Bite Size Post – Debt Ceiling Negotiations

Bite Size Post – Debt Ceiling Negotiations

As the Debt Ceiling debate rages on and we get closer to the August 2^nd deadline, tension in the public is mounting while optimism is fading that a compromise will be reached.  Each side, both Republican and Democrats, believes its party’s plans are in the best interest of the country, however I am NOT looking to evaluated the merits of each parties economic platforms but solely the manner in which they are currently negotiating the deal. 

Both sides have been using the line “everything is on the table” however in reality both sides have non-negotiable terms, some more detrimental to the negotiating process than others. There are two ways to balance the budget, cut spending and increase revenue. Republicans before even sitting down at the negotiating table have stated increasing revenue is not an option; this is NOT an “everything is on the table” approach.  This double talk is the core issue holding up a potential deal on the debt ceiling.  Democrats have signaled that they are willing to cut spending in a multitude of areas to curb our rising national debt; however Democrats are also pushing for revenue increases to lower the amount of spending cuts required to balance our budget.  Legislation is accomplished through compromise, If Republicans are unwilling compromise and fail to get a deal done, it will have an adverse affect on our economy.  Whether you support Republican or Democratic economic policy the private sector needs STABILITY before it will invest (create jobs), and a good first step to stability is reaching a deal on the debt ceiling. 

What are your thoughts?

UPDATED - 7/5/2011

New York Times Columnist David Brooks wrote an Op-Ed piece outlining the debt ceiling debate, outlining the same problems which start from inside the Republican Party....

"If the debt ceiling talks fail, independents voters will see that Democrats were willing to compromise but Republicans were not. If responsible Republicans don’t take control, independents will conclude that Republican fanaticism caused this default. They will conclude that Republicans are not fit to govern.... And they will be right. "

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/05/opinion/05brooks.html?_r=1&ref=opinion 

UPDATED 7-15-11

MSNBC’s Morning Joe perfectly captures Republican’s negotiation position in the Debt talks. Republicans will not agree to ANY deal which creates a net revenue increase, WHY? Because the ultimate Republican goal is NOT debt reduction, its goal is the reduction of government. The Republican’s goal is to make government smaller, which is arguable as a positive or negative, but the truly important note is the refusal of Republicans to compromise to get a deal done.  Our government is divided, Republicans control the House of Representatives and Democrats control the Senate and White House.  Compromise is the ONLY way to pass legislation, however in spite of multiple bipartisan and independent sources saying that revenue increases must be apart of any real debt reduction, Republicans refuse to  act responsibly and put the best interest of the nation before their own political agendas. 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036789/ns/msnbc_tv-morning_joe/#43767349 
**(If you don't have 18 minutes to watch the whole video skip to 11:01)**

Translation of political talk into real world terminology:

“Take hikes” – overall increase of tax revenue to the federal government (not necessarily increased tax RATES)

“cut spending” – decrease/elimination of government programs and assistance

“The out years” – Time after 2012 elections

“Job creators” – Individuals and businesses who make over $250,000/per year

“August 2nd Deadline” –the date the government will not have the money to pay for ALL our current responsibilities and programs

“The Grand Bargain” – 4 trillion dollar/10 year agreement between Republicans and Democrats

“Tax loopholes” – Exceptions that business/corporations use to avoid paying the Federal tax rate

"Triangulating" - A political stance/position attempting to have mass appeal across political lines can also be reffered to as “moving/shifting to the center”