[rostpribru]

The flurry of activity in GOP meetings this weekend now revolves around saving face while allowing a debt ceiling increase to move forward. It could get a little acrobatic. For instance, a Boehner plan under consideration would involve voting on a pair of bills formalizing intended to put their program cut demands and balanced budget demands up for a vote. The bills don't stand a chance of becoming low, they're intended solely to allow Tea Party house members to go back to their constituents able to say they voted against Obama.

It's expected that something closer to the McConnell / Reid compromise will be taken up for vote by next week, with the only real hurdles to passage expected to be filibuster attempts by the likes of Jim DeMint. I'd frankly be surprised if Michelle Bachmann doesn't see an opportunity to use a filibuster as an opportunity for campaign grandstanding.

LA Times: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,3724140.story

For weeks, GOP conservatives, particularly in the House, have issued demands about what they would require in exchange for their votes to increase the debt limit. In negotiations with the White House, Republican leaders have found those demands were unattainable. Unwilling to risk the economic and political consequences of a federal default, which could come as early as Aug. 2, they have started the difficult process of standing down.

At a closed-door meeting Friday morning, GOP leaders turned to their most trusted budget expert, Rep. Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin, to explain to rank-and-file members what many others have come to understand: A fiscal meltdown could occur if Congress fails to raise the debt ceiling.

House Speaker John A. Boehner of Ohio underscored the point to dispel the notion that failure to allow more borrowing is an option.

"He said if we pass Aug. 2, it would be like 'Star Wars,'" said Rep. Scott DesJarlais, a freshman from Tennessee. "I don't think the people who are railing against raising the debt ceiling fully understand that."

The warnings appeared to have softened the views of at least some House members who, until now, were inclined to dismiss statements by administration officials, business leaders and outside economists that the economic impact would be dire if the federal government were suddenly unable to pay its bills.

Freshman Rep. Steve Womack (R-Ark.) said the presentation about skyrocketing interest rates that could result from downgraded bond ratings was "sobering."

"It illustrates to us that doing nothing is unacceptable," he said. "I think the conference understands this is a defining moment for us. It's time to put the next election aside."

[adverwork]

...

It's expected that something closer to the McConnell / Reid compromise will be taken up for vote by next week, with the only real hurdles to passage expected to be filibuster attempts by the likes of Jim DeMint. I'd frankly be surprised if Michelle Bachmann doesn't see an opportunity to use a filibuster as an opportunity for campaign grandstanding.

LA Times: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,3724140.story

Time for you to get schooled Richard. In the alternative reality in which you live is Michelle Bachman a US Senator or does the House of Reps still have the filibuster which in my world was eliminated before the Civil War? So please refrain from calling Michelle Bachmann ignorant while until you have at least s minimal understanding of the same.

BTW In your alternative reality did Pres. Obama's massive spending spree bring us out of the recession rather than drive us to the brink of default?

[konanoileaski]

Thanks for the clarification on the Bachmann point. I forgot there was no filibuster in the House. Though that probably won't keep Bachmann from grandstanding within her time granted and then heading straight to a Fox News camera to pick up where she left off.

The assessment of most economists is that the Obama stimulus kept the recession from being much worse that is was, perhaps even preventing a depression.

USA Today: http://www.usatoday.com/money/econom...lus30_CV_N.htm

Eighteen months later, the consensus among economists is that the stimulus worked in staving off a rerun of the 1930s. But the spending's impact was dwarfed by other crisis-fighting tools deployed by the Bush and Obama administrations, including costly efforts to stabilize crippled banks and the Fed's unconventional monetary policy.

...

It's no surprise that the administration would proclaim its own policies a success. But its verdict is backed by economists at Goldman Sachs, IHS Global Insight, JPMorgan Chase and Macroeconomic Advisers, who say the stimulus boosted gross domestic product by 2.1% to 2.7%.

It's impossible to determine precisely how many jobs or how much growth the stimulus program caused. In a nearly $14 trillion economy, economists can't go employer to employer counting new hires. And there are too many moving parts to confidently link any single factor with individual hiring decisions. Roughly one-third of the stimulus, for example, came in the form of tax cuts, which are designed to boost demand for a wide array of products and eventually result in related hiring.

But to estimate the answers to such questions, economists rely on models based on historical relationships between various policies and real-world results. Earlier this month, Zandi and co-author Alan Blinder, former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve, released the most detailed assessment of the government's efforts to combat the so-called Great Recession. Neither economist is regarded as a partisan firebrand. Zandi, for example, backed John McCain in the 2008 presidential campaign and has advised members of both parties.

Their conclusion: The fiscal stimulus created 2.7 million jobs and added $460 billion to gross domestic product. Unemployment would be 11% today if the stimulus hadn't been passed and 16.5% if neither the fiscal stimulus nor the banks' rescue had been enacted, according to Zandi and Blinder. "It's pretty hard to deny that it had a measurable impact," Zandi said.

[scemHeish]

Sen. Demint was on Meet the Press this morning. When David Gregory quoted Tim Geithner as saying there was no alternative to raising the debt ceiling, Demint seemed to agree but then launched into cut, cap and balance plan (CCB). When Gregory pressed him, Demint gave no specifics on what or how much to cut, what or how much to cap, but did concede that the balance budget amendment (BBA) would likely take 10+ years to go through the states if it even passed the Senate.

Gregory then asked Mr. Demint, "If the Senate does not pass the BBA, will you still raise the debt ceiling?" Demint said he hoped the president wouldn't put us through that, but... and Gregory interrupted him and repeated the question.

Demint asnwered, "We're not going to default. (Jack Lew, Pres. Obama's budget director) said earlier we won't meet some obligations but we're not going to default." Mr. Lew was on the program earlier, but did not say that; in fact, he said just the opposite, that the Congress must pass the debt ceiling or the government could not meet its obligations.

Demint again launched into CCB without specifics, adding that there had been no proposal from the president or the Democratic Senate for debt reduction and the CCB was the only plan.

Gregory reminded the Senator about the $4 trillion proposal from Pres. Obama and the McConnell/Reid plan in the Senate and Demint responded, "We can't vote on proposals. The CCB is the only plan on the table."

There you go. That's where Sen. Demint and the Tea Party are in "negotiations." There are none.