It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Paul Ryan Debt Ceiling Bill: Why Did He Advocate Killing The Grand Bargain?

page: 1
8

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 01:57 AM
link   
Paul Ryan Debt Ceiling Bill: Why Did He Advocate Killing The Grand Bargain?
(huffingtonpost.com)

Do you remember the "Grand Bargain", the showdown over the debt ceiling that the GOP refused to budge on, which caused the AAA bond rating of the United States to be lowered to AA+?

Just as Boehner and the Republicans seemed to be negotiating in good faith with the Democrats to reach a solution, something happened, and Boehner and the GOP shut down the Grand Bargain, the USA lost it's stellar credit rating (for the first time ever) and the interest on the nations debt became billions of dollars more expensive.


The New York Times reported a new and potentially telling anecdote from the height of last summer's debate over raising the debate ceiling.

Ryan, the paper said, urged his own party's leadership to scuttle a grand bargain with President Barack Obama, in part out of concern that a deal may result in a second term for Obama .


This had always been their goal, as soon as Obama had been elected, the GOP made their intentions clear:

"Damn The Country, Obama Must Fail"
(abovetopsecret.com)

The best example of this is spiking the Grand Bargain;


"Boehner was negotiating with Obama. Ryan had gone to Cantor and to Boehner saying he doesn't support the policy, he doesn't think it could be sold to the conference, and, three, he thought it would guarantee the [president's] reelection," said a GOP aide who spoke anonymously in order to discuss private deliberations.


In the Robert Draper book "Do Not Ask What Good We Do", it's known Ryan was among those attending a high-level Republican meeting the night of Obama's inauguration, where it was decided they would obstruct the president at every opportunity. Even if it meant doing a complete flip-flop on some of their own ideas, should Obama embrace them in the spirit of compromise.

To date Republicans have set an all-time record for filibusters in Congress. They have blocked or impeded nearly every recovery act possible. Killing the Grand Bargain and ensuring the bond rating agencies would drop the nations AAA rating was the real goal, as outlined in that January 20 meeting. Republicans have even blocked the Bring Jobs Home Act, one of the most straightforward acts that would simply end tax credits for outsourcing jobs.

The article above is based on the NY Times biography of Ryan;
Conservative Star’s Small-Town Roots
(nytimes.com)
edit on 14-8-2012 by Blackmarketeer because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 02:20 AM
link   
How the Koch's make millions if Republicans crash the Gov?



Any republican that is obsessed with the debt ceiling and cheering it to collapse should read this article by Paul Craig Roberts. He was part of the Reagan admin and co-founded Reaganomics.

The whole republican debt ceiling charade was nothing more than to help their rich friends get richer, have an excuse to strip away social programs, and make Obama/democrats look bad.


This brings us to the most important aspect of the debt ceiling “crisis” that the Republicans are ignoring.

If Republicans become obsessed with their agenda and refuse a reasonable deal, and the Democrats do not cave, the executive branch will be faced with an inability to continue its operations. This could mean, for example, that the troops in the various wars could not be supplied or paid, that air traffic controllers could not be paid, that the US government could not roll over the debt that comes due or issue the new debt that pays for 43% of federal budget expenditures. A shutdown today would be different in its reach from the Newt Gingrich government shutdown in the 1990s. Then the federal government got by with shutting down "nonessential government.” A shutdown today would require halting 43% of federal expenditures. If we were to include the wars, nonessential spending might actually total 43% of expenditures. But, of course, Republicans don't want to include the wars with nonessential spending.

The US dollar could plummet in exchange value and lose its role as world reserve currency. The US would no longer be able to pay its oil bill in its own currency, and as its balance of payments is heavily in the red, the US has no foreign currencies with which to pay its oil import bill. Or its manufactured goods import bill, or any other bill.

We are talking about a crisis beyond anything the world has ever seen. Does anyone think that President Obama is going to just sit there while the power of the US collapses? He doesn’t have to do so. There are presidential directives and executive orders in place, put there by George W. Bush himself, that President Obama can invoke to declare a national emergency, suspend the debt ceiling limit, and continue to issue Treasury debt. This is exactly what would happen.

