Super Congress Getting Even More Super Powers In Debt Deal

"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear." — Marcus Tullius Cicero

remember this and comprehend its meaning it was as relevant then as it is now

Seriously.. Where are you guys coming up with this stuff?

A few things -
Congress is responsible for the purse strings, and as such its completely constitutional and within their powers to establish a committee to do what they are describing.

12 people, simple majority rules (6 plus 1).

The "Super Congress" has boundaries they are to work within. If that group fails to get a consensus on a certain issue that falls within their zone, their are triggers that automatically begind reducing spending across the board.

Second - Any measure dealing within the Super Congress area are sent to both houses, with the exact same worording, for an up or down vote by the members of Congress. There is no fillibustering and no amendments allowed for the nup or down votes.

A straight UP or DOWN vote - Thats it.

12 people, made up of reps from both houses.

Anything this group does MUST go before the full house and full senate for ALL members to vote on it.

Passes the house, fails in the senate - Bill is dead.
Passes in the Senate, fails in the House - Bill is dead.

The area this falls into is budgeting and taxation -

Some concerns by the Republicans -
A wayward republican coul be swayed to vote with the 6 Democrats to raises taxes.

Some concerns by Democrats -
A wayward Democrat could be swayed to vote with the Republicans to cut spending in Soical Services.

Anything this Super Congress "passes" goes in front of the entire Congress for a full up or down vote.

This is no different than any other joint committee that is in place.

For those lacking in how our Government works this Super Congress is nothing more than a joint committee on spending and finance. In order for a bill to be adopted, a member of the House or Senate will introduce a bill. As it advances through either house, differences emerge beause of dollar amounts, percentgages, language etc etc.

When each house passes their bills, it goes to a joint committee (house / senate) who tweak the final bill so its exactly the same in lnaguage. It then goes to both houses for a vote. If it passes both houses it goes tot he PResident for his signature or veto.

This is EXACTLY what the Su-per Congress is - A joint committee.

Originally posted by SpringHeeledJack

Isn't it QUITE telling that not a single person has responded to my first post?

edit on 3-8-2011 by SpringHeeledJack because: additional content

It was already answered earlier in the thread in a post directly quoting the section of the bill empowering the "Super Congress".

reply to post by GeorgiaGirl

Now we see what this whole Debt Ceiling "crisis" was about. I have a gut feeling that THIS is what the whole point was. The goal was to establish this Super Congress, or Super Committee.

This IS a conspiracy site, right? Anyone else have this feeling?

I think you're spot on with your feeling. I've felt this way for the past year or so. It reminds me so much of the novel Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand, where we see the US govt slowly degenerating into a death spiral of communism. Characters like 'Kip's Ma' and others.:shk:

reply to post by SpringHeeledJack

I'm just asking for members to prove this to a skeptic. Can you provide any proof that this committee is in any way different from others?

Can you give me any other committees where no amendment is allowed, where no debate is allowed, where members are limited to a straight up/down vote, where filibustering is prohibited?

Originally posted by mishigas
reply to post by SpringHeeledJack

 

I'm just asking for members to prove this to a skeptic. Can you provide any proof that this committee is in any way different from others?

Can you give me any other committees where no amendment is allowed, where no debate is allowed, where members are limited to a straight up/down vote, where filibustering is prohibited?

Yes... What you and some others are confusing are the conference committees and actual floor votes. When the committees get together (house/senate) they put the final bill otgether, and it goes back to the house / senate for a vote.

Amendments can be offered up when each house is voting for its version of the bill. Once the final bill is put together and goes for a full vote, amendments arent allowed, only fillibustering, and even then the rules can be changed in either house to allow for or disallow fillibustering.

This comittee, the Super Congress, is the exact same as any other committee.. The only difference is the area of responsibility...

I wish they would put together a judicial committee with the same requirements... A straight up or down vote...

reply to post by Xcathdra


And why should we have a committee of 12 select individuals with no transparency and the power to make automatic cuts across the board if their "priority" bills don't get voted through? This is blackmail and it'll likely be used to force through some of the more wackier, authoritarian bills that have been proposed in the past.

It's people like you that just complacently believe that nothing is wrong that allow dictatorial regimes to arise.

reply to post by Xcathdra

Yes... What you and some others are confusing are the conference committees and actual floor votes. When the committees get together (house/senate) they put the final bill otgether, and it goes back to the house / senate for a vote.

