrat to vote their way which is far more likely than one republican switiching to the progressive side.

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Emillereid]

49. I agree -- I think Obama has played some incredible chess!

And it must be good because Rush Limbaugh hates it. Listen to Randi Rhodes -- she's a beacon in the wilderness.

http://www.editedforclarity.com/2011/08/01/debt-ceiling-deal-the-devil-is-in-the-details/

[MilesColtrane]

65. The defense industry is shitting itself.

They are absolutely terrified of the triggered cuts.

And, make no mistake, they will be coming.

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/debt-deal-trigger-dangles-sword-of-damocles-over-defense-126543863.html

[eridani]

54. You have that ass backwards. With 6 Repukes, they only need 1 Dem vote

And if the Senate Dems are of the ilk of Durbin, no problem.

[bvar22]

55. "if the Democrats on the committee are not DINOs...."

:rofl:



The DLC New Team
Progressives Need NOT Apply

(Screen Capped from the DLC Website)
http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=254886&kaid=86&subid=85

[totodeinhere]

57. But the thing is that those Defense Department cuts will not really be mandatory if

the super committee deadlocks. Here is a good analysis of that.

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/08/02/levin_and_mccain_we_have_no_idea_how_much_debt_deal_cuts_defense

This was explained on Rachel's show last night.

And you are being too optimistic I think if you are assuming that we can get one Republican vote. That's a two way street. What if they get one Democrat to vote with them? Remember that several Democrats signed off on the Simpson Bowles Committee recommendations. It could happen again.

[Recursion]

64. All discretionary spending cuts are ultimately optional

At least if they're beyond the current fiscal year. A "cut" to discretionary spending in the future is simply this Congress telling a future Congress "we really hope you only spend this much".

[blkmusclmachine]

59. More 11-Dimensional Rope-A-Dope Bi-Partisan Chess.

How's that worked out, btw?

[former9thward]

60. No one is suggesting a 50% cut in defense spending so the OP is in error.

The bill says that if the committee can't agree on cuts/revenues then 50% of the automatic cuts would come in defense. That is a far different number than 50% of the defense budget.

The idea that you can cut Medicare through "waste, fraud and abuse" is just ridiculous. If it was that easy why isn't the "waste, fraud and abuse" being eliminated now? Reductions to providers will mean less services to beneficiaries. Period.

[hedgehog]

66. If you read the papers carefully, you'll see that a lot of people

are going to jail for Medicare fraud. Funny how Bush's people never noticed them. As for waste and abuse, I suspect that a lot of cronyism is involved.

[former9thward]

70. Sorry but people have been going to jail for medicare fraud for as long as the program exited.

Every DOJ has prosecuted. But believe what you want.

[TheKentuckian]

61. Fucking silliness. A trillion and a half dollars cut from discretionary spending is suicidal

and the military cuts are fucking stupid too when we have a huge hole in demand since the money isn't going to be used to more positively and effectively stimulate the economy.

Hoovernomics is never a win. More unemployment and contraction is the only plausible outcome.

[Jakes Progress]

62. Look. I think I see a wisp of smoke. Let's grasp it.

So desperate. Facing reality is easier than this straining and grasping.

[and-justice-for-all]

63. BERNIE SANDERS & AL FRANKEN needs to be oon that panel..nt

[Logical]

67. LOL....the GOP only wanted two things. Spending decreases and no tax increases.....

they got it and gave up NOTHING!!!

So the job numbers and markets are crashing and the GOP got what they wanted.

How again did the GOP get fooled?

[polichick]

68. Someone's been flim-flammed alright, but it ain't the Republicans!