The Dirty Dozen Democrats Who Could Have Prevented the Downgrade

William E. Been, FloydReports.com

While watching the debt ceiling increase by $2.4 trillion just to cover spending until the next presidential election, the scam perpetrated on the American people could not have been any more obvious. While the Republican-controlled House of Representatives negotiated with itself for weeks in an attempt to propose something that might save our great nation from financial disaster, neither the U.S. Senate nor the White House proposed any plan at all. Even worse, while listening to Barack Obama’s rhetoric about the need for a bipartisan solution, the Majority Leader of the Democrat-controlled Senate announced that bills coming from the House were “dead on arrival.” In fact, nothing coming from the House was even allowed to be debated by the overly partisan Senate leadership. This resulted in another crisis-not-to-be-wasted. As the administration-imposed deadline of August 2 approached, the Democrats’ rhetoric followed a familiar pattern as they attempted to frighten the American public with false accusations that grandma won’t get her medical care, seniors will lose their Social Security, sick children will be turned away, and that a major calamity will occur if no increase in the debt ceiling is approved by August 2.

In attempting to understand how and why our government has become so blatantly irresponsible, I heard an interview with Orrin Hatch on FOX News. Senator Hatch spoke of his past attempts to pass a Balanced Budget Amendment, specifically one in 1997 that failed to pass by a single vote. I could not help but wonder what that one vote would have meant to the current situation. With the debt being $5.4 trillion in 1997 and heading for $15 trillion in 2011, it is clear that holding at the 1997 levels would have assured that no crisis would have occurred and that the spending being generated by the Obama administration would have been dramatically reduced. As a result, it is important to understand who those senators were who accounted for the missing vote that would have facilitated financial soundness.

A familiar pattern was again evident. The vote was 66-34, with a super majority of 67 votes required to pass the Amendment. Upon review of the senators’ vote, it was once more aggravating to see the partisan politics that has ruled this country since the early 1990s. The “one vote” that killed the bill was cast by 34 Democrats as a block. They collectively killed the chance for financial sanity. Even more remarkable, every GOP senator voted for the bill, joined by 11 Democrats. Yet, the 34 Democrats blocked a bill that could have prevented the debt ceiling crisis of 2011.

Sadly, 18 of these 34 senators are still in the Senate, and still blocking all attempts to reduce spending and debt. This Group of 18 has destroyed the financial stability and strength of the greatest nation in history. Every American needs to know these senators, who will be listed as the “Dirty Dozen plus 6” at the end of this document.

Having documented the Democrats’ destruction of mortgage lending standards during the 1990s, this irresponsible destruction of a bipartisan Balanced Budget bill in 1997 coupled with the mortgage lending debacle should be an indictment of the entire Democratic Party. No theft of wealth at any level can even begin to approach what the Democrats and their allies in the Progressive movement have committed against our country. The Democrats have destroyed our financial reputation, the reserve status of our dollar, and are continuing reckless spending at the….

Read more.

Five Reasons the Debt Deal is a Budget-Busting Mistake

Rep. Tom McClintock, FloydReports.com

The “Budget Control Act of 2011” increases the debt limit by between $2.1 and $2.4 trillion, the biggest explosion of debt in American history. It allows the government to avoid spending reductions for the next two years while squandering our last best hope of averting a sovereign debt crisis.

I am opposed to this measure for the following reasons:

  1. The purported cuts, even if realized, are far below the $4 trillion deficit reduction that credit rating agencies have warned is necessary to preserve the Triple-A credit rating of the United States government;
  2. It blows the lid off the House budget passed in April by more than a half-trillion dollars over ten years;
  3. It makes no significant spending reductions for at least the next two years, essentially freezing spending at an unsustainable level. While the debt increase occurs this year, significant spending cuts aren’t to be made for many years and can be ignored or reversed by future acts of Congress;
  4. The spending caps are easily circumvented by declaring appropriations to be an emergency, a response to a “major disaster,” or necessary for the “Global War on Terror”; and
  5. The balanced budget amendment provisions are illusory because the amendment is completely undefined.