Amendments can be offered up when each house is voting for its version of the bill. Once the final bill is put together and goes for a full vote, amendments arent allowed, only fillibustering, and even then the rules can be changed in either house to allow for or disallow fillibustering.

We often hear of good bills being defeated because of some last minute earmark or some amendment totally unrelated to the main bill being inserted.

This comittee, the Super Congress, is the exact same as any other committee.. The only difference is the area of responsibility...

Not exactly. This group skips any work being done by Congress and instead slaps down a proposal that the regular congress must up/down vote on -- no discussion, no amendment, no fillying.

It reverses the steps to process a bill. Instead of the House proposing a bill, debating it, etc., it skips those steps and goes straight to the end vote. It takes the "from the bottom, up" approach and makes it "from the top, down".

Which other committtees do that?

Originally posted by mishigas
Which other committtees do that?

I can name one: A Politburo.

reply to post by mishigas


The good bills that are defeated are either in the house or senate. They are not complete bills out of committee...

Congress gets a straight up or down vote... It doesnt prevent any member from introducing a bill to make changes after the initial vote.

PEople are getting upset over nothing with this. It doesnt grant any new powers, nor does it circumvent any members or their vote.

My perspective is this:

Don't worry about it. This country has already failed.

We have almost no freedoms left, and one way or another, the ones we still have are going to be systematically destroyed by those truly in power. We are given a false choice at the polls (when our votes are even honored), we vote people into office who are bought and sold by the corporations, and who then go off and play golf while our constitution continues to burn to ashes. The fed set up our money system to be destroyed 100 years ago and it's now coming to fruition. The same corrupt bankers murdered thousands of Americans on 9/11, to justify more murders through war, seizure of foreign assets and further destruction of our freedoms. We bend over to let the TSA sexually molest us and our children. We have a nation of absent-father ADHD-diagnosed ritalin children.

And through all this, most of the populace is still asleep. Because entertainment is far more important. And most Americans who believe themselves to be politically aware (including many on this forum) are completely co-opted and brainwashed by the right/left propaganda lie.

Super congress?? WHO GIVES A #.

The breaking point will still be reached. The end of the story is still going to be the same.

So,they have until November to have a meeting.I have a feeling something will come up that they will use to extend the existence of the Super Congress just like everytime something happens that allows them to renew the Patriot Act.

Originally posted by mike dangerously
So,they have until November to have a meeting.I have a feeling something will come up that they will use to extend the existence of the Super Congress just like everytime something happens that allows them to renew the Patriot Act.

You're a pretty smart cookie. A Dr. Milton Friedman once said, "Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program."

The super congress is definitely here to stay.

Originally posted by Kojiro
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

And why should we have a committee of 12 select individuals with no transparency and the power to make automatic cuts across the board if their "priority" bills don't get voted through? This is blackmail and it'll likely be used to force through some of the more wackier, authoritarian bills that have been proposed in the past.

It's people like you that just complacently believe that nothing is wrong that allow dictatorial regimes to arise.

edit on 8/3/2011 by Kojiro because: (no reason given)

Ignorance and fear mongering aside, go back and read what this committee does. When done, read the Constitution.

Secondly please look up the type of government the US has - Here is a hint, its not a democracy.

Once completed, compare, contrast and get back to us.

By the way, its people like you that are ok with the rise of dictators. Reason being you have absolutely no understanding of how your government works.

The only thing this committee dals with is the budget, specifically how much money the government gets to spend. There is plenty of transparency being once the bill goes to both houses its a clear up or down vote. The only time the cuts become automatic is when the committee cant agree on a budget. At that point several triggers are present that begins reducing specnding in some key areas, namely the DOD bufget as well as Social spending.

It does not prevent any bills submitted by Congress (either house) who wish to make changes or create a new program etc.

All this bill does is forces Congress to decide on the amount of money in the government budget and thats it.

Again, nice effort on the fear mongering part though.... I love it when fear is based on ignorance.

reply to post by Kojiro

reply to post by Xcathdra


And why should we have a committee of 12 select individuals with no transparency and the power to make automatic cuts across the board if their "priority" bills don't get voted through? This is blackmail and it'll likely be used to force through some of the more wackier, authoritarian bills that have been proposed in the past.

When I first heard of this committee, I immediately thought.."Here comes Cap and Trade". That was before I had even half-studied the thing.

