October 14, 2013
Oh Lord, Send Us Moderate Republicans....
...but please, don't send them to us just yet:
Earlier this weekend, a compromise proposal by Sen. Collins to end, or at least postpone, the fiscal showdown failed to gain traction due to lack of support from Democrats. Collins is the quintessential “moderate Republican,” the alleged disappearance of whom from the Senate causes such hand-wringing in MSM circles.
Collins’ proposal would have extended government funding for six months and boosted the debt ceiling through the end of January. By way of a fig leaf for Republicans, it also would have delayed a medical device tax in the health care law for two years and instituted an income verification requirement for qualifying for Obamacare subsidies.
Democrats rejected the plan not because of the Obamacare fig leaf, but because they want more money for the government. Collins’ proposal would have retained the spending levels established by the sequester, though it would have provided the government with much-needed flexibility in spending this money.
During a heated exchange with Collins on the Senate floor, Patty Murray, No. 4 in the Senate leadership, said it is unacceptable to lock in cuts at the sequestration spending levels. She took this approach even though the “clean CR” Democrats have been demanding would have locked in those cuts.
Posted by Cassandra at October 14, 2013 09:44 AM
TrackBack URL for this entry:
The battle is over cuts, reduction of spending, maintaining the sequester or what the Democrats want, which is to keep kicking up spending to buy votes.
Running one trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see (before we finally go broke) does not seem like the kind of problem they want to tackle now, because....can, kicking, road.
No one wants to defer gratification NOW to enjoy a benefit later anymore. I constantly read about "low information voters", but the problem is "low consequence voters". The gravy train is still running, everything is still working. What, me worry? There are huge consequences to what the deficit spending is doing, and we are already feeling them in terms of declining numbers of employed (size of workforce, etc.) based on our wrecked fiscal and monetary policies.
Consequences, who needs them?
Posted by: Don Brouhaha at October 14, 2013 01:36 PM
Are you sure you didn't mean this? Not even subliminally?
Posted by: DL Sly at October 14, 2013 03:48 PM
Have *huge* mixed feelings about the entire fiscal mess. Admit I'd kind of like the inflation to start soon enough for Obama to get his (large) fair share of credit for it; its coming, and it will be very, very bad. The Carter inflation was the end result of LBJ's 'Guns *and* Butter, Nixon ditching the gold standard (which was in turn actually precipitated by long term dollar decline from chronic large deficits), and Carter's truly amazing derptitude.
This time around there will also probably be a serious round of monetary instability, as the few strong currency regimes dump the fiat money of the weak sisters.
Obama has distinguished himself as being an even weaker 'leader' than Carter, and I didn't think that was possible.
Imagine the sturm and drang when folks finally realize there simply isn't enough $$$ to pay for all the 'stuff' pols promised? Gonna be a lot of very angry low information voters . . .
We had to live through Carter's utter ineptitude in response to stagflation in order for voters to flee to adult leadership.
Posted by: CAPT Mike at October 14, 2013 08:32 PM
Title nails it.
Posted by: Texan99 at October 15, 2013 01:02 AM