Wednesday, September 2, 2015

Debt Debate a Satanic Sandwich? Try Boomerang.

The deal that averted a possible default on federal debt this week only postponed some of the hard decisions, meaning we'll go through all the posturing, screaming and rending of garments again in a few months.

Debt Debate a Satanic Sandwich? Try Boomerang.


Did you think the recent debt-ceiling debate was brutal? Did the vision of political leaders playing chicken with the U.S. economy make your carotid arteries throb with tension, the bile rise in your throat and curses form on your lips?

Thought so. Well, it’s coming back soon, promising to be more intense. The rapprochement between the White House and congressional Republican leaders (who control the House and thus the balance of power in the triangle) ended the immediate crisis Tuesday but also postponed some tough decisions until later in the year, when the 2012 presidential and congressional races will be even closer.

A bipartisan “super-committee” of House and Senate members must push through $1.5 trillion worth of cuts in entitlement or discretionary spending or revenues (or a combination of all three) before the end of the year, or automatic cuts in defense and domestic spending, including Medicare, will be triggered.

The leaders who will appoint the 12 members of the committee aren’t backing off the partisan positions at the heart of the train wreck this time: Republicans insisting that any tax increases be off the table, and Democrats insisting that corporations and wealthy people should be required to pay more to solve the debt problem created in part by the generous tax cuts they’ve enjoyed for the past decade.

As a consequence few in Washingtonbelieve that the special committee will produce anything but gridlock. Sounds like a real Charlie Foxtrot.

Here is a clear, concise explainer on the situation from Bloomberg’s Julie H. Davis.

Inquirer Politics Writer
We encourage respectful comments but reserve the right to delete anything that doesn't contribute to an engaging dialogue.
Help us moderate this thread by flagging comments that violate our guidelines.

Comment policy: comments are intended to be civil, friendly conversations. Please treat other participants with respect and in a way that you would want to be treated. You are responsible for what you say. And please, stay on topic. If you see an objectionable post, please report it to us using the "Report Abuse" option.

Please note that comments are monitored by staff. We reserve the right at all times to remove any information or materials that are unlawful, threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene, vulgar, pornographic, profane, indecent or otherwise objectionable. Personal attacks, especially on other participants, are not permitted. We reserve the right to permanently block any user who violates these terms and conditions.

Additionally comments that are long, have multiple paragraph breaks, include code, or include hyperlinks may not be posted.

Read 0 comments
comments powered by Disqus
About this blog

Inquirer staff writer Thomas Fitzgerald blogs about national politics.

Reach Thomas at

Tom Fitzgerald
Thomas Fitzgerald Inquirer Politics Writer
Also on
letter icon Newsletter