Deal or No Deal?

    268
    14
    SHARE

    It’s 10:30 pm on Friday, and there are all kind of rumors and stories being bandied (and tweeted) about. For instance, I just saw the following tweets from Jon Allen of Politico:

    “Boehner to House GOP: ‘This is the best deal we could get out of them.'”

    “Boehner: Shutdown to be averted with 5 to 6 day stopgap cutting [$3] billion.”

    Also, USA Today reports, “The Associated Press, National Journal, The Washington Post and Politico are among the news organizations reporting that a tentative budget deal is in the works.”

    Anyway, the excitement is just to much for me (snark), so I’m calling it a day. Feel free to use this as an open thread on the possible shutdown or budget deal. Enjoy!

    UPDATE: Here’s President Obama’s statement on the budget deal cut late last night. From what I’ve seen so far – and I still need to look at the details – I’m not thrilled about this deal. First, from an economics point of view, it makes no sense to cut spending when the economy is weak and needs a Keynesian boost. Second, these cuts have nothing whatsoever to do with the long-term, structural deficit, which is overwhelmingly being driven by the Bush tax cuts ($4 trillion a decade), the ongoing wars in Afghanistan and Iraq (trillions of dollars, total), and rising health care costs (which is why we need a public option or, even better, “single payer,” plus many other reforms to our health care system). Finally, I don’t like the process by which this deal was reached – brinksmanship by reckless Republicans and Tea Partiers, and demands that had no good public policy rationale whatsoever. That was a bad precedent to set, giving in to these bullies. Other than that, great deal! (heh) {As Brian Beutler of TPM writes, “That the focal point of policy on Capitol Hill is on what should be cut — and not when to cut, or whether cutting is even wise — illustrates just how brief the progressive moment lasted after Obama’s election in 2008. It also represents a colossal failure of government.”}

    • Elaine in Roanoke

      I’m getting pretty tired of the political posturing that results in a “deal” being announced at 11 p.m. on the very last day available for a budget settlement. Perhaps we should insist in fines for representatives – senators and house members – who cannot get their job done on time. In fact, perhaps the American people at some point might be ready to admit the truth of two facts:

      1. If Republicans actually believe that “government is the problem,” they should resign from office immediately. They are unfit for office.

      2. If career politicians cannot represent the voters who sent them to Washington rather than the lobbyists and the wealthy who give them money, they should get a real job.

      Good luck on both counts.

    • at Post Partisan:

      …we aren’t necessarily through with shutdown scares this year, and Friday’s deal may make them more likely. It absolves the brinksmanship that led to it, rewarding Republican leaders for saying no until the last minute with more spending cuts than Democrats said they were willing to approve. It has fueled a nasty back-and-forth between the parties that encourages mistrust. These factors, combined with the fact that the speaker will have to convince his Tea Party wing to swallow the deal by promising bigger fights in the future, could make this sort of behavior more probable later, when the stakes are higher.

      Higher stakes…like the upcoming debt ceiling debate (which shouldn’t even be a debate if we were dealing with rational, sane people), and also on the 2012 budget debate. I sure hope that, as part of this deal, the Democrats got rock-solid assurances from Republicans that they’ll at least vote for the absolutely necessary debt limit increase. If not, what was the point of all this, other than to not shut down the government for a few days?

    • pontoon

      details of this “deal” are.  Where are the cuts being made?  How many riders really made it into the deal and what are they?  I’ve searched this morning and don’t see a comprehensive list of what the deal is.  Do we have any real proof that the deal will get enough votes to pass this week?  I heard Anthony Weiner tweeted last night that he wasn’t sure he could support the deal.  The Tea Party Nation tweeted they are going to primary Boehner because he gave in and didn’t get enough. So, will there be enough votes to get it through if both Dems and the Tea Party think it is a lousy deal?

    • KathyinBlacksburg

      What I’d like to see is the president submit the budget, not leave it to TeaPublicans, or Max Baucus and his pal Kent Conrad, though even Conrad opposes Paul Ryan’s upcoming effort to impose the sham/boogus/giveaway-to-the-rich Koch Budget on America.

      I would also like to see Dems getting ahead of the TeaPublican nonsense.  Had they (or enough of them) been brave enough to spell out that, for example, apx 3 million more women (and some men) would then go without cancer screenings, basic tests, and physical exams, then maybe this whole past week could have been avoided. They needed to do this on every single major outcome of the GOP cuts.  They should have been everywhere, not quietly hand-wringing, except for the few who ventured to MSNBC.  (My boycott of MSNBC didn’t last either And if they cannot figure out how to do this, they should be forced to watch Cenk at 6 PM on MSNBC or take a framing class or classes.  Let’s hope they do it before the next round.  Cenk can sum up in one sentence what the sound bites could be.  Why cannot Democrats?

      Then the Senate needed to promote the WH budget by using it as a basis for negotiations.  

      If the WH would send over the bill it wants, we would be a lot better off (I hope).  But leaving everything up to TeaPublicans in the House is a recipe for disaster and puts the WH in a one-down position.

      Giving Orange Man such power is really foolish.

    • Hugo Estrada

      This is what has been happening since the GOP won in November.

      It is sad to see how little of the budget does so much to make this country great. And those program have just been made a lot weaker or effectively non-existent.

      Had these cuts been done together with tax hikes, then we would be talking about solving a deficit. But this has nothing to do with it. Why give up on the deficit when deficits can be used to destroy pro-social programs?

      There will be no one moment that we can look back and point at the time when the U.S. fully abandoned the New Deal and devolved into a country with  3rd world dynamics, but it will be around this time.

      What the GOP did is what the IMF and World Bank do to countries in crisis. But at least the leaders of those countries can pretend that it was some foreign body that force them to make draconian cuts in social programs.

      The GOP, with the help of Democrats, did it to their own country.