More from ABC News' Jonathan Karl on a tentative debt deal

[flpoljunkie]

Congressional Sources: Republicans and Democrats Reach Tentative Debt Deal
July 30, 2011 10:39 PM

Here, according to Democratic and Republican sources, are the key elements:

-A debt ceiling increase of up to $2.1 to $2.4 trillion (depending on the size of the spending cuts agreed to in the final deal).
-They have now agreed to spending cuts of roughly $1.2 trillion over 10 years.
-The formation of a special Congressional committee to recommend further deficit reduction of up to $1.6 trillion (whatever it takes to add up to the total of the debt ceiling increase). This deficit reduction could take the form of spending cuts, tax increases or both.
-The special committee must make recommendations by late November (before Congress' Thanksgiving recess).
-If Congress does not approve those cuts by December 23, automatic across-the-board cuts go into effect, including cuts to Defense and Medicare. This "trigger" is designed to force action on the deficit reduction committee's recommendations by making the alternative painful to both Democrats and Republicans.
-A vote, in both the House and Senate, on a balanced budget amendment.

Democrats won't like the fact that Medicare could be exposed to automatic cuts, but the size of the Medicare cuts is limited and they are designed to be taken from Medicare providers, not beneficiaries.

Two sources briefed on the framework say the automatic cuts would hit Defense spending harder than Medicare. A Republican briefed on the framework says this will be unacceptable to many Republicans because it could force them to face a choice between accepting tax increases (if that is what the committee recommends) or automatic cuts that would gut the Pentagon's budget.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2011/07/white-house-republicans-strike-tenative-deal-to-raise-debt-ceiling-.html

[woolldog]

1. This is sounding better than I expected. nt

[flpoljunkie]

2. More from Talkingpointsmemo on Medicare cuts and Balanced Budget Amendment vote

The Medicare cuts would supposedly fall on Medicare providers, not beneficiaries. The trigger would also include a vote on a Balanced Budget Amendment -- but no requirement that it be sent off to the states.

One source briefed on the negotiations confirms that the ABC story is correct "on the key points." A similar piece in National Journal suggests the Special Committee would not be allowed to reduce the deficit by raising new net tax revenue. The source disputes that notion, as does the ABC report.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/07/dems-gop-float-eye-popping-debt-limit-compromise.php?ref=fpblg

[derby378]

14. Where are the tax increases on the rich?

:shrug:

[scheming daemons]

15. January 1, 2013

[derby378]

16. In other words, NO tax increases on the rich

Any deal to let them expire on 1/1/13 will be scuttled by the Tea Party long before that date arrives. You know it, I know, and the American people know it, so why are we pretending?

[woolldog]

17. Oh don't get me wrong.

It's still bad. But put McConnell and Obama in a room negotiating and I expected worse. Obama is still incompetent negotiator

[alcibiades_mystery]

3. People have to understand what a trigger is

If my two kids are fighting, I might say, "Cut it out, or I take a toy away from each of you for the week."

Now, if I pick a toy that neither of them cares about, then the consequence is meaningless. I have to select a toy that they both really want to play with.

What that does is assure compliance with the directive.

These triggers work the same way: You vote on the committee recommendations, or something you really really want to preserve will be affected. If it wasn't something worthwhile to the negotiating parties, the trigger would be meaningless. But the whole point is to avoid affecting the targets. The GOP will have a massive interest (especially specific defense-heavy districts) in protecting particular military spending, just as the Democrats will have a massive interest in protecting Medicare spending. If the GOP or Dems din't care about the programs being affected, the trigger would be no trigger at all.

Indeed, this is a way to introduce revenue increases into the deal so as to make the House GOP have to choose them. If the committee comes out with X number of tax increases, GOP Congresspeople will have the choice of preserving the military spending on some pet project or voting for the tax hike. Ideology tends to go out the window when it's the defense contractor in your district who is on the chopping block. It completely circumvents the GOP's ideological resistance.

The win here is constituted by the fact that defense cuts of this kind were not previously included in the Reid bill, which took most of its defense cuts through projected windings-down of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Now we have real defense cuts on the table in these trigger mechanisms.

