Congress. EPIC FAIL. But I repeat myself.
Doug Mataconis’s post on the infuriating FAA situation got me all fired up, and inspired me to do something I rarely do: write to my congressperson.
Congresswoman DeGette,
I am writing to express my absolute disgust with the ongoing situation surrounding the FAA’s lack of funding. I do not know your position on the issue, and thus do not presume to blame you personally. But in the larger picture, it is utterly disgraceful that Congress has gone on recess without resolving this issue, leaving as many as 74,000 citizens out of work because our government cannot even perform the basic functions of governance. This inexcusable behavior reflects extraordinarily poorly on members of both parties and both houses of Congress. For our legislative branch to take a month off, with pay, while stranding thousands of Americans for no discernible reason other than partisan bickering and brinksmanship, is beneath contempt.
Such actions by Congress cause the public to rightly question whether anyone in Washington deserves to be re-elected next year. The entire Congress, as a body, is failing this country in countless ways, with this being just the latest, most egregious example. Mind you, I am a Democrat, and I blame the extreme, intransigent Right for many things — for instance, they take the bulk of the blame for the recent absurd standoff over the manufactured debt-ceiling crisis. But I know better than to naively believe that Congress’s overall dysfunctionality, as exemplified by this FAA fiasco, is solely one party’s fault. Both Republicans and Democrats share the blame for getting us to this point, and both Republicans and Democrats must work to improve things. It is incumbent upon each member of Congress to exercise leadership and prevent this sort of nonsense from occurring. “Partisanship” is not a dirty word, to the extent the parties are arguing honestly about genuine, passionate policy disagreements. But when partisanship leads to situations like this, something is clearly amiss. I urge you to take a leadership role in moving Congress back from the brink and getting this situation resolved immediately.
I also believe it would be appropriate to pass legislation stating that, in the future, if any federal employees are furloughed, or federal contracting projects placed on hold, due to congressional budgetary inaction extending past the deadline at which action is required to maintain funding, Congress should be barred by law from taking a recess until funding is restored, and congressional salaries should not be paid for the unfunded period of time. I somehow suspect these ridiculous impasses would be far less likely to occur if such a law were on the books.
Sincerely,
Brendan Loy
Denver, CO
I think I’ll send it to Bennet and Udall, too.
UPDATE: dcl points out that my hastily conceived proposed legislation would violate the 27th Amendment. At least the salary part. Seems like they could do the recess part.
Mental health break
Blah blah, debt ceiling, extortion, default, blah blah. Enough! It’s over! Look, a rainbow!
Taken in our neighborhood yesterday.
(Would’ve been prettier, if not for the Tea Party! … Sorry.)
P.S. Also… 30 days till college football starts! YAY!!!
Quote of the day
“One of the most important things about this piece of legislation is that never again will any president, of either party, be able to raise the debt ceiling without being held accountable for it by the American people.” –Mitch McConnell, just now.
Translation: henceforth, members of Congress, of both parties, will feel even more freedom to pass irresponsible budgets, pretending that they are somehow unaware that they are requiring the president to borrow money, since it’s mathematically impossible to cover the spending mandated by Congress with the revenue allowed by Congress. They’ll do this because they know they can pretend to be “deficit hawks” when the president makes the necessary request to borrow the money that Congress has mathematically required him to borrow, at which point they can deny simple arithmetic and create a big f***ing months-long dog-and-pony show about “fiscal responsibility,” blaming the president for the arithmetic of the prior years’ budgets that Congress passed.
Didn’t the Tea Party require a reading of the Constitution at the beginning of this session of Congress? Apparently it didn’t sink in. Congress has the power of the purse. Not the President. Congress.
Our “leaders” are a disgrace to this nation. And because we allow them to be our leaders, so are we.
Ugh.
UPDATE: The bill passes.
Deal reached; now what?
President Obama, Speaker Boehner and Senate leaders in both parties have agreed to a deal that would effectively raise the debt ceiling through 2012 while enacting a mostly Republican-friendly package of spending cuts (and no new revenues). It would also set up a likely showdown in December over a second wave of deficit-reduction measures as recommended by a bipartisan congressional “supercommittee” — assuming the committee members, who will be evenly split between the parties, can agree. If they can’t agree, or if Congress doesn’t pass their recommendations, harsh across-the-board cuts in defense spending, Medicare and other programs would follow — a “trigger” that is designed to force both parties to bargain in good faith. But hey, at least the “trigger” won’t be default.
