Debt Ceiling Compromise SOLUTION???

I gather that the Congressional "Leadership" and the administration have cobbled together a "compromise" that will "solve" our problems. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that this "compromise" solution will reduce the deficit by $917 billion—OVER THE NEXT TEN YEARS!

In exchange, it will let the President have a $900 billion increase in the debt ceiling—right away!

This plan will reduce the Fiscal Year 2012 budget deficit by a whole $22 billion—in what’s expected to be an over ONE TRILLION DOLLAR DEFICIT!!!

That is, frankly, insulting, especially in light of the fact that at least three secondary ratings agencies have ALREADY DOWNGRADED THE US CREDIT RATING!

All three agencies cited our massive level of debt, and skepticism that the U.S. government can ever control its spendthrift ways, as reasons for their actions.

For example, the Egan-Jones Ratings Company, which enjoys the same level of recognition from the Securities and Exchange Commission as S&P or Moody’s, lowered its rating of U.S. debt from AAA to AA+ two weeks ago.

Weiss Ratings of Jupiter, Florida already had the U.S. government at a “fair” rating of “C.” Weiss knocked the United States down to C-minus last week, which I understand is “the Standard & Poor’s equivalent of one notch above ‘junk’ status.” That’s just wonderful! And why did Weiss do this? This is their reason: "OUR DOWNGRADE TODAY IS NOT CONTINGENT ON THE OUTCOME OF THE DEBT CEILING DEBATE IN WASHINGTON. (Emphasis mine) It is driven exclusively by the numbers, which indicate that, in addition to a decline in the long-standing weaknesses we noted three months ago, the U.S. has already lost the golden halo that helped guarantee liquidity and acceptance of its government securities in global markets."

The third rating agency is Chinese, Dagong Global Credit Rating. They fret about “the slowdown of growth, the high financial deficits, and rising debt dependency,” which jeopardize America’s “actual ability and intention to repay its debts.”

I thought the "Cut, Cap and Balance" debt ceiling and balanced-budget plan which left the House recently and which was tabled in the Senate was too little, too late, but anyone who votes for this abomination that has been crafted by our national "leadership" obviously DOES NOT HAVE THE LONG-TERM BEST INTERESTS OF THE UNITED STATES UPPERMOST IN THEIR MINDS!

Gimme Money or I Stick it to the Poor

In reply to President Obama's threat (ala Mayor Richard Daly Chicago style) to not pay Social Security if he doesn't get his debt ceiling increase, I suggest that a bill be introduced in Congress requiring that such funds as are available without borrowing be earmarked for payment of government expenses in the following order:

1. Payment toward the interest on the national debt. (Current revenues will cover it so we might as well keep the credit of the US as high as possible for the time being.)

2. Payment of Social Security and Medicare benefits. (These are real Americans who paid real money into FDR's national pension plan and LBJ's effort to nationalize health care. As members of arguably the least flexible cohort of our population, they deserve the most consideration.)

3. Payment of the wages of members of the US Armed Services (NOT DOD civilians). (These are people who have elected to give a part of (and in some cases, all) their lives to the USA. If anybody deserves more than a fair shake, these persons do.)

4. Payment of benefits to disabled veterans. These are Americans who gave a part of their life to their country and are now crippled to one extent or another as a result of that service. (America owes them a little extra consideration, especially since their service has decreased their ability to be flexible and resourceful in the face of hardship.)

5. Payment of benefits to all other veterans. (Having given a part of their lives to their country, it seems that they should stand at the head of the line for all other government beneficiaries.)

6. Payment of contracts, wages and benefits to all other federal contractors and employees except for elected officials and their staffs. Prioritization of payment could be left in the hands of the President. High priority employees would be paid first and the remainder would be paid in order of priority until such time as funds run out.

7. Payment of wages and benefits to elected Federal officials and their staffs. (These are the people who screwed the system up and really don't deserve to get paid anything until they have gotten everything fixed.)

