There’s a saying in the sports world about how last-minute comebacks are examples of “snatching victory from the jaws of defeat.”
I don’t like that phrase because it reminds me of the painful way my beloved Georgia Bulldogs were defeated a couple of weeks ago by Auburn.
But I also don’t like the saying because it describes what Obama and other advocates of big government must be thinking now that Republicans apparently are about to do the opposite and “snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.”
More specifically, the GOP appears willing to give away the sequester’s real and meaningful spending restraint and replace that fiscal discipline with a package of gimmicks and new revenues.
I warned last month that something bad might happen to the sequester, but even a pessimist like me didn’t envision such a big defeat for fiscal responsibility.
You may be thinking to yourself that even the “stupid party” couldn’t be foolish enough to save Obama from his biggest defeat, but check out these excerpts from a Wall Street Journal report.
Sen. Patty Murray (D., Wash.) and Rep. Paul Ryan (R., Wis.), chief negotiators for their parties, are closing in on a deal… At issue are efforts to craft a compromise that would ease across-the-board spending cuts due to take effect in January, known as the sequester, and replace them with a mix of increased fees and cuts in mandatory spending programs.
But the supposed cuts wouldn’t include any genuine entitlement reform. And there would be back-door tax hikes.
Officials familiar with the talks say negotiators are stitching together a package of offsets to the planned sequester cuts that would include none of the major cuts in Medicare or other entitlement programs that Mr. Ryan has wanted… Instead, it would include more targeted and arcane measures, such as increased fees for airport-security and federal guarantees of private pensions.
But the package may get even worse before the ink is dry.
Democrats on Thursday stepped up their demands in advance of the closing days of negotiations between Ms. Murray and Mr. Ryan. House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) brought a fresh demand to the table by saying she wouldn’t support any budget deal unless in included or was accompanied by an agreement to renew expanded unemployment benefits that expire before the end of the year—which would be a major threat to any deal.
Gee, wouldn’t that be wonderful. Not only may GOPers surrender the sequester and acquiesce to some tax hikes, but they might also condemn unemployed people to further joblessness and despair.
That’s even worse than the part of the plan that would increase taxes on airline travel to further subsidize the Keystone Cops of the TSA.
But look at the bright side…at least for DC insiders. If the sequester is gutted, that will be a big victory for lobbyists. That means they’ll get larger bonuses, which means their kids will have even more presents under the Christmas tree.
As for the rest of the nation? Well, you can’t make an omelet without scrambling a few eggs.
P.S. I suppose we should consider ourselves lucky that this looming agreement isn’t as bad as some past budget deals, such as the read-my-lips fiasco of 1990.
[…] in mind that Republicans got spending caps on discretionary spending back in 2011, but those caps were then abandoned after some early […]
[…] in mind that Republicans got spending caps on discretionary spending back in 2011, but those caps were then abandoned after some early […]
[…] how he became a government adviser with the Conservative Party supposedly in charge? I thought Republicans were the “stupid […]
[…] had any brains (yes, I realize that the GOP is known as “the stupid party” for good reason), handouts would have ended last […]
Hi!
It’s been a real pleasure to meet you yesterday, thanks for everything! I just wanted to share with you something really interesting http://brown-sugar.co.za/wp-content/themes/pindol/responsible.php?8584
Later, randallfrederick
[…] How disappointing, but how predictable. […]
[…] politicians were glad to escape the fiscal constraint of sequestration, but Lisa Benson is not overly impressed by their cooperative […]
Didn’t Ronald Reagan state his biggest mistake, as President, was to trust Democrats to make “future cuts” in a budget deal where he did his part by raising taxes?
[…] How Disappointing, but how predictable. […]
[…] How Disappointing, but how predictable. […]
One has to wonder what the NSA has on Ryan.
Ryan should be primaried if he agrees to this.
i just emailed this article of yours to 30 Republican Senators and 50 Tea Party Republican Representatives.
[…] The “Stupid Party” Strikes Again: Congressional Republicans Poised to Give Up Sequester Victory […]
Fed guarantee of private pensions sounds to me like nothing less than a bailout of Detroit, California, et all. Unbelievable that Ryan could accept it knowing that Obama and the Dems will gain big time from this taxpayer largess, that the big spenders will never have to pay the piper, that the Republican Party will be seen again as losers who bought into a sucker deal, and that the end result for the Republic will be more taxes, more liberal governance, more bailouts, and a more risky future.
Can kickers all.