Tea Partiers, having quite clearly “won” the negotiations, are, of course, outraged. So are liberals, who see this as yet another Obama capitulation (though really, I’m not convinced Obama had that much choice in the matter, when his opponents were willing to “shoot the hostage” — in this case, the economy — if their demands weren’t met). Consequently, although it’s likely to breeze through the Senate, it’s not at all clear the deal will pass the House, where there are fewer moderates and more hard-line, unruly partisans on both sides of the aisle.
House Republican leaders are touting the new deal as better than the measure that they narrowly, and belatedly, passed last week. But the provisions on the Balanced Budget Act are already attracting criticism from conservatives.
Twenty-two House Republicans voted no on that bill, and it is likely that there will be more defections on the measure embraced by President Obama Sunday night. If every Democrat voted against it, Republicans could only afford about two dozen “no” votes and still pass it. …
Yet it remains unclear how many Democrats will vote yes on the debt-limit bill. Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.), a co-leader of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, bashed the agreement on Sunday. Others are expected to follow his lead on Monday. …
[House Democratic leader Nancy] Pelosi…has not publicly endorsed the deal. … [She] issued this statement: “We all agree that our nation cannot default on our obligations and that we must honor our nation’s commitments to our seniors and our men and women in the military.
“I look forward to reviewing the legislation with my caucus to see what level of support we can provide.” …
Pelosi has wanted to raise the debt ceiling, but preferred that a “clean” bill go through without any strings attached.
A few of her deputies, meanwhile, have argued that Obama should invoke the 14th Amendment to raise the debt ceiling.
Regarding the “clean” debt ceiling increase, House Republicans put that notion up for a political show vote back in May, uniformly voting against it. House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer urged his colleagues to vote against it, and most did — even though they actually supported the underlying policy it purported to enact — because they wanted to deny the GOP its desired political victory on the designed-to-fail bill. I’ve said all along, and it’s now completely clear in retrospect, that this was a tactical mistake, as well as a substantive one. Democrats would be in a much better political position today if they were already on record as supporting a “clean” increase, which is, of course, the only correct solution to this invented problem. Their too-cute-by-half decision to oppose a bill they support (paging John Kerry!) makes them look like idiots, and greatly complicates their argument now.
In any case, with time having essentially run out, the question at this point for Democrats is which is worse: cementing the horrible precedent that debt-ceiling extortion works, or allowing a default that will damage the economy and destroy Obama’s presidency? They can float bogus 14th Amendment arguments all they want, they can complain that Republican intransigence and illegitimate hostage-bargaining put them in this unfair and untenable position (and they’re right!), but that’s the choice they face, like it or not. I have no idea which way they’ll come down. All I know is that this whole thing is a farce, we should never have arrived at this juncture, and — whatever happens — I will never forgive the shameless Republicans who manufactured this “crisis” for political gain.
(Having said that… don’t think for a moment that Democrats, led by the same liberals who are crying foul over today’s deal, won’t eagerly use this same horrible precedent — that debt-ceiling extortion works — the next time they control part of Congress and a Republican president requests a debt ceiling increase, which will certainly happen. They’ll do it on goose-gander grounds, and to try and achieve policy objectives that would otherwise be impossible. And when they do, that will be unreservedly the Democrats’ fault. The debt ceiling is a math problem, not a policy decision.)
High drama on Capitol Hill as Congress ponders if America should pay its bills
Well, the House GOP has finished wasting the better part of a week on fantasy-land legislation so unrealistic and irrelevant to the final (necessarily bipartisan) resolution of this crisis, they might as well have tied a debt-ceiling increase to Frodo casting the Ring into the Fire. Obviously, the Senate immediately voted down the House’s non-starter of a ridiculous, designed-to-fail bill. So, that’s that. Our last full week before national default, completely wasted on political posturing and partisan nonsense! Congratulations, guys! And it now appears there may not be enough time left to prevent disaster:
Here is advice from veterans of past budget battles in Congress that went to the brink: This time, be afraid. Be very afraid. …
Democrats and Republicans with legislative experience agree that even if both sides decided Saturday to raise the $14.3 trillion borrowing ceiling and to reduce future annual deficits, it would be extremely difficult for the compromise measure to wend its way through Congress before Tuesday’s deadline, given Congressional legislative procedures.
But such a bipartisan deal seemed virtually impossible on Friday, as House Republicans approved their bill and dug in deeper against compromise with President Obama.
