Durbin: Reid, McConnell Working on Debt Deal

[jefferson_dem]

Durbin: Reid, McConnell Working on Debt Deal
By Meredith Shiner
Roll Call Staff
July 17, 2011, 12:03 p.m.

Senate leaders are hashing out a plan this week to raise the debt ceiling and avert government default, Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said Sunday.

“The good news is Majority Leader Harry Reid and Sen. Mitch McConnell are sitting down and working out an approach that we’re going to try to tackle this week,” Durbin, who participated in last week’s White House talks on raising the debt ceiling, told CBS’ “Face the Nation.”

With 16 days left before the Treasury Department’s Aug. 2 deadline, talks are intensifying between Reid (D-Nev.) and Minority Leader McConnell (R-Ky.) on a plan based on a framework provided by the Republican leader.

The Senate is poised to hold votes this week on a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution, and it’s likely to vote on the Republicans’ “cut, cap and balance” plan. Although neither measure is expected to pass, leaders hope the votes can clear the way for the ultimate package that would raise the debt ceiling before August and perhaps include a series of hard budget cuts being negotiated now.

“We have to check the boxes. One of them is to engage in this debate,” Durbin said regarding why the Senate would vote on the balanced budget amendment even though it is destined to fail.

<SNIP>

http://www.rollcall.com/news/durbin_reid_mcconnell_working_debt_deal-207393-1.html

[chill_wind]

1. Related:

Kyl: GOP Won’t Allow Default

By Steven T. Dennis
Roll Call Staff
July 17, 2011, 10:41 a.m.



Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) predicted Sunday that the debt ceiling would be raised with backing from the GOP.

“Republican leaders have made it clear that if all else fails ... we will not be the ones that put the country into default,” he said on ABC’s “This Week.” “At the end of the day, I don’t think there will be a default.”

http://www.rollcall.com/news/kyl_gop_wont_allow_default-207391-1.html?pos=hln

[jefferson_dem]

4. Saw that. Thanks for posting...

Back from the brink, perhaps.

[CarolinaIndependent]

2. Do You think Obama Will Look Bad...

..if the debt ceiling agreement is reached by senators without his input? It will look like he wasn't able to come up with anything and the senators had to get together and compromise without him.

I'm really worried about that happening. We really need some pro-Obama press right now - has anyone seen the latest daily approval scores? Rasmussen is -9 and Gallup is -8. Rasmussen I don't typically trust (they always seem to be pro-Repug) but Gallup is usually a little more middle of the road if not left leaning..

[mucifer]

3. I thought this was a congressional issue and not an executive issue.

I might be wrong.

[shraby]

5. You're right..congress makes the decision. Obama approves

or vetoes. He can propose, but not dispose until the final bill hits his desk.

[former9thward]

13. It is both. That is why everybody is in the room.

[CakeGrrl]

6. It's CONGRESS' job to come up with a plan. The R's have been stalling

to make POTUS look bad one way or the other.

The problem is that it's easy to fool a large swath of the country that appears to be clueless about how government works into thinking that it was on the President to actually PRODUCE the result.

But either way, the press is pretty useless. Some objective reporting would help, and the President won't ever get even that much. The campaign and Administration have had to do end-arounds to counter the MSM spin.

[BklnDem75]

7. Why would it make the President look bad...

if Congress did it's job? And um... people who expects a serious discussion doesn't quote Rasmussen numbers.

-----
The discrepancies between Rasmussen Reports polls and those issued by other companies were apparent from virtually the first day that Barack Obama took office. Rasmussen showed Barack Obama’s disapproval rating at 36 percent, for instance, just a week after his inauguration, at a point when no other pollster had that figure higher than 20 percent.

Rasmussen Reports has rarely provided substantive responses to criticisms about its methodology. At one point, Scott Rasmussen, president of the company, suggested that the differences it showed were due to its use of a likely voter model. A FiveThirtyEight analysis, however, revealed that its bias was at least as strong in polls conducted among all adults, before any model of voting likelihood had been applied.

Some of the criticisms have focused on the fact that Mr. Rasmussen is himself a conservative — the same direction in which his polls have generally leaned — although he identifies as an independent rather than Republican. In our view, that is somewhat beside the point. What matters, rather, is that the methodological shortcuts that the firm takes may now be causing it to pay a price in terms of the reliability of its polling.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/04/rasmussen-polls-were-biased-and-inaccurate-quinnipiac-surveyusa-performed-strongly/

[Palmer Eldritch]

8. awww, we got a cute little "independent" here. no agenda, nothing to see.

[CarolinaIndependent]

12. Get Over Yourself

It's the strangest thing here at DU - no one's allowed to express concern with the election or else they are a Republican? It's so odd. It reminds me of a cult - if you express dissatisfaction with the leader you're branded a traitor.

I really like Obama, and I want him to win 4 more years, if for no other reason than the fact that there will likely need to be some supreme court nominees by 2016 and I want him to be the one to do it. The more liberal the SCOTUS becomes the sooner the US can move out of the dark age...could you guys imagine if Michele Bachmann was given the chance to appoint justices!? It's highly unlikely, but stranger things have happened..

Anyway, my point is that I check polls DAILY. I'm a bit of a poll-nerd. And I watch trends...and I don't like the current trend. I feel a lot of states that went for Obama in 2008 are trending back red and the path to victory is becoming harder. I can say that with Romney as the nominee (likely) Obama will probably lose: New Hampshire, Ohio, Florida. The other 2008 battleground states are more likely for Obama to win - I think the new battleground will not be the mid-atlantic states (Ohio, PA) but rather the states of the "new South" - Georgia, North Carolina, Virginia. Minority increases mixed with the increasingly higher educated and liberal population (esp. NC and VA) make them more friendly territory for Obama.

I believe Obama's Ohio and Pennsylvania base is made of moderate Dems - those that will vote Republican if unhappy. He can't count on them in 2012 like he did in 2008 - they're perfectly fine switching allegiance. For NC and VA, however, Obama never really won this group to begin with. The "Moderate Democrats" in NC and VA were not quite liberal enough to give him a chance the first time around (2008) and he won without them - he won on the back of blacks and the urban liberals. These are two groups that WILL NOT abandon him like moderate democrats. In other words, his base in VA and NC will not erode like in Ohio and Pennsylvania.

That's my analysis so far, I really believe the path to victory is concentrating on the New South, which is starting to mirror the Northeast in political ideology, while the mid-atlantic states are starting to mirror the rural south. This is due to changing demographics - highly educated are moving to where the jobs are (urban areas of NC and VA) while mid-atlantic states are forcing the young and highly educated out due to poor economies and less focus on tech/green jobs.

Obama and his team understand this - that's why the Convention is in Charlotte this year. I don't appreciate being treated like a mole or a right-wing nut job just because I said I'm concerned with the polls. The reality of the situation is that Obama's 2012 margin will be much much closer, and the loss of just a point or two can flip the states we will really need (VA, NC, Colorado, Iowa).

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[21st Century FDR]

9. Couldn't they find someone with a spine to represent the Democrats?

Reid does not have a good track record standing up to these bastards.

[BeyondGeography]

10. Wake me up when it's "over"