April 16, 2014

Posts on commissions

Subscribe to this feed Subscribe to this feed

 

Tuesday, July 17, 2012 - 12:52 PM

Today Concord Coalition Co-Chair Sam Nunn, a former U.S. senator from Georgia, helped launch the Campaign to Fix the Debt.  This project is a non-partisan initiative to put America on a better fiscal and economic path.  Nunn is a member of the campaign's steering committee.  

In advance of the campaign's launch, Nunn said:

"On fiscal matters, neither political party can impose its will on the other, and that it is not likely to change after the election.  Successfully tackling our fiscal challenges requires Members of Congress to come together across party lines with a balanced plan that will strengthen the economy, reassure markets, and save future generations from an unbearable debt burden.  There are good people across the political spectrum who recognize this in putting together the Simpson  – Bowles and the Domenici  – Rivlin plans.  There are many Members of Congress who are willing to work together, but they get hit hard from both sides and need a foundation of citizen support.  The Campaign to Fix the Debt hopes to give these folks in Washington, DC and across the country the support they need to work together to put our nation's interest above political parties and to strengthen America to protect our children's...

Monday, April 2, 2012 - 12:00 AM

A rare display of bipartisan fiscal cooperation broke out on Capitol Hill last week when 38 House members (22 Democrats and 16 Republicans) braved an onslaught of interest group pressure to vote in favor of a budget resolution designed to rein in the deficit through a combination of spending cuts and tax increases. The budget plan, offered by Representatives Jim Cooper (D-TN) and Steven LaTourette (R-OH) as an amendment to the House budget resolution, was based on the recommendations of the Simpson-Bowles fiscal commission. It came 15 months after a bipartisan majority of that commission put forth a credible and comprehensive plan to address the deficit and was the first budget plan based on the commission’s work to come up for a vote in the House or Senate.

While the nays on the Cooper-LaTourette amendment outnumbered the yeas by 10 to 1, the very existence of a bipartisan budget alternative signaled an important breakthrough. It demonstrated growing frustration with the starkly partisan plans that members are routinely pressured to choose from and established a framework upon which future bipartisan efforts can be built.

There is little doubt that future efforts will be needed.

Legislation will have to be enacted by the end of the year unless Congress and the President want to allow all expiring tax...

Friday, March 30, 2012 - 1:38 PM

 

Sometimes it can seem like none of our elected representatives are willing to buck their own party leaders, let alone vote for something because it’s for the good of the country, rather than serving some ideological purpose.

That’s why bipartisan support this week in the House to use the Simpson-Bowles commission recommendations to guide the 2013 budget was like a breath of fresh air. No, the amendment did not come close to passing, but the 38 members who broke ranks and voted aye are true heroes of fiscal responsibility. Political considerations took a backseat to doing the right thing, and we enthusiastically commend these brave men and women for stepping up and being counted:

Jim Cooper (D-TN) Sponsor
Steven LaTourette (R-OH) Co-sponsor
Rob Andrews (D-NJ)
Charlie Bass (R-NH)
Dan Boren (D-OK)
Leonard Boswell (D-IA)
Ann Marie Buerkle (R-NY)
John Carney (D-DE)
James Clyburn (D-SC)
Jim Costa (D-CA)
Henry Cuellar (D-TX)
Charlie Dent (R-PA)
Bob Dold (R-IL)
Chaka Fattah (D-PA)
Chris Gibson (R-NY)
Jim Himes (D-CT)
Tim Johnson (R-IL)
Ron Kind (D-WI)
Rick Larsen (D-WA)
Dan Lipinski (D-IL)
Cynthia Marie Lummis (R-WY)
Pat Meehan (R-PA)
Ed Perlmutter (D-CO)
Collin...

Tuesday, November 1, 2011 - 12:00 AM

Members of the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction (“super committee”) have a timing problem that compounds their political problem. Put simply, they may run out of time to reach agreement on the kind of comprehensive changes that are needed to put the nation’s finances on a sustainable path. However, with a little cooperation and a strong dose of leadership, they need not let the clock run out on their efforts.

The super committee’s political problem is easy to see. Its official goal is to cut the deficit by $1.5 trillion over 10 years. This won’t be easy, but as the Government Accountability Office (GAO) recently pointed out, even if lawmakers are able to achieve this goal it would still leave the debt on an unsustainable growth track. That is why the President, the chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, many members of Congress and countless outside commentators have urged the super committee to aim for a more ambitious target – anywhere from $3 trillion to $5 trillion.

However, to reach this goal, often described as “going big,” the super committee will have to tackle the two thorniest fiscal policy issues – entitlement and tax reform. These issues have stymied every other long-term budget negotiation this year because they are where the parties have their biggest differences.

And yet, we...

Thursday, September 8, 2011 - 12:00 AM

It is not inconsistent to provide effective short-term support for the economic recovery while laying the groundwork for long-term deficit reduction. To do so, however, Washington will have to move beyond the inflexibility and partisan vitriol of the recent debt limit debate.