The consequences would be that the power of the purse would transfer from Congress to the President. It would be the end of the power of Congress. Congress, Republicans and Democrats alike, have already given away to the President Congress’ Constitutional right to decide whether the country goes to war. Now Congress would lose its power over debt, taxes, and the budget itself.

Republicans need to decide whether the advantage of delivering a blow against “leechdom” is worth such extreme risks.


globalresearch.ca...
edit on 14-8-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 03:22 AM
link   
I remember some kind of tax hikes being involved with that deal?

Something like $100 billion a year in tax increases.

Maybe that was the real problem?

The Republicans maybe were trying to stop tax hikes on people in the middle of a recession.

Obama had proposed to Republicans a "grand bargain" that accomplished a host of individual things that are unpopular on their own, but that just might pass as a huge package jammed through Congress with default looming. Obama offered to put Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid cuts on the table in exchange for a tax hike of roughly $100 billion per year over 10 years. Meanwhile, government spending would be cut by roughly three times that amount. It's no small irony that the party's dogmatic opposition to tax increases is costing the GOP its best opportunity to roll back social programs it has long targeted.


"Despite good-faith efforts to find common ground, the White House will not pursue a bigger debt reduction agreement without tax hikes," Boehner said in a statement. "I believe the best approach may be to focus on producing a smaller measure, based on the cuts identified in the Biden-led negotiations, that still meets our call for spending reforms and cuts greater than the amount of any debt limit increase."



I think there was some Democrat oppositions to possible cuts in SS and Medicare (there was already enough Medicare cuts established in ObamaCare via the HHS I thought)

When word leaked out this past week that Obama was proposing cuts to entitlements, Democrats in Congress and outside advocates kicked their opposition into high gear, making it clear that no bargain would win their support if it contained any cuts to Social Security or Medicare beneficiaries. That opposition may have broken the back of the bargain.


link to article from July 2011


All a strange twist just the same.

Sounds like neither side could con the other



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 03:41 AM
link   
The OP is lying. Either with intent or through the talking papers that minions like him receive daily.


S&P cut the long-term U.S. credit rating by one notch to AA-plus on concerns about the government's budget deficit and rising debt burden. The action is likely to eventually raise borrowing costs for the American government, companies and consumers.

"The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government's medium-term debt dynamics," S&P said in a statement.

www.reuters.com...

The stall to inhibit the raise in the debt ceiling was an attempt to stop the credit rating downfall that rests soley on the presidents shoulders.

Rewriting history is of a fail so epic, that only liars, cheats and desparate people would attempt it.

The debt ceiling fight was in July of 2011.

S&P didn't drop America's credit rating until August of 2011. One month AFTER the debt ceiling rose!!!


edit on 14-8-2012 by beezzer because: I like carrots



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 03:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
To date Republicans have set an all-time record for filibusters in Congress. They have blocked or impeded nearly every recovery act possible.


The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

That is an inaccurate statement. You're confusing Cloture votes with the filibuster. The Democrat controlled Senate began voting on pre-emptive cloture motions on virtually everything, eliminating even the chance of a GOP filibuster. Many of these cloture motions have been on votes the majority of GOP Senators stated they were in support of and had no intention of filibustering against. The Democrats have used the cloture as a tool to pull the wool over the voter's eyes in hopes they buy into this "obstructionist GOP" bullcrap. In reality, so long as the bills have held to the PROMISE by Obama of Pay-Go while also not increasing taxes (another PROMISE Obama made and subsequently broke), the GOP has been ready to approve.

This is right up there with passing Obamacare as a budget issue via reconciliation only to discover that it is only legal as a tax policy... which, therefore, makes the entire bill illegal because taxes CANNOT be passed by reconciliation and must ORIGINATE from the House. Forget a living, evolving Constitution, we need a living, evolving dictionary to assist us with the meaning of terms which scarcely changed for centuries until the past few years when they seemingly changed on a daily basis depending on which way the wind was blowing the Democrat majority.