In a word, #PANIC! Of course, this assumes that August 2 is the “real” deadline, which some experts have questioned, but Treasury has not yet backed away from. Anyway, the Washington Post offers more details on the legislative timetable:
The Senate is driving toward a climactic and dramatic vote at 1 a.m. Sunday that could determine whether a bipartisan deal to raise the nation’s legal borrowing limit is possible or a government default is likely.
What that deal might look was still deeply uncertain Friday, but talks were underway between Democrats and Republicans in the Senate about methods to circumvent some of the chamber’s most cumbersome procedures to allow the Senate to act more quickly if a compromise is reached. …
Senate rules require a full day in between Reid introducing the measure Friday night and a vote to cut off debate, leading to a key vote early Sunday.
Closing debate will require the approval of 60 senators, meaning Reid will require at least seven Republican votes to clear that hurdle.
If the measure cleared that hurdle, the final passage would require a simple majority of senators to send the bill to the House. Without unanimous agreement, however, it would require an additional 30 hours of debate for that final vote, meaning 7:30 a.m. Monday would be the earliest a final vote could happen.
Then, the measure would return to the House on Monday, where it would face a final critical vote — with the outcome deeply uncertain, as world markets watch nervously.
[UPDATE: More from Politico:
Reid and the White House do not have a deal with House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). Talks ground to a halt as House Republicans moved forward with their own plan that Democrats oppose. That means Reid may file cloture on his own plan to raise the debt ceiling without GOP support.
Even if a bipartisan accord is reached when the Senate is in the cloture process, Reid would need unanimous consent to swap in any compromise measure, an unlikely scenario given the passions in the fight.
Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and senior White House officials have been talking with lawmakers across the Capitol this week, but Republicans put the talks on ice in recent days until the House took up the Boehner bill, according to Democratic officials familiar with the negotiations.
As a matter of fact, Reid filed for cloture on a modified bill designed to attract GOP support. But it wasn’t a “compromise” so much as a unilateral attempt by Reid to compromise with himself, because he was out of time — because the GOP wasted a week on the Boehner plan.]
Meanwhile, Treasury is finalizing its contingency plans.
There is no curse in Elvish, Entish of the tongues of Men for the reckless, indefensible irresponsibility of the various fools, idiots and cynical bastards who have brought us to the brink of this utterly unnecessary disaster. They are a f***ing disgrace to the nation they purport to lead.
Boehner secures debt-limit vote “win” by adding absurd fantasy-land provision
Seriously? Seriously? We’ve wasted three whole days, with national default* on our legal obligations mere days away, for this?!?
House Republicans will link passage of a balanced-budget amendment to Speaker John Boehner’s (R-Ohio) last-ditch debt-ceiling plan, which GOP lawmakers said would move the measure to passage in a high-stakes vote later on Friday. …
Republican lawmakers say the Boehner framework would still pave the way for the debt limit to be raised through the 2012 election in two chunks. But it would also mandate that the second hike of the ceiling could only occur after a balanced-budget amendment passed both chambers of Congress and went to the states for ratification.
Mind you, that would require a two-thirds vote in both chambers of Congress. In a divided government. And “if” that doesn’t happen, then we default in a few months. F***ing brilliant.
This is completely insane, and does not represent a remotely serious attempt to resolve the debt-limit crisis. This “revamped” Boehner bill has, by design, literally zero chance of success. Any journalist who reports this development in a way that credulously treats it as a serious attempt at pertinent legislating is deceiving his or her readers. This is sheer nonsense. But don’t believe me; believe Paul Ryan, yesterday:
What I never really agreed with is the idea that we would expect Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi to deliver 40 [and] 15 votes from Democrats for our version of the Balanced Budget Amendment. You know, I just never thought that was realistic, to demand Democrats vote against their conscience for our version of the Balanced Budget Amendment. So I just never thought that would work.
Or, if you prefer, John McCain:
I will take back seat to none in my support of the balanced budget amendment. Thirteen times I voted for it. I will vote for it tomorrow. But what is really amazing about this is that some, some members are believing that we can pass a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution in this body with its present representation, and that is foolish. That is worse than foolish. That is deceiving. …
That is not fair to the American people, to hold out and say we won’t agree to raising the debt limit until we pass a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution. It’s unfair, it’s bizarro. And maybe some people who have only been in this body for six or seven months or so really believe that. Others know better. Others know better.