Sometimes my (considerable) gut speaks the truth...

reply to post by Xcathdra

The only thing this committee dals with is the budget, specifically how much money the government gets to spend.

And we all know that budget committees are the real power in any govt.

All this bill does is forces Congress to decide on the amount of money in the government budget and thats it.

It's a little more than that. Their main goal is to create a goal of where spending cuts will come from. That is the main danger of such a committee. They have the power to actually affect elections by helping certain agendas to be passed.

Xcathdra, I normally agree with your pov. But this time, not. Let's debate rationally.

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by Kojiro
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

And why should we have a committee of 12 select individuals with no transparency and the power to make automatic cuts across the board if their "priority" bills don't get voted through? This is blackmail and it'll likely be used to force through some of the more wackier, authoritarian bills that have been proposed in the past.

It's people like you that just complacently believe that nothing is wrong that allow dictatorial regimes to arise.

edit on 8/3/2011 by Kojiro because: (no reason given)

Ignorance and fear mongering aside, go back and read what this committee does. When done, read the Constitution.

Secondly please look up the type of government the US has - Here is a hint, its not a democracy.

HAHAHA! I never said it was. Go back and read that, chump.

Once completed, compare, contrast and get back to us.

By the way, its people like you that are ok with the rise of dictators. Reason being you have absolutely no understanding of how your government works.

Bzzt! Wrong!

One, I do know how the government works. Civics was one of my favorite subjects. I'm familiar with how a bill becomes a law and I don't need Schoolhouse Rock tell me like most people.

Two, folks who just let crap like this super congress slide past the radar, giving into some fearmongering about budget default this or terrorist attack that are responsible. Hitler didn't get the Third Reich going without the Reichstagg fire and riots after all. Corrupt regimes create the fear and then pass seemingly harmless bills to "remedy" the issue. You're seeing that now with the super congress.

The only thing this committee dals with is the budget,

Keep telling yourself that if it helps you sleep comfortably with the rest of the sheeple.

Baaaa-aaaaah!

specifically how much money the government gets to spend. There is plenty of transparency being once the bill goes to both houses its a clear up or down vote. The only time the cuts become automatic is when the committee cant agree on a budget. At that point several triggers are present that begins reducing specnding in some key areas, namely the DOD bufget as well as Social spending.

It does not prevent any bills submitted by Congress (either house) who wish to make changes or create a new program etc.

Not yet, anyway.

All this bill does is forces

THERE IT IS! Congress shouldn't be forced to do anything. There's nothing in the Constitution that allows Congress to be forced to do such things. The only mandate for Congress in the Constitution is that it must convene at LEAST (mind you, bare minimum) once (1) a year (that's twelve months in case you were curious, a month is roughly about 30 days long).

Congress to decide on the amount of money in the government budget and thats it.

And the Soviets called it a Politburo. Similar system... an elite committee that oversaw the creation of policy for the rest of the country.

Again, nice effort on the fear mongering part though.... I love it when fear is based on ignorance.

The only fearmongering was that "OMG WE'RE GUNNA DEFAULT OHNOES!" crap they kept hammering us with.

reply to post by Kojiro


Yes.. you are fearmongering and you ahve absolutely no idea how our government works. Congress is responsible for day to day operations when it comes to how someting is funded. Congress can make any committee they want to deal with whatever consitutionally delegated authority they.

Yes, Congress should be forced to do their job, wehich is to represent the American people, not whatever political party they are a member of. Our reps represent their district, not just the people who voted for them.

You need to take more than just one civics class if you want to remain in this discussion. What you have sad so far reinforces why we need to spend more money on education.

If I were you I would go back to what ever institution you took your civic class from and ask for a refund because you got screwed.

Can't we debate this without berating each other's intelligence?

xCathdra,

I would ask what committee in the past could determine the timing of the vote in congress. Are not all bills that come out of committees brought to the floor for a vote at the time the leader of the house decides.

This committee gets to determine when their bill is voted on. They get to set the timing of the vote - which to me is very important - The healthcare bill was passed on Christmas eve. The federal reserve act was passed on Dec 23 when most of congress was away for Christmas. The Debt deal that created this super congress was passed against a deadline Aug 2. The bailout bill was passed in a rush as was the patriot act. Timing is very important.

