Repeal the "fiscal cliff"

[cos]

[I also posted this on Blue Mass Group]

We hear a lot about Congress and Obama working to find some elusive deal that could stave off the "fiscal cliff", and occasionally we also hear about why we should to avoid it: According to the Congressional Budget Office, allowing the "cliff" to happen is likely to send the economy back into recession in 2013, and sharply increase unemployment.

What we don't hear much about is that Congress can simply repeal the fiscal cliff, without any complicated deals.

"Sequestration" - the automatic spending cuts that start to take effect in January - is just a law passed by Congress in 2011. Congress can repeal it, and that alone would be enough to prevent a recession in 2013 according to the CBO report - even if all the Bush tax cuts expire.

Extending the payroll tax cut and unemployment benefits would double the impact. Extending the Bush tax cuts on income below $250,000 would do even more (In contrast, extending the Bush tax cuts on higher income would, according to the CBO, have very little impact). But even if we did neither of those sensible things, just repealing sequestration would be much better than doing nothing. Neither Congressional Democrats nor Republicans actually like sequestration or want it to happen. So why do we hear so little in the news about that option?

I started a petition on change.org: Congress: Repeal the "fiscal cliff".
Please sign, re-post it, and send it on to others.

Comments

[pseydtonne.livejournal.com]

Just because I disagree with you does not mean I am misinformed. I studied the facts, and I'm going with with the six-inch cliff.

Even if I would prefer no cuts to any programs, I see raising taxes as vital to the resumption of America the Well-Paved, Pretty Sweet Place To Live. I'm big into roads and mass transit, each of which require tax outlay. In return we get cool stuff cheap and get back to our individual projects.

I'm going with anything that forces Republicans to stop being racists. Their entire plan for two years was to make sure the President had only one term. "The nation? Screw the place. We've got a billionaire addiction and we hate that mulatto. Let's relive the glory days of 1851."

They've filibustered 387 votes in six years, all without actually giving long speeches. McConnell even filibustered his own proposal because Democrats would have voted for it. Does he think running the largest government in the Western hemisphere is a game? To use their terminology, why does he hate America?

The Tea Party is like the Bloc Quebecois. Their goal is to shrink government (Quebec leaving Canada would shrink Canada's government), but any actual success would cost them those cushy government jobs. The Pequistes in the MNA actually have more work to do if they succeed, but the guys in Ottawa would have to get days jobs in Gatineau.

The Tea Party are terrorists. It's our national policy not to negotiate with terrorists, because you don't negotiate with toddlers. When they're ready to drop the threats of physical violence and resume reading primary sources, we'll resume capitulation to prevent fighting. Oh wait, why do we liberals do that again?

They agreed to the six-inch cliff two years ago because they assumed they could weasel out of it. Nope, that's not how legislation should work. Screw these Copperheads.

[auros]

Krugman puts it more concisely than either of us:

This is not a negotiation in the normal sense, in which each side makes proposals and they dicker over the details; instead, Republicans are demanding that Obama read their minds and produce a proposal they’ll like. And Obama won’t do that, for good reason: he knows that they’ll just pronounce themselves unsatisfied with whatever he comes up with, and are indeed very likely to campaign in 2014 attacking him for whatever cuts take place.

Pushing the Republicans to make a deal now is foolhardy -- their base prefers intransigence over compromise as the default choice, and every time they get to reject something from Dems, that helps maintain the base's interest and support -- and yet, weirdly, if they did take an offer, that would actually improve their bargaining position after 1/1/13, so even if they did get pushed into taking a simple deal, that would be bad in the long run. Better to just shut up, go home for the holidays, and then make an offer that they can't refuse, because it's so obviously in line with their claimed values (tax cuts for the middle class!) that even low-information voters will notice it if they try to reject it.

[pseydtonne.livejournal.com]

Thank you for the link and the feedback!

I've concluded as well that, since the Democrats will get a 'no!' no matter what they (we) propose, let's propose crazier things:

"We want the tax rate for the rich back to LBJ-era levels, funding for maglev trains all over the place, a Federal database that alerts dog catchers to neighborhood folks looking for a new dog, and a free sixer of Laguanitas IPA for every head of household that files taxes before March 15th."

"No! Dirty socialists."

"So, you hate puppies? You hate beer? Fascists."

[auros]

I'm going to assume you're being somewhat extreme for effect, but I think I agree with you in principle. I wouldn't want to propose something so extreme that it would actually look strange or wasteful to the median voter, but I absolutely would like to see the Dems making proposals that start them out at a position where they have more chips to bargain away. Like, propose authorizing up to $800B in stimulus through a new Works Progress Administration, to be spent over the next 5 years (which would on its economic merits be a clearly good thing -- we have crumbling infrastructure, and the capital, labor, and materials to fix it are available on the cheap). Acela for the west coast (not necessarily maglev, but something) would be a great item to include.

[pseydtonne.livejournal.com]

Precisely: we take their crappy tactics and get a compromise point that we like.

"We demand maglevs!"

"Uh, no."

"Then compromise -- fast trains from San Diego to San Francisco, with ads all over the place. Cushy chairs. Make it nicer than flying. Oh, and we'll sell the good fruit and jerky on the train."

"Well, yeah... cushy... and are we talkin' that peppered jerky from the guys that advertise with Sasquatch?"

"Yup. Sounds like a plan. Next topic: kitty! We have a video here..."