The Washington Post reports that Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is pitching a non-deal on the debt ceiling. The proposal is fairly far into the legislative weeds, but it involves having President Obama ask for a request in the debt ceiling, which Republicans would reject. President Obama would veto the rejection, and Republicans would let the veto stand.
Producer Mike Yarvitz forwards this rough verbate of Senator McConnell talking to reporters just now:
We would authorize him to request of us that we raise the debt ceiling for the amount he says he needs ... the way it would work is the legislation would authorize him to get to the amount he says he needs-- based upon the advice of his Secretary of the Treasury-- in three tranches. The first tranche $700 billion, the second tranche $900 billion, the third tranche $900 billion. Once the request is made, it would be appropriate in either or both houses for a resolution of disapproval to be taken up on an expedited procedure ... if the resolution of disapproval achieved a majority, it would go down to him where he could either sign it or veto it. My assumption is that he would veto it. And that veto would be sustained by one-third plus one in either of the houses. That's the way it would work.
...
We would not give him unilateral authority to cut spending on his own, but we would require him to specify cuts he would make, if he could, commensurate with the amount that the tranche is asking for ... this is not my first choice. My first choice is to get an agreement with the President to significantly reduce spending. And we're going to continue to talk to them about that in the hopes that we can get there, because that's what we think is the single biggest problem ... [but] what we're not going to be a party to in the Senate, I'm pretty confident, is default. And the only way you can get an agreement that actually achieves something is when the President signs it. To actually reduce spending requires not just Republicans, but a Democratic Senate and a Democratic President. And we're still hoping to achieve spending reductions that he will sign. That's my first choice.
Senate Republicans would be able to pass three separate resolutions of disapproval, the Washington Post reports. They'd also get $2.5 trillion in proposed spending cuts -- the Biden deal, in essence, or at least the Biden cuts. And they wouldn't have to take the heat for Social Security checks not going out if the government can't pay its bills, which President Obama suggested could happen. The Republicans would win what's there for them to win. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says he's open to considering Mr. McConnell's idea.
In the other chamber, Ezra Klein's got House Majority Leader Eric Cantor's slideshow for the Republican caucus. Plus: Think Progress says it's really 12 chances to blame the president for everything.
Way more on the show, of course. After the jump, the Senate rules about resolutions of disapproval.
What producer Mike's reading on Senate.gov:
The Congressional Review Act of 1996 established expedited (or "fast track") procedures by which Congress may disapprove a broad range of regulatory rules issued by federal agencies by enacting a joint resolution of disapproval. For initial floor consideration, the Act provides an expedited procedure only in the Senate. (The House would likely consider the measure pursuant to a special rule.) The Senate may use the procedure for 60 days of session after the agency transmits the rule to Congress. In both houses, however, to qualify for expedited consideration, a disapproval resolution must be submitted within 60 days after Congress receives the rule, exclusive of recess periods. Pending action on a disapproval resolution, the rule may go into effect, unless it is a “major rule” on which the President or issuing agency does not waive a delay period of 60 calendar days.
If a disapproval resolution is enacted, the rule may not take effect and the agency may issue no substantially similar rule without subsequent statutory authorization. If a rule is disapproved after going into effect, it is "treated as though [it] had never taken effect." If either house rejects a disapproval resolution, the rule may take effect at once. If the President vetoes the resolution, the rule may not take effect for 30 days of session thereafter, unless the House or Senate votes to sustain the veto. If a session of Congress adjourns sine die less than 60 days of session after receiving a rule, the full 60-day periods for action begin anew on the 15th day of session after the next session convenes.
Leave a Comment:
More Smoke and Mirrors from the Republicants! What part of being elected to serve the needs of the Nation and the People do they not understand?
Apparently the core concept.
They only understand the concept of making it look like the Democratic President has been unable to accomplish anything in an effort to get back into the White House--they have been playing politics with our economy for long enough. I mean, our president captured and killed Bin Laden--what more do you want to get off his back?
