My take on the first "Super Committee" Meeting

[jtown1123]

It's going to be bad.

Not only did the Republicans spout their typical nonsense about how government spending is the root of all evil and this so called spending is strangling private sector growth (proof?), Chris Van Hollen called Bowles-Simpson (Catfood Commission) and Domenici-Rivlin plans "balanced." As a reference, these plans are not balanced. It is a ratio of 3-1, cuts to revenues. Not good that he said this.

http://www.rooseveltinstitute.org/new-roosevelt/simpson-bowles-balanced-take-look-its-supporters

http://www.ncpssm.org/news/archive/Analysis_of_Commissions_Proposal/

http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2010/baker111110.html

[Proud Public Servant]

1. And here's my take

I've never understood what the motivation is for the GOP members of the Super Committee to find a solution. If they do, it'll mean compromising with the Dems and finding some way to raise revenue (and thus pissing off their base). If they don't, they get no tax increases and across the board cuts in social spending. Sure, defense spending gets cut too, but only the most delusional hawk would imagine that our current bloated Defense budget can't take the hit (besides, there's always off-budget tricks to reinstate National Security spending).

I really don't get why the GOP should bother even showing up; if the Committee fails, they win.

[jwirr]

2. I agree with you. They can let this slide and not be hurt with their base.

If they already know they are not going to get re-elected then they have nothing to lose by bringing the country down. At least that is what they think. Once the country tanks their base may not be so happy.