I know what the right-wing chorus will say: “Well, at least the Republicans have passed a bill! Where is the Democratic bill?” But both of the Republican bills — Cut, Cap & Balance, and now this — are completely meaningless as actual attempts to legislate and govern, because they were passed with 100% certain knowledge of failure. They are the equivalent of the Democrats passing a debt-ceiling bill that would cut the deficit by way of a carbon tax, and tie future increases to the passage of a constitutional amendment confirming that the individual mandate is permissible. Imagine if a Democratic House, responding to a request by President Romney and the Republican Senate to raise the debt ceiling, passed such a bill as a condition of raising the ceiling. Would you be impressed? Or would you recognize it as total baloney? Such a bill would obviously have no chance of becoming law in a divided government, and would not represent an actual attempt to govern, but rather, pure political posturing and pandering. This bill is the same way. So, yeah, there’s a “Republican bill,” and there will soon be two of them — both designed solely to score points with to a radical base that lives in an alternate universe. If you think the raw number of bills passed by each party is significant, ask yourself: would we be materially closer to a resolution if there was a “Democratic bill” along the lines I just proposed? Of course not. It would be a pointless, if not counterproductive, piece of legislation. So is this. The House GOP is not even attempting to govern at this point. These people are a joke, and a disgrace.
F*** you, Washington. F*** you, Tea Party.
P.S. *Or “semi-default,” or whatever you want to call it. I realize we wouldn’t immediately default on our debt, presuming Treasury can & does prioritize payments, and the markets don’t freak out so badly that we’re unable to “roll over” short-term debt. But we will certainly “default” on legal obligations of one kind or another, not making payments that are required by law. (What ever happened to conservative respect for the rule of law, by the way?)
P.P.S. Via the indispensible Megan McArdle, center-right economics writer and noted RINO (I kid!), here’s more on what a failure to raise the debt ceiling would actually look like.
UPDATE: Don’t believe Ryan or McCain? How about arch-conservative commentator Bill Kristol?
Last night, Speaker Boehner toyed with adding a gimmicky balanced budget amendment provision to the Republican budget bill in order to try to get the final handful of votes he needs for passage. He thought better of this last night, and didn’t do so. He should continue to avoid pointless and embarrassing gimmicks to try to secure a last-gasp victory on the House floor. Such a tainted “win” would truly be dead on arrival in the Senate. And it would do nothing to increase McConnell’s leverage, or Boehner’s own, if and when a Senate-passed bill comes over to the House this weekend.
RINO. [/sarcasm]
DOOM
As if the increasing odds of a debt-ceiling disaster weren’t bad enough, now there’s this:
The U.S. economy came perilously close to flat-lining in the first quarter and grew at a meager 1.3 percent annual rate in the April-June period as consumer spending barely rose.
The Commerce Department data on Friday also showed the current lull in the economy began earlier than had been thought, with the growth losing steam late last year.
That could raise questions on the long held view by both Federal Reserve officials and independent economists that the slowdown in growth as the year started was largely the result of transitory factors.
Growth in gross domestic product — a measure of all goods and services produced within U.S. borders – rose at a 1.3 percent annual rate. First-quarter output was sharply revised down to a 0.4 percent pace from a 1.9 percent increase.
Economists had expected the economy to expand at a 1.8 percent rate in the second quarter. Fourth-quarter growth was revised to a 2.3 percent rate from 3.1 percent.
“The second quarter disappointed, but the first-quarter downward revision is more disturbing. It advances the pangs of concern. The debt ceiling nonsense is not going to help us. We’re already in an economy that is subpar,” said Scott Brown, chief economist at Raymond James in St. Petersburg, Florida.
I for one welcome our new Texan overlords. (Well, not really.)
#PANIC!
Boehner #FAIL
Today’s debt ceiling developments, summarized in a single tweet:
Standard & Poor’s downgrading US credit rating to WTF.
pourmecoffee
pourmecoffee
Oh, and I also had a little (more) fun with a Drudge mockup:
Shake down the debt limit from the sky
The Republicans are feverishly rounding up supporters ahead of this afternoon’s dramatic Boehner-bill vote on the House floor. The Speaker is cautiously optimistic his bill will pass. (We’ll know he’s really confident if he schedules a vote before the markets close.) Oh, and there’s a Notre Dame angle:
Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.), a bulky former Notre Dame football player, gave a rousing football-themed speech and said he would vote for the bill. He told colleagues they needed to do three things: put on your helmet, put in your mouth piece and tighten your chinstrap. He gave out signs with the Notre Dame football saying: Play like a champion today.
“Let’s kick the sh*t out of them,” Kelly said in the meeting, according to several sources.
Heh. Nate Silver thinks it’s all over but the face-saving. I think the bill will pass by a vote or two. (But if it fails, it’ll be by a dozen or more, because of yes-to-no switches once it becomes clear it’s gonna fail.)