It's a fact! And the Middle-class are not happy with the overreaching they have been doing either!
I have never seen such petty bickering. Just look at the increases in the debt ceiling- what, like 7 or 8 times under Bush Jr but now, suddenly...... Too bad the election is not this year.
everything after 'being elected'.
It is Punch and Judy. Oh no Mr. Punch, Don't kill the baby! Oh, Mr. Punch killed the baby!
This plan is so contorted, twisted and non comprehensible that of course it will be accepted!
It gets rid of all policy and is all political, a shoo-in.
I thought this was an upbeat take on the 'crisis'
http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2011/07/debt-ceiling-charade-update.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+CalculatedRisk+%28Calculated+Risk%29
I guess $4 trillion in cuts is not significant enough?
Please, Mr. McConnell, just how dumb do you think the American people are?
It isn't that the Republicans could not get to a workable solution... it's that they don't want to.
i thought it was 'starving the beast'. :\
It's the puppet show stage that blocks the view of the emaciated govt straining at the end of its chain with a full bowl of food just out of reach. You can hear its agonized howling, but are too raptured by the Punch and Judy Show to really care. ['Atsthewayyoudoit!] Never mind that it is a real baby thrown to its death from the stage. What's political theater without real death? Kabuki.
This is so ridiculous I actually laughed out loud. Could it actually work that way?? Would a veto of a disapproval actually constitute an approval??
I didn't go to law school like I should have, so I could use some help on this one.
As I remember from government in classes this is what it means and I hope I remember correctly: Veto, The vested power or constitutional right of one branch or department of government to refuse approval of measures proposed by another department, especially the power of a chief executive to reject a bill passed by the legislature and thus prevent or delay its enactment into law.
It's at times like this, Cora, that I wish I knew a stoner. Then I could test my theory that you have to be stoned to understand Mitch McConnell.
I'm not sure I understand this convoluted idea? Can someone help me out.
Rachel, you will need to discuss this later on the show. Help us out!
It seems like they are setting it up so they can blame him for cutting the services that they demand be cut.
Do something real unpopular by having your opponent take the blame, sweet.
It means heads I win, tails you lose.
This idea is too screwy and convoluted. If this kind of legislating worked, why not have Obama "request" single-payer health care, and veto the rejection?
Please tell me this is a nightmare. These obstructionist do-nothing republicans are proposing to be let off the hook by the president while slapping him around? Why on earth should he let them off the hook? Every day he should REMOVE an offered cut until these people get off the toilet and wipe already.
Thank you
I think the President should beat the Republicans over the head with the debt ceiling, instead of letting them slither away. If he takes the case to the public, the President will win this argument because the Republicans are trying to protect indefensible tax subsidies. Make the Republicans feel the heat of public opinion and they will come around to ending the subsidies. Even the Tea Party members will find themselves in trouble with their constituency.
Oh for heaven's sake, get real will you. Knowing what your alterior motives are this sounds really ridiculous.
Anytime I think that politicians cannot get ANY dumber , the current batch of republicans prove me wrong ! We are against raising the debt ceiling but if you are an idiot here is how you can do it Mr Obama ?????? Someone needs to put ALOT more fish in their diet !
Ugh, it's fishy enough. All I could think when I heard about it was that storybook quote: "'Come into my parlor,' said the spider to the fly."
This veto dance maneuver is the only way Republicans can save face, get some of what they want, and also have another reason to blame Obama for their own bad choices (which is their main goal). Surely, by now, democrats and Mr. Obama should know that any scenario presented by the GOP as a "win-win" proposal is really a "We win, you lose, and we can't wait to badmouth you later for it" or a "We win, you pay" proposal. Caveat emptor!
I hope Mr. Obama is alert enough to see what's really going on here.
