
Freshman Sen. Mark Warner has spent a lot of time with President Obama lately.
Warner (D-VA), is one of a handful of former governors serving in the chamber and has deep concerns about the nation's fiscal health. That's one reason he signed a letter suggesting he would not vote to raise the debt limit unless the long term problems were addressed.
But in a broad interview with TPMDC, Warner said while he is worried about the swelling deficit, Congress can't avoid raising the debt limit because it would rile the markets if they didn't.
"At this point you are playing with fire in terms of how markets would react to extending the debt limit," Warner said, adding it's not something to approach with a "cavalier" attitude.
But he said he hopes Obama will move forward on deficit reduction, and suggested a bipartisan commission to evaluate reform in the long term. The panel would put everything on the table for adjustment, from entitlements to discretionary spending programs.
"We're not going to get out of it in a year or two," Warner said.
"There are a number of us on the Democratic side, particularly a lot of newer members who say we can't be here and allowing this red ink for as far as they eye can see. We've got to put a halt on it," he said. "We need to finish health care, refocus on jobs and put in place a longer term plan to get our deficit under control."
While Warner is a freshman senator with little pull, he has fiscal responsibility cred from his days leading Virginia and the ear of the president on these issues.
Warner spent his birthday Tuesday with Obama first at an event at Home Depot and then at a caucus meeting at the White House.
Warner said "the bill is getting better" and said he is waiting for the CBO score, expected at some point today. He said doing nothing is not an option and party leaders expect him to vote for the bill with no trouble.
"We're all waiting to see the details of the manager's amendment," Warner said, adding he wants to make sure the package "doesn't dramatically change" the bill. He said the freshmen senators are likely to get their wishes and have a cost containment amendment included.
Warner said he "had concerns all along about the public option" and he thinks the bill should increase competition, potentially by increasing the numbers of private insurers and nonprofits.
"The price of doing nothing would be a financial disaster in this country," Warner said.
He was surprised more Republicans haven't tried to play ball.
"I'm disappointed my Republican colleagues haven't been more willing" to cooperate, Warner said. "This would have been a better bill if we had 70 votes trying to get to 60 votes rather than 61 trying to get to 60."
Warner, who made millions in the cell phone industry, also said he finds it "amazing" to see business groups opposed to energy reform.
"That's like business groups opposing the Internet in the 90s or in the 80s opposing the cell phone," he said. "China is going to eat our lunch if we don't do something on this."
Steve LaBonne
December 16, 2009 1:02 PM
The long-term problems are tax cuts for the rich and hugely expensive wars. I won't be holding my breath waiting for Warner to address those things.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mike from Arlington
December 16, 2009 1:25 PM
He's right on energy reform. We're going to end up being the consumer of Asian goods if we don't hit the accelerator, damn American Petroleum Institute needs to get a life.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Walter Mitty
December 16, 2009 1:46 PM
Where was all this deficit concern during the eight Bush years? It's funny how Clinton leaves a surplus, Bush comes in and spends like a drunk sailor in port with not one person who is making a stink now saying one damn word, but now that a Democrat is in office it's a huge concern again.
And when a Republican is in office again in four or eight years, they'll disband this committee and spend to their hearts content and the same voices so concerned now will not say a peep.
But hey, nobody in the MSM or heaven-forbid another senator is calling them on their shit, to who in the hell am I to care.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kenga
December 17, 2009 9:56 AM in reply to Walter Mitty
Any ideas how to calculate, or who to ask to calculate, what deficit projections and the national debt would be if we implemented modified Eisenhower tax rates for, say, 5 years, with an automatic sunset provision that returned taxes to Reagan era rates indefinitely thereafter?
We've got more than $10 Trillion in debt.
How big a dent would that make in it?
Not that I'm expecting you to answer personally - but your comment made me start wondering again. I really think it would be a good idea.
Sure, sure - lots of people in FIRE weren't involved in the various fiascoes and crapshoots that created the problems which led to this recession and debt.
That said - how many of them tried to do something about it? The Supreme Court has ruled that "silence implies assent".
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
joejustice
December 16, 2009 2:51 PM
This guy is a Senator? Amazing how he has been totally invisible.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Southern Man
December 16, 2009 4:17 PM in reply to joejustice
Heck, it's preferable to the self-centered grandstanding from the majority of the members. Warner's a policy wonk who wins on his record, not his TV time.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kenga
December 17, 2009 10:09 AM in reply to joejustice
Politicians who want to take up entitlement reform as a means of addressing debt and deficits - i.e. trimming Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, VA benefits, etc. - tend to not like to present a high profile unless they're speaking at the Club for Growth, or dining with Grover Nordquist, and are confident of their unconditional support.
I'm pretty sure Sen. Warner has done neither A or B and has no illusions about C. I don't know enough about his full policy wonk record to have an opinion on whether I think he qualifies as a wonk. But he's suggested opening a door which could lead to gutting some of the most progressive achievements of this nation, in the name of fiscal responsibility.
I haven't heard that he's ever suggested raising more revenue, rather than cutting spending. (Not that it's necessarily a binary situation.)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?