As far as this grand bargain and Paul Ryan goes, does anyone really believe that the US' credit rating wasn't going to take a giant crap regardless? How, exactly, would the US retain its (phoney) AAA+ rating by piling yet more bad debt on top of a mountain of already existing bad debt? Who does that outside the government? "Hey honey, we're almost insolvent, where did that Platinum Master Card pre-approval letter go?" I say this with all honesty and heartfelt emotion... if Obama hadn't failed, this country would be damned, not the other way around. Look at the few issues he was able to ramrod through and then ask "How will our economy survive this?" $5 to $6 Trillion in new debt in 4 years!?!? Praise the Lord that all 4 of those years weren't with a sympathetic, happy to please Congress standing behind him because that figure would probably be double digit trillions by now if it had.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 07:48 AM
link   
reply to post by burdman30ott6
 


111th Senate Breaks A Filibuster Record

The cloture rule is used to break a filibuster. The GOP has also demanded hard quorum calls before a bill can even proceed. That means that if less than 51% are present, no vote can be held. And guess who the missing senators would be? Republicans. After demanding a hard quorum call, there would always be enough GOP members missing to ensure nothing could proceed in the Senate. That is why Democrats were forced to respond with cloture calls. Invoking cloture does not impede the Senate from doing it's job in any way. (What is a Quorum Call?)

Republican Obstruction at Work: Record Number of Filibusters

When the Democrats regained tenuous control of the 110th Congress in 2007, filibusters by the new Republican minority skyrocketed. Following the landslide victory of Barack Obama and progressive Democrats in 2008, there was a clear mandate for change in reform in America, yet the 111th should set a new record for filibusters as part of a clear pattern of obstruction from those who do not want change or reform.


Reaction to Obstruction


Lou Gerber, the Legislative Director of the Communication Workers of America writes, “Under Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Republican Senators have instituted “new math” in which 60 votes have replaced 51 votes as the required majority to pass legislation.”



Ali Frick of ThinkProgress adds, “The Republicans have become experts at using Senate filibusters — or often just the threat of filibusters — to block the Democratic agenda while in the minority.”



There is more. Wes Rackley documents that while only 3 Bush nominees have been held up more than 3 months during his first year, 63 Obama nominees have been subjected to delay tactics, leaving important posts left unfilled.

Conservatives from both parties, but mostly the Republicans have held up health care reform for almost a year now. There was even a manual on procedural ways to obstruct reform written by Sen. Judd Gregg, (R-NH) leaked.


Here is more on that leaked manual instructing GOP Senators on how to block legislation;

GOP Senator Pens Obstruction Manual For Health Care

Sen. Judd Gregg, (R-NH) has penned the equivalent of an obstruction manual -- a how-to for holding up health care reform -- and has distributed the document to his Republican colleagues.

Insisting that it is "critical that Republican senators have a solid understanding of the minority's rights in the Senate," Gregg makes note of all the procedural tools the GOP can use before measures are considered, when they come to the floor and even after passage.

He highlights the use of hard quorum calls for any motion to proceed, as opposed to a far quicker unanimous consent provision. He reminds his colleagues that, absent unanimous consent, they can force the Majority Leader to read any "full-text substitute amendment." And when it comes to offering amendments to the health care bill, the New Hampshire Republican argues that it is the personification of "full, complete, and informed debate," to "offer an unlimited number of amendments -- germane or non-germane -- on any subject."



In a nutshell - the 111th Congress has been the most obstructionist Congress - ever.



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 08:07 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Well Beezer your own source shows you to be the one lying. The drop in the AAA rating came directly from the lack of the debt deal, aka the Grand Bargain, which "failed" (sabotaged, more like). The S&P declared the Grand Bargain did not include enough revenue increases. After the "gang of six" (3 Republicans, 3 Democrats) had agreed with Obama to the Grand Bargain, Boehner and his key TP allies walked out of negotiations. The Grand Bargain was dead, and the S&P responded by lowering the credit rating.

Your post is a perfect example of selective memory and revisionist history.


(Reuters) - The United States lost its top-tier AAA credit rating from Standard & Poor's on Friday in an unprecedented blow to the world's largest economy in the wake of a political battle that took the country to the brink of default.

That political battle was, of course, the Grand Bargain. The thing Paul Ryan feared passing. The thing Paul Ryan stated "if this passes, it will guarantee Obama a second term". Now we know why, after negotiating a debt deal between Obama and the "gang of six", the GOP sabotaged the deal.



