Bacon's Rebellion

Democracy Thrives in Sunlight

With Warner snub, “super committee” shows it’s hardly super

—

by

Norm Leahy
in , ,

Senator Mark Warner had some small hope of being named to the congressional “super committee” that is supposed to pore over the federal budget and find hundreds of billions of dollars worth of additional savings (or taxes increases, or both) in order to avoid across the board cuts. Those automatic cuts would result in a $600 billion hit to defense spending which could throttle Virginia’s defense-spending dependent economy.

Before Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid made his “super committee” picks, Warner characterized his chances of being picked, and the committee’s likely Democratic make-up, this way:

…he doesn’t see much chance of winning one of the three Senate Democratic seats — because he wants to tackle entitlement reform and tax reform on a much broader scope than is envisioned by the new committee.

“The fact that I’m willing to do that probably means that I’m not actually going to get on the committee,” Warner said on Fox News. “I don’t actually expect to get on the committee. … I also know that chances are that there will be enormous pressure on leadership in both parties to put members that might not be willing to be as bold.”

As Ken Falkenstein notes, Mr.Warner was passed-over for membership on the committee in favor of the odious John Kerry, Democratic Senate campaign chair Patty Murray and Finance committee chair Max Baucus.

So give Warner the credit he’s due: he knew Reid would pick those who weren’t interested in sweeping entitlement reform. If anything, the Murray choice ensures just the opposite. In addition to her charge to look after Democrats’ electoral concerns, according to the Wall Street Journal, Murray is also “a vocal supporter of Social Security and Medicare.”

In that same Journal article, we learn more about why Warner was shut out of the committee — his involvement with the “Gang of Six” — and Harry Reid’s take on entitlements:

That group irked Mr. Reid by going its own way and trying to influence matters during the recent negotiations on the debt ceiling. In addition, those senators accepted cuts to Social Security at a time when Mr. Reid was strongly rejecting such cuts.

Hope, change…not on his watch.

It’s anyone’s guess who will be named to the other spots on the “super committee,” but the snubbing of Mark Warner has made a few things clear:

* Serious entitlement reform is off the table for Democrats.

* This and taxes will likely lead to no agreement, meaning the automatic cuts of the debt ceiling could be on their way. Buckle-up, Virginia, it’s about to get bumpy.

* Warner has been given an additional reason not to make the Senate a long-term career. Terry McAuliffe, you’d best call your office.

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

5 responses to “With Warner snub, “super committee” shows it’s hardly super”

  1. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Norm:

    Good article. I was thinking about a similar post. One thing to review is the backgrounds of the three people Reid did name to the committee. A very sad crew. A phys ed major and former gym teacher, a lawyer (albeit with an economics undergraduate degree) and a guy whose only record of value creation was his marriage to a widow who inherited a Republican’s fortune.

    Mark Warner stands head and shoulders above Reid two and half stooges (I’ll give Baucus some credit for possibly being worthwhile).

    As far as I know, the Republicans have yet to check in with their version of the headless horsemen of the apocalypse. We’ll see if they can trump gym teachers and gigolos. Probably not.

    Oddly, it might be good to have the dirty half dozen on the “not so” super committee. My understanding is that they either make a decision or across the board budget cuts go into effect. Let’s say across the board budget cuts go into effect and the government keeps running. Whoa! Maybe that’s the simple answer – give everything a 20 – 40% haircut.

  2. TMT Avatar
    TMT

    This is a loss to the country. Mark Warner has made serious efforts to address the nation’s budget fiasco. While I don’t agree with all of his votes, Warner is doing a good job representing Virginia in the Senate. IMO, he is a much better Senator than Governor. John Kerry, on the other hand, is proof of the reality of electing and reelecting incompetence.

  3. larryg Avatar
    larryg

    I agree. This is not a good sign. I STILL – DEMURE from the conventional wisdom that entitlement reform is central to the issue.

    It’s important and it must be part of it making it the central focus of the effort is continuing to mis-characterize the true dimensions of the problem.

    The state mission of this group is to find a trillion dollars worth of cuts in the deficit.

    That’s an EXCELLENT GOAL – as we are somewhat north of that number but more importantly … reducing the deficit – helps push back the impending disaster with the debt which is going to DOUBLE in a decade if we do not get the DEFICIT under control.

    But ENTITLEMENTS – Medicare Part B and MedicAid comprise only about 600 billion of that trillion. That’s about half of the problem – not THE problem.

    but I do concur. The Dems on the chosen committee or not good picks and Reid did this on purpose … but I’d never underestimate that man in terms of political instincts. He knows what he is doing even if it’s not the right thing in our minds.

  4. larryg Avatar
    larryg

    Cutting Medicare Part B and MedicAid are going to be easy compared to trying to cut other things – I predict.

    Medicare Part B costs most/many seniors a piddling $100 a month and can easily afford to pay more – and should.

    MedicAid will be harder but 60% of MedicAid is nursing homes .. and 70% of the beneficiaries own their own homes outright and, at the least, I believe, should put their homes in reverse mortgages to pay for nursing home care rather than have taxpayers pay for it.

    Another 30% of MedicAid is to pay for the pregnancies and birth care of people who cannot pay. We have a very serious problem in this country with single moms … having kids.. receiving food stamps, subsidized school lunches, medical care, housing vouchers, etc… and this has to change.

    But Afghanistan and Iraq need to be put “on budget” and included in the totals attributed to the military and the military cut back to reasonable levels.

    Just as we cannot afford teen mothers… we cannot afford to spend more on the military than the next 10 countries including China and Russia – combined.

    NoVa and Hampton Roads will have to suck it up also.

    We have an “entitlement” mentality in this country and it permeates all income and classes. Each group believes that it should get a piece of the pie even if in the process the country is going down the tubes financially.

    Everyone is going to have to take a haircut – from the rich to the teen mom to the military and the towns and cities whose economies are based on Fed spending.

    I DO believe that if we truly approach this in a way that everyone does share the cuts – that enough people will support it but if the approach is to single our certain groups and to protect other groups.. it’s going to fail.

    In that regard, if the Dems are hoping to “protect” entitlements.. and the Republicans the rich and the military… we are doomed.

  5. TMT Avatar
    TMT

    Fairness — Soros, Buffet and Gates will pay at the same rate as two GS-14s married to each other. The liberals will always protect the truly rich by including the upper middle class in the definition of rich.

Leave a Reply

Read More