February 7, 2012

GET INVOLVED

Posts on commissions

Subscribe to this feed Subscribe to this feed

 

To Go Big, Keep Going
Monday, October 31, 2011 - 11:00 PM

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...

... Read More

Obama's Proposals Could Boost Economy, But Effectiveness Depends on Long-Term Fiscal Reform
Wednesday, September 7, 2011 - 11:00 PM

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...
... Read More

Super Committee Republicans Already Showing More Willingness to Include Revenue-Side Solutions
Wednesday, August 17, 2011 - 12:23 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...

... Read More

The Super Committee’s 13th Member... You
Tuesday, August 16, 2011 - 2:09 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.”
...
... Read More

The American People Want In
Sunday, August 14, 2011 - 11:00 PM

 

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...

... Read More

The President's Debt Tour: "Game On" but to What End?

Monday, April 25, 2011 - 9:25 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...

... Read More

The Rough Common Ground
Monday, December 6, 2010 - 10:54 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...

... Read More

Politically Popular Options Aren’t Enough for Serious Deficit Reduction
Monday, November 22, 2010 - 4:52 PM

My least favorite argument in deficit reduction debates is that a particular option can’t be chosen because it is too unpopular. If that criterion is strictly applied, we might as well fold our tents and wait for the inevitable fiscal crisis because we’ll never eliminate trillion-dollar deficits with “popular” options.

That message was clearly conveyed last week by the Bipartisan Policy Center’s Debt Reduction Task Force, led by two veterans of past deficit-reduction efforts, Pete Domenici and Alice Rivlin. Their report followed a similarly tough message from Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson, co-chairs of the President’s bipartisan fiscal commission.

Elected officials have not flocked to embrace these reports and it is easy to see why. They propose spending cuts in popular programs. They challenge cherished tax breaks and raise revenues in the process. They produce howls of protest from powerful interest groups on the political left and right.

But they each do one more thing: They outline plausible paths to a sustainable fiscal policy.

As a member of the Bipartisan Policy Center’s task force, I’m very proud of the resulting report. We worked together in a spirit of cooperation and compromise....

... Read More

Passing on a Burden That Future Generations Don't Deserve
Tuesday, October 19, 2010 - 8:27 AM

As the chair of The Concord Coalition’s Youth Advisory Board, I am always looking for opportunities to highlight why issues of fiscal sustainability and entitlement reform most significantly impact today’s young Americans and future generations. So when Sara Imhof, Concord’s Midwest field director, asked me to speak on a panel with Congressman Paul Ryan and former SEIU President Andy Stern, two members of the President Obama’s fiscal commission, I jumped at the chance.

Prior to the Oct. 12 event, I was fortunate to share a ride with Mr. Stern, and had a few minutes with both him and Congressman Ryan, hearing their perspectives and sharing some of my own. That includes my hope that the commission will use the opportunity in December, when it releases its findings, at least in part as a teaching moment -- an opportunity to shine a light on our nation’s unsustainable fiscal path, the facts of which are undisputed by both major political parties.

I was encouraged to hear Congressman Ryan and Mr. Stern acknowledge not only the gravity of the situation we face, but also the critical need for an “adult” conversation about our policy options going forward.

...

... Read More

Economic Recovery and Other Uncertainties Are No Excuse For Failure to Plan A More Responsible Fiscal Course
Monday, June 7, 2010 - 3:45 PM

How large is the federal debt? That's something of a trick question in economic circles, and some analysts believe it may have already tripped up the President's fiscal commission.

Some commission members think the panel, charged with recommending solutions to the nation’s fiscal problems, should focus on the total federal debt. That figure, which just hit $13 trillion, is most familiar to the general public because it is widely cited by the news media and politicians.

Many budget experts and economists, however, say the real number to watch is “publicly held debt,” meaning what the government owes to investors. This figure, now approaching $8.6 trillion, does not include money that the government owes to various trust funds, notably for Social Security.

Beyond this issue is the question of how much more debt the government can safely take on. Fiscal commission members tussled over that at their second full meeting late last month on Capitol Hill, with some arguing that the economy was still too weak for the government to start focusing on deficit reduction.

“It’s very important that we don’t in our zeal focus on deficit reduction right now,” said Rep. Jan Schakowsky, an Illinois Democrat.

Regardless of which figure the commission focuses on, federal debt is...

... Read More