THE ACT FLIRTS WITH A CREDIT DOWNGRADE

Let’s not forget the gorilla in the room. America faces an unprecedented fiscal crisis because of an unprecedented spending binge by this administration and the last. Credit rating agencies have openly warned that the nation’s Triple-A credit rating cannot be sustained without a credible plan to reduce the projected 10-year budget deficit by roughly $4 trillion.

This bill averts the threat of downgrade for failure to pay our current bills, but it also gives the most spendthrift administration in American history a credit line to continue spending at unsustainable levels through the next election. And it falls far short of the measures demanded by the rating agencies as necessary to maintain the Triple-A credit of the United States government.

If the nation’s Triple-A credit rating is downgraded as a result of this failure, it will mean higher interest rates to maintain government debt. Given the enormity of that debt, even a small increase in interest rates can add crushing additional costs to government. Furthermore, interest rate increases would ripple through the economy, causing higher mortgage interest rates, higher credit card rates and a severe additional drag on the economy.

This would occur on top of the inherent economic damage this bill does. The borrowing authorized in this measure is not theoretical: it amounts to more than $7,000 for every man, woman, and child in the nation or roughly $28,000 for a family of four. This debt must be repaid through that family’s future taxes just as surely as if it appeared on their credit card statement. In a real sense, this act means that every family in America has acquired the obligation to make the same payments as if they had just bought a new car.

Predicting the future decisions of the credit rating agencies is a fool’s errand. Much of their economic analysis is marred by perception, psychology, political pressure, and self-interest. But there is no blinking at the fact that on many occasions in the last month their senior analysts have called for immediate adoption of a credible work-out plan for $4 trillion of genuine deficit reduction in order to maintain a Triple-A rating. We ignore these repeated and explicit warnings at our peril.

SAVINGS ARE GREATLY EXAGGERATED

The Budget Control Act purports to cut federal discretionary spending by $900 billion over the next ten years and set in motion another $1.2 trillion to $1.5 trillion in ten-year spending reductions by year’s end. A recurring theme by proponents is that it guarantees a dollar of cuts for every dollar of new debt.

However, while the debt limit increase occurs this year, the savings occur over the next decade and are heavily back-loaded toward the end of that period. The work of the great economist, J. Wellington Wimpy, can be observed here: “I will gladly give you a dollar of spending cuts ten years from now for a dollar of debt today.”

In reality, this bill will decrease total federal spending by just $4 billion between….

Read more.

2012 Could Be Another GOP Blowout

Matt Mackowiak, FloydReports.com

The debt ceiling fight currently being waged in Washington will have a major impact on the 2012 elections, because it’s presenting a clear contrast between the Republican and Democratic parties — something that rarely happens.

Republicans have skillfully used this moment to push fundamental budget reform uphill. The forces of the status quo, who have gotten fat and happy from federal spending levels of 24 percent of gross domestic product, are violently resisting the overspending straitjacket that the Cut, Cap, Balance plan represents.

It would be very easy for Republicans to wash their hands of a president who is biologically incapable of leading. If a speech or a lecture were necessary, he would be the most qualified person in the world for the task. But alas, what is needed in the White House is a statesman, a negotiator, a legislator. What is needed is trustworthiness and commitment, not hope and change.

But conservatives and the more than 180 groups who make up the Cut, Cap, Balance Coalition (for whom, in full disclosure, I have consulted) have driven this political battle from the very beginning. Now, as it nears some kind of conclusion, it’s important to consider the ramifications it will have on policy and politics.

Several courageous leaders in Congress, like Senators Jim DeMint (R-SC), Mike Lee (R-UT) and Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Congressmen Jim Jordan (R-OH), and Joe Walsh (R-IL), have consistently put the next generation ahead of the next election. Republicans aren’t stupid — they know that if they simply increased the debt limit and maybe made Democrats vote against a reasonable plan to cut and restrict spending, it would redound to their political benefit next November. As a result, they’d likely maintain a majority in the House, take back the Senate and perhaps win the White House. But these conservative leaders have said winning an election is not enough. They’re worried about the country’s future.

The last three elections (2006, 2008 and 2010) were wave elections — which is unusual. Four consecutive wave elections would be even more unusual.

But, it’s possible.

In order for Republicans to create the circumstances for a fourth consecutive wave election, they should….

Read more.