728x90_newspapers_dark_1.gif
Showing posts with label Panel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Panel. Show all posts

Sunday, January 9, 2011

What Are the Odds? Deficit Panel Proposals Face Uphill Climb in Congress - Fox News

The co-chairmen of the president's deficit commission are urging politicians not to "wimp out" as they roll out dozens of recommendations aimed at slicing trillions from the long-term deficit and stabilizing the national debt. 

But with a herd of sacred cows being brought out for slaughter, interest groups for months have lined up to decry parts of the plan. A vote is set for Friday and there are already doubts that the document can win the 14-vote supermajority on the 18-member panel it needs to advance to Congress in one piece. 

That leaves the question of what, if any, proposals and ideas lawmakers might draw from in the next Congress, where incoming Republicans are vowing to focus on fiscal discipline. Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., said Wednesday that even if the report does not clear the commission, chaired by Erskine Bowles and former Sen. Alan Simpson, the panel has "moved the ball forward" -- the Budget Committee chairman suggested he would advance some kind of budget-tightening proposal next year. 

FoxNews.com takes a look at some of the key, and in many cases controversial, proposals contained in the 59-page report, and the chances they have at coming up for a vote in some form next year. 

Discretionary Spending Freeze -- Good Chance 

Given that lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have talked about imposing some kind of freeze or limit on discretionary spending, it would seem likely that the commission's call for a federal spending reality check would find friends in Congress. 

The commission's recommendation is more severe than others on the table, calling for a spending freeze in 2012, pre-2008 crisis levels in 2013 and subsequently a cap on growth to half of inflation all the way through 2020. That's about 17 percent less than what President Obama has requested. 

Maybe that goes too far for some members. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities argues that limits of that magnitude would significantly impair the government's ability to function. But Obama, as a starting point, has already called for a three-year freeze on nonsecurity discretionary spending. Republicans want discretionary limits and so do Blue Dog Democrats, who said in a statement Wednesday that "elements" of the commission proposal "deserve real consideration." 

That makes a vote in the House, to be led next year by Republican Speaker-Designate John Boehner, more likely than in the Senate. Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., who is poised to take over the House Budget Committee, praised the spending limits on Wednesday as "pretty good." 

Cap on War Spending -- Low Chance 

Though calls for discretionary spending cuts often ignore the Defense Department, the commission report calls for requiring the president to proposal an annual limit for war spending. 

This proposal would break out the so-called "Overseas Contingency Operations" for the current wars into a separate category with a limit of its own, as well as impose a "general security spending cap." 

But with new security threats emerging out of Iran, North Korea and terror cells around the world -- and dozens of Republicans soon entering the House - the current budget-tightening led by Defense Secretary Robert Gates might be all lawmakers can stand. 

"I don't know how you do that, and I can't imagine Republicans agreeing to that," said Michael Tanner, senior fellow with the Cato Institute, when asked about the war spending cap. 

Federal Pay Freeze -- Good Chance 

Obama cleared the way for this kind of proposal on Monday when he called for a two-year freeze on federal civilian pay. Though it earned him a backlash from unions and Democratic lawmakers who represent districts heavy with federal workers, the commission gives him some backup. The report goes further, calling for a three-year pay freeze for federal workers as well as a three-year pay freeze for members of Congress. 

It's unclear whether legislation will fall somewhere in the middle, but Republicans have already indicated they'll back the president on a federal freeze. 

Change to Mortgage Interest Deduction -- Low Chance 

The commission proposes a host of changes to the tax system, some of which might find their way into proposals next year. 

But one item that probably won't be in any bill, Tanner said, is a cut to the mortgage deduction. 

"You're talking about something that's really sacrosanct," he said. "It might be dumb economics but ..." 

Tanner said the mortgage issue would make a great "30-second attack ad" against anyone who votes for it. He predicted the commission's tax proposal as a whole would fade as lawmakers continue to push their own ideas for tax reform. 

The interest deduction provides a big incentive, built into the U.S. tax code, for Americans to buy property. The proposal does not eliminate it, but caps the applicable mortgage at $500,000 as opposed to $1 million and only applies it to primary residences. 

The proposal includes several other tax changes, including a call to cut and simplify income tax rates. 

Gas Tax Hike -- No Chance 

At a time when Washington is in lockstep agreement about the need to shield the middle class from a tax increase, the idea of raising the gas tax is a tough sell. 

The commission, calling for Congress to fully fund the Transportation Trust Fund, recommends bumping up the federal gas tax by 15 cents per gallon between 2013 and 2015. 

Ron Haskins, a senior fellow with the Brookings Institution, gave the idea a precisely "zero percent" chance of passing. 

"Anything that's a new tax or a big expansion of an old tax ... I think has a very low probability," he said. 