President Obama took some helpful steps in this direction in his speech to Congress this evening. He offered several short-term proposals that could conceivably provide both an economic boost and a basis for bipartisan cooperation – which are together essential ingredients for effective fiscal policy and for repairing some of the damage that the debt limit debate inflicted on public confidence.
 
A full evaluation of the President’s plan, however, will need to take into account the ideas he will release later for paying for his new proposals and moving the federal budget toward a sustainable path. A credible plan to stabilize the debt over the long term will be essential to making short-term measures more effective. It is not just a matter of making the numbers work; it is sound economics.

As The Concord Coalition has long argued, “fiscally responsible deficit spending” need not be an oxymoron. During periods of economic difficulty when deficit spending may be required, the key is to ensure that the country gets the...
Wednesday, August 17, 2011 - 1:23 PM

The “no new taxes” pledge taken by Republicans in Congress has been a huge obstacle to achieving bipartisan agreement on a comprehensive deficit reduction plan. Many Republicans interpret the pledge as ruling out revenue increases of any kind, even those that close narrow loopholes and special interest deductions. The devotion seems to extend to a “grand bargain” for deficit reduction that would actually enact future cuts in tax rates, but pay for some of the revenue loss from those cuts by limiting deductions and loopholes.

However, it is encouraging that some of the newly appointed Republican members of the debt limit deal’s super committee have already indicated a refreshing openness to considering this approach. Congressman Fred Upton (R-MI) recently told a group of constituents that “tax reform is long overdue” and that he is “not afraid of looking at tax loopholes” in finding common ground on deficit reduction. And, Congressman Dave Camp -- a Republican super committee member from Michigan who also chairs the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee -- when questioned about tax increases has said that “nothing is...

Tuesday, August 16, 2011 - 3:09 PM

The Concord Coalition is calling upon the 12 members of the Congressional Super Committee to include a critical 13th member in their deliberations -- you. As we discussed in yesterday's post, The American People Want In, the Committee’s decisions will affect every American so it’s only right that every American has a voice in their deliberations.  

Let your voice be heard and demand that members of the Super Committee engage the American people in a dialogue about the tough choices America faces.  The issues at stake -- from social insurance to national security, domestic investments and tax reform -- have profound consequences for our nation. This is your chance to weigh in.

The Super Committee’s Thanksgiving deadline means that time is short, so your participation now is critical. Don’t let this opportunity to help decide America’s fiscal future pass you by. 


Here’s what you can do:

1. Contact Super Committee members and tell them, “Listen to the American people, and put all options on the table.”
...
Monday, August 15, 2011 - 12:00 AM

 

This post originally appeared on The American Square

Twelve official members of the new joint congressional committee charged with reducing federal budget deficits by $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years have been named. What remains to be seen is whether an unofficial, but crucial, 13th member will be included in the committee’s deliberation – the American public.

Most of the deficit reduction negotiations this year have taken place behind closed doors and none of it has gone beyond Washington horse-trading to engage the public in any meaningful way. Exchanging shop-worn, poll-tested talking points on cable TV is not “public engagement.”

We watched the debt ceiling debate with horror as politicians played “Chicken” with our nation’s creditworthiness. Business leaders warned that the possibility of default, in one form or another, would create a ripple effect through the economy with lasting negative consequences. To top it off, even with the deal that was eventually reached, Standard & Poor’s dropped the U.S. from its list of AAA sovereign nations over concerns that political intransigence in Washington would stand in the way of meaningful solutions.

The new committee has an opportunity to...

Monday, April 25, 2011 - 10:25 AM

House Republicans have adopted a budget they say will make tough but necessary spending cuts to rein in our nation’s burgeoning budget deficits. President Obama says the Republican plan is too radical. He hit the road last week to sell his own deficit reduction plan, which he says is more balanced.

So, it’s “game on.”

But just what is the purpose of this game?

If the purpose is to gain advantage for the 2012 elections, then recent events make sense. If, however, the purpose is to build consensus around a fiscal sustainability plan, we’re off on the wrong track. Rather than seeking areas of common ground, which clearly exist, the President and Republican leaders seem more interested in sharpening their differences.

Consider two major issues: tax reform and health care.

In both instances there is the potential for compromise. Indeed, without compromise on health care and taxes, it is hard to see how a meaningful plan for fiscal sustainability can be enacted.

Two bipartisan groups that looked at these issues last year were each able to find consensus, at least around a broad approach.

On tax reform, the Bowles-Simpson and Domenici-Rivlin commissions both recommended that most tax expenditures – deductions, exclusions and credits – be eliminated or greatly scaled back in exchange...

Monday, December 6, 2010 - 11:54 AM

By now we've seen a number of proposals for fiscal sustainability from groups with very different perspectives. Some of the harshest critics of the bipartisan deficit-reduction panels are liberal-leaning groups that argue that the recommendations of the President's commission, as well as those of the Bipartisan Policy Center and the MacGuineas-Galston plan, leaned too heavily toward the conservative side and proposed packages that were too heavy on spending cuts and too insistent on keeping taxes (too) low. (I may agree that I would have preferred more revenue increases in the overall mix than the President's commission proposed, but I don't think that should lead me to declare the overall proposal "dead on arrival" or to reject the the individual policies contained within it.)

I've looked at two...