White House: S&P downgrade is why Obama 'pushed for grand bargain'


The White House reacted to the Standard & Poor's downgrade of the U.S. credit rating by calling for more bipartisan compromise to "put our nation on a stronger fiscal footing."

But the administration didn't miss the chance to say, in essence, "I told you so."

"Over the past weeks and months the President repeatedly called for substantial deficit reduction through both long-term entitlement changes and revenues through tax reform, with additional measures to spark jobs and strengthen our recovery," press secretary Jay Carney said in a statement.

"That is why the President pushed for a grand bargain that would include all of these elements and require compromise and cooperation from all sides."

S&P, the credit rating firm that reduced the nation's rating from AAA to AA+, said the recent plan to raise the debt limit while reducing the debt "falls short" of its expectations, but also offered broader condemnations of America's political process.


Why The Stock Market Sank. And S&P Downgrades US Debt Because Debt Deal Doesn’t Include More Revenue.


Rating agency Standard and Poors (S&P) downgraded the US credit rating from AAA to AA+ Friday. We’ll see if it has any practical effect in the rates investors will demand from Treasuries due to the downgrade. Our initial guess is it won’t have any effect because investors are not political they are practical and the simple fact is the US Treasury market is the only one big and liquid enough to trust.

As for the downgrade, S&P pointed out the debt ceiling bill didn’t include any revenue increases. S&P knows revenue will have to be raised from current levels, otherwise the goal of real deficit and debt reduction is not possible. So it wasn’t just about cuts, the downgrade came after S&P made the common sense analysis that revenues are necessary as well. Obama’s $4 trillion grand bargain with House Speaker John Boehner included $850 billion in revenue. Boehner walked out when Obama moved the goal post higher, to $1.2 trillion in revenue over 10 years. Obama did that because the ‘gang of six’ (3 Republicans, 3 Democrats) in the Senate agreed to that number in their proposal.



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 08:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


Obama and the dems wanted to raise the debt ceiling. Without adequate revenue (taxes) the credit rating would fall.

Those opposed did not want the debt ceiling increased. They wanted spending curtailed. Obama and the left wanted to increase spending.

Obama failed.
The left failed.

Re-writing history and placing the blame on others (while a common tactic) is also a fail, regardless how many times you use it.

Cloward-Piven.

Look it up.
edit on 14-8-2012 by beezzer because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 12:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


Obama and the dems wanted to raise the debt ceiling. Without adequate revenue (taxes) the credit rating would fall.

Those opposed did not want the debt ceiling increased. They wanted spending curtailed. Obama and the left wanted to increase spending.

Obama failed.
The left failed.

Re-writing history and placing the blame on others (while a common tactic) is also a fail, regardless how many times you use it.

Cloward-Piven.

Look it up.
edit on 14-8-2012 by beezzer because: (no reason given)


The ones who got what they wanted were the Repubs.
How is it the democrats fault for what happened because of what they wanted and not the Republicans fault for what happened because of what they actually did?
You make no sense.



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 03:40 PM
link   
In my opinion, shutting down 43% of the government, ending the wars, and massively reducing spending is the best thing this country needs right now.
If you, me, or anyone else were to run their household budget like the government runs theirs, we would go bankrupt and probably even arrested at some point for failure to pay our debts....the government for some reason is allowed to have a budget that is trillions in the red and borrows money on our china credit card
edit on 8/14/2012 by AnonymousMoose because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 03:59 PM
link   
People needs to understand economics, if you spend more than you make you will always be in debt.

Plain and simple, US deficit is due to the fact that we do no get more revenue than the crocks spend.

And it doesn't matter who is in power is going to stay the same and getting worst.



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by RealSpoke
 


Ryan voted for every debt ceiling hike during his previous 14 years in office, and he and the Repubs raised the debt ceiling 19 times under Bush. The ONLY reason they refused to do it under Obama had to do with making OBama look bad, making the US lost it's credit rating, and making a wad of cash with the Koch brothers.



awesome video by the way



new topics

top topics



 
8

log in

join