Follow-up on the Debt-Ceiling Debate

Now that Congress and the Administration have reached an agreement on the Debt Ceiling/Budget debacle, it’s time to look back at some of the absurdities involved in the progress of the situation. As there were many absurd demands and allegations made, I’ll only be able to touch on one or two without this becoming “book length.” There may well be sequels to this article.

Let’s start with the “fringe elements” involved, and to be fair, I’ll start with those on the right. The right, of course, has the Tea Party, a self-proclaimed savior of the Republic. The Tea Party name comes from their own comparison of themselves to the early colonists rebelling against England. Who do they think they’re kidding? If they continue on the present course, it will be the destruction of the Republican arty, not to mention the Nation, itself.

These Congressmen and Senators that call themselves “Tea Party Candidates” are stuck in a loop they cannot escape. To epitomize their label, they must cater to the radical leadership of the sect that is whipping the people into a frenzy of illogical action. They have attacked Speaker Boehner (and every other member of Congress that voted “Yea”) over the final agreement. They say it doesn’t go far enough. Someone needs to remind them that the Senate is still controlled by the Democrats and the sitting President is also a Democrat. To get anything accomplished, a deal had to be struck that allowed both sides to gain something.

The final bill includes a mandatory vote on a Balanced Budget Amendment, while allowing the debt ceiling to be raised in increments . It ties the debt ceiling to equal spending cuts. This is just a few of the victories for the left. Yet, the Tea Party expects the GOP to “hold the line” until they get what they want. Let’s see if we can extrapolate the results of that.

To achieve the massive, and immediate, cuts demanded by the Tea Party, vital services would be reduced to nothing, or even disappear. Unemployment would skyrocket in the public sector. Yes, admittedly, many of those bureaucrats need to be unemployed, but let’s do this a little at a time. It took 50+ years of uncontrolled spending to get to this point. It should have been reined in long ago, but we have become a “gimme” people. It won’t turn around overnight.

As long as the Palins and Bachmans of the Party are around, absurd demands will continue to be made. Count on it in 2012. The foam will start forming at the corners of their mouths as they decry the sins of Washington. I worry that we will see more Tea Party candidates elected, increasing the idiocy in both houses of Congress. The only thing Conservative and Crazy have in common is the “C”.

Now, let’s look at the other side. Actually, this one can be laid at the feet of both Parties. I believe Social Security and Veterans/Military pay should be exempted as they were. They are only entitlements in the purist definition. Social Security is your own money, paid in over the period of your working life, supposedly held in trust for you as a supplement to retirement. Congress misappropriated it and now wants to “reform” it.

If a bank did that with your deposits, there would be people going to prison. Shouldn’t Congress be held to the same accountability? Military retirement is no different than any private sector retirement. It’s a promise to those who served. Enron official went to prison for destroying a retirement fund. Congress? Not hardly.

Disabled Veterans are even more critical an issue. These are men and women who gave themselves to the cause of freedom; the same freedom that allows disagreement between the parties and the people. These are citizens that were permanently injured or became ill because of that service. There was a promise made to them in that contract. That promise was they would be cared for by a grateful country. Entitlement? Yes, if you must . They are certainly entitled to that care, that promise. Yet, these checks were held hostage during the debate.

It was said that benefits might need to be reduced or even eliminated. The President called these checks “wine and steak” budgets and said they needed to be reduced to “beer and burgers.” Strangely, in all the items presented for possible cuts, I’ve not heard anyone place Congressional salaries on the table. How about the almost 200K retirement a former President gets? Federal Judiciary? Not mentioned. Cabinet members and staffers? Nope. Why don’t we consider cuts in these massive salaries and “entitlements” before we consider punishing the lower income citizen?

A 10% cut across the board for Congress and staff, Federal Judiciary, Cabinet Members and staff, Presidential advisors and “Press Secretaries” would greatly decrease the budget. Let’s hear it for that one!

To be continued…