I'm quite sure he is aware of what's taking place. I think he does have the better hand. People need to be aware of what HE is doing. He tells us all the time, he needs us to help bring about change. He stated many times we have to be willing to meet in the middle if we want to get anything done. I have no problem with expressing what the citizens want, none whatsoever. But he is right on the money with his goal to get anything done, we have to be willing to compromise. He could go out there on the air and be nasty and accusatory, (like so many Republicans) but all that gets us is another wall. The Republicans are so sensitive when they are called out for what they are doing. Representing the upper crust only. We have enough walls and we have to get Congress to do its job. The Congress is the body that needs to grow up and stop having tantrums and playing games.
Sing it with me:
"I'm just a bill, yes I'm only a bill..." Let's see what we can come up with.
"Well, I start in the White House, in the President's mind.
'Cause there's no other bills, for the President to sign.
Now it's off to the Senate, for Republicans to deny.
Then back to the White House, where I skip to the front of the line.
For the President to veto, and not to sign.
Cause if he signs me, then I ...won't be a law?"
I'm sure others can do better, but you get the point.
No need-- you did well.
I am amazed and know not what to say.
What fools these legislators be?
Figures. Why should we be surprised? It's what is good for political gains, not what's good for the people (unless you're rich and then it doesn't matter to you)
Splendid idea. Let's eliminate the Bush tax breaks this way. Institute single payer healthcare. Cut the oil subsidies. Why give them anything at all in exchange if this is how they want it to work? Obama could veto every rejection and get a whole lot more done than in this current game of chicken.
And if Obama actually falls for this stunt the Repubs will spend from now till the election hammering him for it.
If not investigating him for doing something illegal.
Yeah, something about this whole deal smells to high heaven!
Republicans are trying to get off the hook for dealing with this issue and at the same time continue political gridlock until the elections. They think they are in a good position to take control of Congress and the presidency so it is in the Republicans interests to do nothing that may be credited to Obama. However, I think they are underestimating the impact of their vote on the Ryan budget. It is highly likely the Dems will take back control of the House. Dems need only contrast the Ryan budget as the way Republicans want to deal with the deficit. That frightens and angers a lot of people, even in safe Republican districts.
"Should any political party attempt to abolish Social Security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things, but their number is negligible and they are stupid."
- Dwight D. Eisenhower
They are known as Republicans.
Tea Party Republicans, not Eisenhower Republicans.
I guess what the Republicans assume is that Americans will be "clueless" about what is going on and believe that the Republicans are actually acting in their best interest....and the Democrats are not. Hey, it'll probably work!
Once again, the Republicans are looking for ways to pin what they are doing upon Obama. Playing politics rather than earnestly dealing with the budget.
Congress knows they are despised for doing this stuff, yet they still do it.
The Republicans are just trying to keep people under their thumbs and feed our resources to corporations, for WHAT? When do people see behind the curtain? They are selling us all down the tubes for the favor of whom?
Saying shut it down will leave how many people waiting for their checks? Not just Social Security! Bachmann was talking about paying interest only. What kind of thing is it to be proud to force our nation into bankruptcy?
Right, not just Social Security. How about we stop paying the troops that are risking their lives? And how about stopping those unemployment checks, stopping Medicaire payments to doctors (because hey- why should they get paid?). Bachmann is both insane and idiotic, as most (if not all) of her Republican colleagues seem to be. But McConnell said this a long time ago, and we have no reason to doubt him- the Republicans' #1 priority is making sure that Obama is a one-term president. All they care about is getting elected. They serve no one except for the wealthiest. They won't govern, and they sure as hell won't let anyone else do it either.
I don't know if it was him but I heard some Repub clown state that during an interview. He said that was their number one goal. Gee- I thought it was to govern the country and take care of business.
Why is it always the poor who get their benefits cut first? I think Congress should lose their paychecks, med insurance, etc it they do not pass the debt ceiling. Let them be first for a change. They are the cause of the problem. Cause it wouldn't really hurt them, the majority are millionaires!
