Paul Krugman argues in the New York Times today (11/18/11) that the failure of the Congressional supercommittee might be a good thing, and that public understanding of what’s really happening is hampered by a familiar media problem.
He also makes a pretty safe bet about what coverage is going to look like if they fail to reach a deal:
So the supercommittee brought together legislators who disagree completely both about how the world works and about the proper role of government. Why did anyone think this would work?
Well, maybe the idea was that the parties would compromise out of fear that there would be a political price for seeming intransigent. But this could only happen if the news media were willing to point out who is really refusing to compromise. And they aren’t. If and when the supercommittee fails, virtually all news reports will be he-said, she-said, quoting Democrats who blame Republicans and vice versa without ever explaining the truth.
And he adds for good measure:
Oh, and let me give a special shout-out to “centrist” pundits who won’t admit that President Obama has already given them what they want. The dialogue seems to go like this. Pundit: “Why won’t the president come out for a mix of spending cuts and tax hikes?” Mr. Obama: “I support a mix of spending cuts and tax hikes.” Pundit: “Why won’t the president come out for a mix of spending cuts and tax hikes?”
Psst–he’s talking about this guy:
AND the 0bamanable Phantom of 0sterity at the White House buck stop!
“[D]isagree completely”?
I think the argument comes down to how far each party wants everyone but the rich to spread their legs, not the act to be committed.
In my local paper, it was reported that a “significant concession” was made by the Republicans. They would agree to $1.2 trillion dollars in cuts (or more) and, in return, allow $300 billion in tax revenues. If I lived in a sane country, this kind of lopsided offer would be laughable.
Senator Pat Toomey (R-PA), a member of this committee, is hell-bent on locking in lower tax rates for the rich while raising Medicare eligibility from 65 years to 67 years. Perhaps raising Medicare eligibility will help pay for the lower tax rate for the rich.
The local paper went on to describe Toomey, the man who voted “no” to end tax subsidies to oil companies, as the possible “key” to a deficit deal. If he’s the key, failure might prove to be a better option.
I should also add that Toomey voted to protect benefits and tax breaks to corporations dodging U.S. taxes by locating offshore, and opposed penalties for corporations laying off more U.S. workers than they do in foreign countries.
Yep, he’s our perfect point man on the ‘supercommittee.’ He’s the one our local paper thinks can wrap up the deficit deal. Was this whole super-duper committee a set-up or what?
Time to OCCUPY Harry Reid’s & the dem Senators’ offices: he has numerous offices in NV, the top state for home foreclosures/evictions, and every senator in each state, esply the dems sh be occupied n forced to vote on bills @ 50% (cO the Constitutional Option) and they must agree to filibuster or threaten to filibuster (n im not talking abt the 1 hr speeches Kucinich or Sanders make)* to STOP ANY cuts on people’s safetty nets (Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, Soc Sec Unemployment Ins etc) and insist on taxes (YES fair taxes at last) on Financial Transactions (Wall ST/Banks) and on the Rich..
anyone who really wants to cut the deficit knows, as we can ONLY do that by putting folks to work where they pay taxes to fix the economy n erase the deficits.. not cutting the social safety nets!!
*vs the draconinan cuts the STUPID Committee of 12 will come up with.. we must prepare Now for that!! Occupy, Occupy, dance to the music..
Harry Reid? You mean that Senator that in the debt ceiling negotiations said that there was NO WAY that he’d agree to cuts in Social Security and Medicare…until he reversed himself?
The press will report about the willingness of the saintly Re-poop-likens to a tax increase “here”, but not explain that there is another tax break “there” that is more than 10 times as much, meaning that they’d like to lie to us yet again and have us thank them.
Yes, Jeff, that Harry Reid, the putative Senate Majority leader who lets the offensive liar and reactionary Mitch McConnell actually run the Senate. Reid and his fellow Dems could have changed the filibuster rules at the beginning of this year, but didn’t, so next time Reid stomps his little foot and bitches about the mean old Republicons, try to keep the bile from rising again. It’s tough, believe me.
Newt said it best regarding the super committee.Obama set it up to fail
Good for Obama. Medicare/Social Security should have never been on the table. They were not responsible for a near economic meltdown of this country.
Thanks for your posting. I also feel that laptop computers have grown to be more and more popular today, and now will often be the only type of computer found in a household. It is because at the same time that they’re becoming more and more very affordable, their working power is growing to the point where they can be as highly effective as desktop computers coming from just a few years ago.