
When President Obama and the GOP's primary contenders talk up the 2012 election as a choice for voters between two visions for the country's future, it's only about half hyperbole.
We'll see a prelude of this fact in the months between now and November both on the campaign trail and on Capitol Hill as politicians club each other with their past votes and statements on taxes, Medicare, Social Security, and other potent issues. But it's not just rhetoric.
To an unappreciated extent, the legislative whipsawing in 2011 has set the country and the parties up for a major reckoning about the role and size of government at the end of next year. And the outcome of the election will help determine which side of the argument wins.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)When the House GOP's enormous freshman class arrived on Capitol Hill in January, it wasn't uncommon to hear them sound off on the mistakes their predecessors made in 1995. Despite having shut down the government -- twice! -- House Republicans under Newt Gingrich had caved too easily, didn't push hard enough, didn't embody the true spirit of conservatism.
But the new House leadership wasn't so sanguine. Many had lived through the Gingrich revolution and its aftermath. Others had been around long enough to hear tales of it. And so they mapped out a strategy specifically designed to avoid what they believe were the party's '90s-era mistakes.
In other words, the two factions -- the newly energized backbenchers and the veteran leadership -- were pulling each other in opposite directions. The tug of war left the House GOP's strategic center of gravity stuck in an unstable position. The party was committed to fighting as hard as possible, but stopping short of its most conservative members' slash and burn instincts.
The 2011 version of the House GOP, in not always easy coordination with Senate Republicans, would approve must-pass bills, but only after dragging negotiations down to the wire and extracting as many concessions as possible from Senate Dems and the White House each time. We saw that strategy play out over and over again this year, with mixed results for both parties and largely poor results for the country at large.
Here's a quick lookback at a year of living dangerously -- and the series of recurring crises that it produced.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Is the White House taking advantage of the holiday recess to thumb its nose at Congressional Republicans over the nation's debt limit?
That's one interpretation of an announcement Treasury Department officials made today, which sets in motion an automatic increase in borrowing authority while Congress is out of session.
All of this dates back to the destructive summer fight over whether, by how much, and under what conditions to raise the national debt ceiling. Back then, the White House sought over $2 trillion in new borrowing authority -- enough to assure the country avoided another debt limit fight in the middle of election season, when members of Congress might be even more willing to put the country's creditworthiness at risk for short-term political gain.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)
Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) says the right response to the failure of the Super Committee is to let a thousand ad hoc Super Committees bloom.
When the panel failed, it lost all of its power, which was in essence the power to force Congress to hold up-or-down votes on their recommendations -- no amendments, no filibuster.
Lieberman wants to extend these same powers to any sufficiently large bipartisan "gang" in the House or Senate, if they can come up with at least $1.5 trillion in deficit reducing measures over the course of three months.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Former Super Committee co-chair and head of Senate Democrats' 2012 campaign effort Patty Murray will take on the GOP myth that the wealthiest Americans are "job creators" -- and therefore must be protected from higher marginal tax rates.
In prepared floor remarks sent my way, Murray will argue that the GOP has this exactly backwards, and that middle class workers need more money in their pockets -- not the highest earners.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Democratic sources confirm that Harry Reid will try to win GOP support for a new payroll tax holiday by shrinking the size of the overall cut, and offering Republicans a few concessions that they've been pushing for both publicly and behind the scenes.
But their proposal will be partially paid for by a small, temporary income surtax on millionaires, and that will be a tough sell with Republicans, according to a top Republican aide, as the GOP overwhelmingly opposes raising taxes on high-income earners.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)