Balanced Budget Amendment

The shenanigans inside the imperial beltway have gotten my dander up (again). On a more positive note, I hope that the current impasse will give us an opportunity to impose a Balanced Budget Amendment onto the crooks that we have elected to work (ostensibly for us) inside the imperial beltway. I guess my real bottom line is that, if I had to, I would give the Democrats everything they wanted on the debt ceiling debate IF I could get an ironclad guarantee that a balanced budget amendment with teeth would go forth to the States for ratification.

Such an amendment has to have teeth or Congress will go back to ignoring the Constitution just like they are wont to do now. An old saying is that, "Locks are meant to keep honest people honest." Well, a balanced budget amendment that gives the States power to enforce it is a device to keep honest Congresspersons honest.

I see that there are several resolutions that have been submitted in Congress to create a balanced budget amendment. They all seem fairly similar but I will address my comments to SJ Res 5 which is the one that I guess is most likely to go forward. For those who are interested, the text can be found at: http://thomas.loc.gov/home/thomas.php where you can do a search on "SJ Res 5" in order to gain access to it.

I suggest the following change (in caps) to Section 5: The limit on the debt of the United States held by the public shall not be increased, unless two-thirds of the whole number of each House of Congress shall provide for such an increase by a roll call vote. ANY INCREASE IN THE DEBT LIMIT SHALL SUNSET FIVE YEARS AFTER BEING RAISED UNLESS CONGRESS SHALL HAVE PROVIDED FOR AN EARLIER SUNSET DATE. THE DEBT LIMIT MAY ALWAYS BE LOWERED IF A MAJORITY OF THE WHOLE NUMBER OF EACH HOUSE OF CONGRESS SHALL PROVIDE FOR SUCH A DECREASE BY A ROLL CALL VOTE.

This change is intended to prevent the debt limit from being raised higher and higher over a period of time as one profligate Congress after another comes into office every ten years or so and raises the debt limit in order to buy whatever political advantage that may be obtained irrespective of what is best for the nation.

I would like to see the following change (in caps) made to Section 6: Any Member of Congress shall have standing and a cause of action to seek judicial enforcement of this article, when authorized to do so by a petition signed by one-third of the Members of either House of Congress. LIKEWISE, ANY STATE OF THE UNION SHALL HAVE STANDING AND A CAUSE OF ACTION TO SEEK JUDICIAL ENFORCEMENT OF THIS ARTICLE. IN ADDITION, ANY STATE MAY IMPEACH AND RECALL ANY MEMBER OF THEIR CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION WHO WAS INSTRUMENTAL IN VIOLATING THIS ARTICLE. IN THE EVENT THAT THE PRESIDENT APPEARS TO BE COMPLICIT IN THE VIOLATION OF THIS ARTICLE, AND THE HOUSE FAILS TO IMPEACH HIM, HE MAY BE IMPEACHED BY THE ACTION OF A MAJORITY OF THE STATES. IF THE PRESIDENT IS IMPEACHED BY A MAJORITY OF THE STATES, HE SHALL BE TRIED BY A CONGRESS OF ALL THE STATE GOVERNORS OF THE UNION AND SHALL BE REMOVED FROM OFFICE IF CONVICTED OF BEING IN VIOLATION OF THIS ARTICLE. No court of the United States or of any State shall order any increase in revenue to enforce this article.

I believe that this change is necessary because Congress and successive administrations, when left to their own devices, over the last 50 years (and arguably much longer), has demonstrated about as much fiscal responsibility as a gambling addict demonstrates in a casino. Congress and the President need to know that the States are looking over their shoulders and are empowered to do something about any exhibition of fiscal irresponsibility. After all, it is patently obvious that the Federal government, given enough time—and in spite of the famously lauded separation of central government powers (executive, legislative and judicial), is fully capable of turning our Federal Union with a central government of limited powers into a unitary government attired in a federal fig leaf.

Based on the sad state of our national finances, I will be totally amazed if, for the short term at least, it will not be entirely necessary to raise the debt ceiling. Therefore, what I want to see is an omnibus bill that both raises the debt limit AND sends a balanced budget amendment to the States for ratification! It is NOT acceptable that the debt ceiling is raised in exchange for a PROMISE to pass a balanced budget amendment! I fully expect that the current administration would renege on any such promise!