Because the poor, by definition, do not own any politicians.
Stupid, stupidier and stupidest they become. I am amazed daily that they won seats in congress and continue to keep them.
Despite the severely incomprehensible language and proposal (ask for it, we'll say no, then you can veto our no, and "trust us" to let your veto stand), the idea of "trusting" the GOP to keep it's word on ANYTHING is absurd at best.
Did we not just recently discuss the way Christie betrayed the agreement he made with the Dems in New Jersey? Do we think the treasonous Republicans in DC are any more honorable to their given word than Christie?
I sure as hell do not!!
The GOP would need a 2/3 majority to override a veto, which I sincerely doubt they will ever achieve in my lifetime, given all the crap they have tried to pull just because they have a majority in ONE side of the legislature.
They'd have to override the veto in the House and the Senate. The Dem Senate won't override Obama's veto.
Leave it a few days........ let the GOP sweat.This idea is so half baked they must be getting pressure from their friends on Wall St to come up with a deal. They courted the far right they got them elected & the only thing the far right will vote for are resolutions of disapproval.This is the most asinine crackpot solution to a problem they trumped up.
Rachel...can you explain to us tonight what the hell they are talking about!?
If Obama is for oxygen, then Republicans are against it. If he takes their ideas into a proposal, they will reject THAT (they've already done that.)
Thank you for that analogy. It is pointless for Obama to bring a bill to the table, they won't pass it. I just have to voice my opinion, looking at the so-called 'adults' in Washington(especially Republicans) acting like little whiny kids is so sad that it is getting embarrassing. The honest truth of the matter is that if they really wanted to fix the economy the easily could- it's not that hard to come to an agreement, but they all have separate agendas other than truly helping people who really need it. I feel for Obama because the man got elected into office in a bad spot and everybody thought that he could magically snap his fingers and fix all of these problems, but the conumdrum is that the problem is in Washington itself. All we do is vote for them but at the end of the day they are not living a life of struggle like the majority of people, they don't have to worry about how they are going to pay their bill from month to month or when they are going to get a job, I bet you that if they switched lives with a regular American they wouldn't last one week without all that money they getting from corporations and oil companies. These politicans need to grow the hell up.
They should be held accountable for their actions. They swore to uphold protect and defend the Constitution. Apparently they like money more than having the U.S.A. be for everyone's interests, not just one class of people. They are always charging Democrats with class warfare, they are projecting. Republicans are the ones that use power and money to benefit the powerful and moneyed. They try to con the working person to be "one of them", but look at what they do. They want tax cuts for millionaires and try to say they wealthy will create jobs.
I hope the President has the sense not to play this game. Congress must do what it has always done: raise the debt ceiling to prevent default. It's quite simple. The President must not give in to this political gamesmanship. Any appearance of weakness on his part will be political suicide. I double-dare the Republicans not to raise the debt ceiling.
McConnell is the worst of the bunch. He exudes contempt for President Obama, apparently simply because of who he is.
'Cmon people. This is the nuclear option.
We're going to have to pay with 2+ trillion of spending cuts over 10 years to get the debt ceiling lifted now without any tax increases or the closing of loopholes on corporations and the rich, whatsoever. What will happen is that the Republicans will kick the can down the road until one of the tranches coincides with the expiration of the Bush tax cuts in 2012. Then it'll be a redux of the current dickdance to exact yet more spending cuts with no new revenues.
It's the path the wingnuts have chosen to ensure the government's nuts are cut and it gets shrunken to the size where it can be drowned (per Grover Norquist) in a bathtub and replaced with a "god-led" free market system which will create a pure two class society.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KXPyMN_KuI&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZ9hVMN8UMY&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTzMqm2TwgE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7EwF_DodUk&feature=relmfu
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlttMTDCDwY&NR=1
What a smug, turtle-faced piece of manure McConnell is.