Besides whats wrong with the whole of congress determining what should be cut in the usual back and forth manner that most bills are agreed upon. Amendments, house version, senate version and so on.

Ron Paul disagrees with you - why does Paul not see it the way you do?

“The legislation produced by this commission will be fast-tracked, and Members will not have the opportunity to offer amendments,” said Paul. “Approval of the recommendations of the “Super Congress” is tied to yet another debt ceiling increase. This guarantees that Members will face tremendous pressure to vote for whatever comes out of this commission– even if it includes tax increases. This provision is an excellent way to keep spending decisions out of the reach of members who are not on board with the leadership’s agenda.”

I would think that Dr. Paul's long time in congress as well as his service on several committees qualifies him quite well on knowing how business is usually done in congress. He seems to think that this is a significant departure from the norm, and I agree with him.

More from Congressman Ron Paul .... (skip to 2:00 when Lou gets to interviewing Paul or watch the whole thing its interesting)



Another interview, this one is much better ...



And now in the words of Reid and McConnell, who of course created this committee ...

Last weekend, HuffPost reported on the extraordinary powers being delegated to the emerging super Congress, but most beltway media has largely dismissing the group as just another Washington commission.

On Sunday, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and his counterpart, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) sought to disabuse everyone of that notion.

"The joint committee -- there are no constraints," Reid said on the Senate floor. "They can look at any program we have in government, any program. ... It has the ability to look at everything."

"Let me emphasize the joint committee," McConnell said Sunday morning on CNN's "State of the Union." "In the early stages of this discussion, the press was talking about another commission. This is not a commission. This is a powerful, joint committee with a equal number of Republicans and Senate -- equal number of Republicans and Democrats, and, to make recommendation back to the Senate and House by Thanksgiving of this year for an up or down vote. Think of the base closing legislation that we passed a few years ago for an up or down vote in the Senate."

Ask yourself what makes it powerful? Why do the creators not see this as an ordinary commission?

reply to post by MegaMind


The leader of the House and Senate get to decide the agenda as to when bills make it up for debate or a vote. When this committee was created both houses agreed their bills would go directly to a floor vote. The committee itself did not decide that, but the Leadership of the House and Senate when they created the committee, which is within their province to do.

There have been bills in the past that have gone straight to a vote on the floor, so this is not new. The only thing that makes it stand out is the ability of the committee to be the originator of the bill. Usually its introduced in the house or the senate, debated, tweaked, changed, amendments etc before it makes it into committee for additional review and tweaking, then it goes to the conference committees (joint committees) to work out the differences between the House and Senate version of the bill.

This is nothing but fast tracked legislation on steroids. Both houses get to vote completely on the bill, up or down. It does not prevent members of either house from going back and creating legislation that can affect the budget that is passed.

This eliminates the one area almost all of us on this site have complained about - pork spending.

Before members would offer amendments at the last minute that would earmark funding for some pet project. The earmark would be ignored so the bill could pass, thereby passing the earmark as well. Since they can no longer attach amendments / earmarks to the budget, it effectively eliminates thos additions, forcing them to be added to less important bills where they are going to stand out more.

This is not new.... Congress is within its authority to do this... It does not present any injury to seperation of powers nor does it violate any constitutional requirements. So long as the power origionates with Congress, Congress can delegate that power to whomever. It does not prevent any person from voting on bills, nor does it strip away any of the representatives abilities.

As far as some of the other rules, those rules re established by the rules committee for each side (House and Senate). Those rules can be changed at any time, and because they are essentially Roberts Rules of Order, they have nothing to do with the Constitution or any other laws.

Roberts Rules of Order -
* - Setting time limits on members to speak in front of the House / Senate on whichever topic.
* - establishing rules of conduct and what constitutes an ethics breach.
* - How voice votes are conducted and how the loudness of the nays or yays is used to determine voice votes.

etc etc etc.

To those who think this is constitutionally questionable or think its a breach or curtailment of members abilities, please explain and show which part of the Constitution is being violated.


As far as Dr. Paul goes, I think you hit the nail on the head when you said business as usual. I respect Dr. Paul, but over the years the business as usual model does not work, and he has poointd that out more than any other member of Congress. As I said, members of congress can offer any bills they want that can challenge, change, end etc any bills submitted by the Super Congress. They just cant do it on the origional bill...

This is the same standard both sides of the aisle want for Supreme Court / Federal Court nominees.