In Which We Find That John Carney Still Doesn’t Get It
There are still 14 million people unemployed in America and today we find that John Carney is still working on stuff that creates no jobs:
- Introducing a Balanced Budget Amendment — one that is different than the one that is being voted on later in the week by the House:
because Rep. Carney’s legislation protects Social Security and allows for public investments by separating the federal capital and operating budgets. It also provides for extenuating circumstances by allowing outlays to exceed receipts in a time of economic recession, declared war, or imminent national security threat as voted on by Congress.
Great. In addition to creating no jobs, this Balanced Budget Amendment does exactly what the other one does. It lets people burnish their budget cred in public. This — much like Coons’ exercise in bipartisanship — is meant to be theater. Because you know something interesting? Budgets originate in the House. If the House cared about producing a balanced budget, they’d get their staff to churn out one. This amendment fetish is just a way to keep one upping people on this budget without having to do the hard work of producing a balanced budget OR in having to do the hard work of selling the amendment to a bunch of states. The federal government is meant to be a different animal than state governments and while I’m killing metaphors here, the federal government budget isn’t like a household budget. So while I’m still astonished that *this* is the Congressman’s priority while 14 million of his fellow citizens are unemployed, I’m starting to be insulted by these guys trying to sell me this balanced budget snake oil for something they could do with a little leadership and discipline.
- Shows Up at a Bipartisan Press Conference to Urge the Super Committee to Go Big — as in cutting the deficit more than $1.2 trillion.
OK. Except that isn’t about job creation, EITHER. And it doesn’t look to me like Representative Carney is following the travails of this committee. They look like they are heading for failure — the latest deal floated is that the GOP might consider tax hikes if Dems agree to privatize Medicare. Carney boasted of this event on his Facebook page (where you should go to tell him what you think his priorities should be):
I just got back to my office after participating in a bipartisan press conference urging the Super Committee to “go big.” Great turnout from Democrats and Republicans from House and Senate who want the Super Committee to agree on a large deal that is balanced, responsible, and fair.
Notwithstanding the fact that this has nothing to do with employment — and I’m reminding everyone that fuller employment goes someway towards genuine deficit reduction — I want Carney to explain how he thinks there is going to be balanced, responsible or fair from people who refuse to consider raising revenue and who think that privatizing Medicare is a responsible thing to do?
So c’mon, Representative Carney — what we don’t need is more theater. We need serious leadership and governing to get the jobs back. And it doesn’t help that you are actually proud of spending time and energy on symbolic stuff that has not one thing to do with bringing jobs or the economy back.
Tags: Deficit Peacocks, John Carney
Tom Carper we already knew would talk out of both sides of his mouth on this thing:
Carper also cites a poll the he produces no data for. Carney additionally weighs in with a tax reform approach, which is fine as it goes, but not exactly the work of the Super committee. My guess is that if the Super Committee goes bust, this tax reform path is what they’ll all be talking about next.
And if the credit rating agencies downgrade US debt, it isn’t because of the size of the debt, it is for the march towards banana republic-hood that they guys keep working towards.
And, right on time, here we have Tom Carper’s ‘bipartisan’ proposal to ruin the economy:
http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20111117/NEWS02/111170339/Group-Big-cuts-right-solution
Nothing will get the economy moving faster than $4 trillion in cuts over a decade. The RoboCarper money quote:
“That would send a great signal that we can govern, that we can be fiscally responsible, that we can provide certainty on the tax code in this country.”
It would also send a great signal that putative Democrats and hostile Rethugs can successfully work together to destroy what is left of our economy. BTW, to whom is this signal being sent? The ever-increasing ranks of the unemployed who will be crushed under the weight of such a proposal? No, to the bleeping credit agencies that are not so pristine themselves.
Seriously, is there not a Delaware Democrat out there anywhere who is willing to challenge these green-eyeshade ghouls by running as a real Democrat? We already know which side Carper is on, and we’re beginning to realize that Carney and Coons are approaching lost-cause status fast. How about some Democrats who are on the side of the people?
Matt Denn, do you really want to stagnate for six more years as LG when you can make a real difference now? I for, one, think that Denn would slaughter Carper in a one-on-one. And I, for one, don’t think we can afford six more years of Carper.
(Oops, Cass, great minds think alike. And your ‘droid is clearly better trained than my ‘droid. BTW, what’s a ‘droid’?)
“Certainty on the tax code” – that’s rich from a guy who voted against certainty last December when he voted to temporarily extend the Bush tax cuts and throw tax and fiscal policy into chaos for two years. Carper was against certainty before he was for it.
Here’s a hint: The best option for tax reform, deficit reduction, and job creation is also the easiest one: Just let the damn Bush tax cuts expire already.
If Democrats want certainty on the tax code, just do nothing. All you have to do is win your elections, and then let them expire.
Here’s a hint on how to do that: Act like Democrats.
Here’s why “bipartisanship” is so unattractive on Democrats:
When a center-right guy like Mike Castle reaches out to the left, he ends up in the center.
But when a center-right guy like Carney/Carper/Coons reaches out to the right, they end up even further right.
Stop trying to be Mike Castle.
Or if you do want to be Mike Castle, you are standing in the wrong place. Take three giant steps to the left, then start reaching out to the right if you must.
El Som – as you should know, the $4 trillion plan isn’t all cuts. It’s the Simpson Bowles plan – the President’s commission. The plan does include cuts, yes, as well as entitlement reform but also revenue increases. It’s unfair and wrong to just say it’s all cuts.
I find the Bowles-Simpson “revenue increases” to be a specious hoax. They are no substitute for authentic tax increases. The previous Democratic tax reform plan – let the Bush tax cuts expire – is still superior.
Here’s what Senator Coons says in his jobs plan:
“lowers rates while raising revenue” …. Oh my. There’s your Bowles Simpson “revenue increases.” Senator Coons has done gone back to his Reagan roots.
Remember Bowles Simpson is Senator Coons’s “ideal” tax reform plan. So now let’s see what Bowles Simpson itself says about revenues (can you spot the prancing unicorns?):
Carney’s balanced budget does not require a balanced budget:
It also provides for extenuating circumstances by allowing outlays to exceed receipts in a time of economic recession, declared war, or imminent national security threat…
In other words, as long as there are Republicans… “Just kidding! Spend away!!”
The Catfood Commission is ‘bipartisan’ in the same way (only perhaps worse) that the Carper, Carney and/or Coons proposals are bipartisan. Since when are ‘bipartisan’ and ‘capitulation’ synonyms?
Choose your term: “Good Jews”, “Stockholm Syndromed”, these are people who refuse to acknowledge that cooperating with your enemies still gets you, or in this case, the American people, destroyed.
Cutting back on expenditures is a good thing. The problem is that I don’t hear any of these guys looking to seriously ratchet back the river of taxpayer money that flows to corporations. Lots of them are plenty profitable and plenty healthy. Middle class and working class families are not. And it is only the corporate class that is able to even get these guys’ attention. So we end up with a delegation focused like a laser on the issues of the folks they see everyday and that’s not the middle and working class folks who will be asked to bear the brunt of this newfound budget peacockery.