Social Security Overhaul -- Low Chance 

They don't call it the third rail for nothin'. Though the commission calls for Social Security changes merely to make the system solvent, not reduce the deficit, interest groups have raised alarm for months about the possibility of beneficiaries taking a hit. Liberal advocacy group Demos swiftly issued a statement Wednesday morning saying the plan "slashes Social Security at a time when fewer Americans can count on a secure retirement." 

Under the plan, the retirement age would gradually increase to 68 by 2050 and 69 by 2075. The benefit formula would change, cost-of-living adjustments would not be as large and the cap on income taxed for the program would rise. 

Haskins called the proposals "totally reasonable" and said lawmakers could very well introduce some of the elements in the form of a bill. But as for an actual floor vote on sweeping changes to Social Security, he gave it about a 30 percent chance. 

Medicare Overhaul -- Low Chance 

Part of the problem with making Medicare changes, while necessary to stabilize the federal budget, is that Republicans demonized the idea of any cuts to the elderly during the health care overhaul debate. 

Some elements of the commission's Medicare plan could come up for a vote, like a repeal of the so-called CLASS Act -- Republicans have long railed against the long-term care program and could use the report as justification to advance a repeal. 

But the report also calls for a change in the deductible structure and other reforms, which would either be decried as too much or too little or too dangerous. 

Besides, Ryan has been pushing a plan of his own and made his disappointment with the commission's proposal known Wednesday. 

"My primary concern with this plan is health care," Ryan said. "I do not believe that this sufficiently fixes the health care problem and guess what? Our debt problem is the health care problem." 

Simpson and Bowles argue that policymakers are going to have to confront these issues and still expressed hope Wednesday that the commission would approve the entire package, sending the whole thing to Congress. Bowles said voters are telling him "not to wimp out." 


View the original article here

Tuesday, October 5, 2010

Recession Not Over for Congressional Candidates Despite Panel Ruling - FOXNews

A Cambridge-based economics panel declared last month that the recession is over -- in fact, it ended in June 2009. 

Just try telling that to congressional candidates. The judgment of one Massachusetts board has done little, if anything, to change the campaign trail rhetoric with Election Day mere weeks away. Candidates and lawmakers, particularly those arguing against a massive tax increase, continue to insist that the recession is ongoing and the nation is stuck in the "middle" of it. 

Jack Conway, the Democratic nominee for Senate in Kentucky, was the latest to repeat that claim during a debate with Republican Rand Paul on "Fox News Sunday." 

"I think that raising taxes -- we shouldn't be doing it in a time of recession," Conway said, battling the charge that he in any way opposed the extension of the Bush tax cuts. 

Conway's not alone among politicians in describing the downturn as a full-blown recession. There may be good reason -- poll after poll shows most Americans are on the same page. A Fox News poll released in August showed 88 percent of voters think the country is still in a recession, including 48 percent who think conditions could get worse. A Fox News poll released in September showed 86 percent say it feels like the country is in a recession. 

A recession is technically defined as two consecutive quarters of economic decline. The National Bureau of Economic Research, which tracks these trends, issued a statement Sept. 20 saying the recession officially lasted 18 months -- starting in December 2007 and ending in June 2009. That marks the turnaround from economic decline to economic growth. 

But in a climate where the unemployment rate is inching back toward 10 percent and businesses are sitting on their reserves, the declaration offers little comfort. Even the bureau said the announcement does not mean "economic conditions since (June 2009) have been favorable or that the economy has returned to operating at normal capacity." 

As long as the economy is sputtering, many politicians say the United States might as well be in recession as they appeal to voters for confidence in their commitment to spurring job creation. 

Both the Republican and Democratic nominees for the 3rd District House seat in Arkansas told local news channel KFSM-TV last week that the recession is not over. Democrat David Whitaker and Republican Steve Womack pointed to high unemployment and low investment by businesses in making their case. 

The claim that the recession is alive and not-so-well is most common in the debate over whether to extend the Bush tax cuts. Those who want them extended for all income levels cite the "recession" as the reason -- it's become a talking point for members of both parties. 

"We should not be raising taxes in the middle of a recession," Rep. Jim Marshall, D-Ga., wrote in a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. 

Jaime Herrera, a Washington state representative running as the GOP nominee for the 3rd District House seat in her state, wrote in a questionnaire for the Daily News Online that "raising taxes in the middle of a recession will harm job growth." 

Republican Senate Leader Mitch McConnell has repeatedly made that argument, and his rank-and-file are starting to follow suit. 

Louisiana Republican Sen. David Vitter, who's facing a challenge this year from Democratic Rep. Charlie Melancon, said last month it would be "crazy" to raise taxes in a recession

The recession rhetoric was not enough to bring up the tax cut issue for a vote before Congress adjourned last week. Democratic leaders, who want to extend the tax cuts for the middle class but raise taxes on the wealthy, are pledging to tackle the issue when they return from recess in November. 

Republicans have voiced their doubts. House GOP Leader John Boehner last week equated the vote to adjourn with a vote to raise taxes.


View the original article here