[flamingdem]

5. This is a way for the teapublicans to save face and get the rich to cough up a little nt

[Tennessee Gal]

8. Ha! They will never go for anything requiring the rich to

cough up a cent. That is obvious. They don't care that history has proven them to be totally wrong. They don't care that even Ronald Reagan spoke out against their stance on raising the debt ceiling. They don't care that Ronald Reagan raised taxes. They don't care that it is a fact that the Bush tax cuts and unfunded wars got us to where we are. They don't care that Bush squandered the surplus handed to him by Clinton. They just don't care about the financial status of this country. They certainly don't care that this nation cares more about job creation than anything else.

[BumRushDaShow]

6. Good analysis

The Necon wing of the repuke party has been totally silent as the guillotine swings over their head, ironically manned by the stewards of their own party. They and the Corporate agriculturalists are the biggest beneficiaries of tax-payer spending (not just tax breaks, but direct subsidies) of any group, having been shielded for decades. And this would force them to wake up and go after the fiscal conservatives (now teabaggers), which could then mean that at least tax loopholes get closed (which provides cover for non-teabagger fiscal conservatives, although they may dial up the rhetoric on having a flat tax and no deductions at all). In any case, this provision alone, if enacted, would be a win for the Dems.

[flamingdem]

12. Good points about the Neocons getting their way

and getting cover. I was wondering how they would intervene in this negotiation. They're the power behind the curtain, not the teaparty. In general the deal looks okay for the Dems and it might be the neocons who pushed back against the bagger business.

[Tennessee Gal]

9. But the GOP will never go for the committee recommending

X number of tax increases. They will pressure the Dems to give in to more and more cuts to entitlements.

[flamingdem]

11. With the triggers they can abdicate party responsibility nt

[fasttense]

4. Spending cuts of roughly $1.2 trillion over 10 years.

Well, well, well, it seems we gut our social spending yet again. We have cut heat for our grand parents, education for our babies, food for our hungry. I wonder which poor and suffering group will be made to suffer even more in this round of cuts?

Austerity for the working poor, luxury for the idly rich.

[MannyGoldstein]

7. So we'll be hostaged again before Christmas

Marvelous.

[gholtron]

10. Even if this sounds like a workable deal. . .

The teapugs will never vote for it.
14th amendment NOW!

[scheming daemons]

13. The more I hear about this deal... the better it is

Plus... the Bush tax cuts expire Dec 31, 2012.

[damonm]

18. Then there's the small matter of ELECTIONS...

We LET the TPers crank up the retard - we want them to - all the while reminding our base and the indies that Rethugs want to gut Medicare, SS and others to give MORE tax breaks to those who don't need them. Then the thugs get voted OUT, we retake the House, increase our margins in the Senate, and tell the regressives to suck it while we clean up their mess.

[ClarkUSA]

19. "size of the Medicare cuts is limited and they are designed to be taken from Medicare providers"

Congressional Sources: Republicans and Democrats Reach Tentative Debt Deal
July 30, 2011 10:39 PM

Here, according to Democratic and Republican sources, are the key elements:

-A debt ceiling increase of up to $2.1 to $2.4 trillion (depending on the size of the spending cuts agreed to in the final deal).

-They have now agreed to spending cuts of roughly $1.2 trillion over 10 years.

-The formation of a special Congressional committee to recommend further deficit reduction of up to $1.6 trillion (whatever it takes to add up to the total of the debt ceiling increase). This deficit reduction could take the form of spending cuts, tax increases or both.

-The special committee must make recommendations by late November (before Congress' Thanksgiving recess).

-If Congress does not approve those cuts by December 23, automatic across-the-board cuts go into effect, including cuts to Defense and Medicare. This "trigger" is designed to force action on the deficit reduction committee's recommendations by making the alternative painful to both Democrats and Republicans.

-A vote, in both the House and Senate, on a balanced budget amendment.

Democrats won't like the fact that Medicare could be exposed to automatic cuts, but the size of the Medicare cuts is limited and they are designed to be taken from Medicare providers, not beneficiaries.

Two sources briefed on the framework say the automatic cuts would hit Defense spending harder than Medicare. A Republican briefed on the framework says this will be unacceptable to many Republicans because it could force them to face a choice between accepting tax increases (if that is what the committee recommends) or automatic cuts that would gut the Pentagon's budget.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2011/07/white-house-republicans-strike-tenative-deal-to-raise-debt-ceiling-.html