Getty Images
Has Daniels actually read the Simpson-Bowles budget plan?
If Republican Mitch Daniels has any lingering national ambitions, he might want to explain his debt-reduction plans in more detail.
Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels on Tuesday urged Congress to reconsider sweeping changes called for in a federal debt report he says has fallen by the wayside in the past year.
Daniels said he would like to see a "reunion tour" of the sweeping report drafted by former Republican Sen. Alan Simpson and former Clinton aide Erskine Bowles in 2010. [...]
Daniels made the request on a conference call with the group No Labels, which group founder Nancy Jacobson said was heard by 20,000 listeners.
Putting aside skepticism about whether No Labels could get 20,000 people to get together on a Tuesday afternoon to listen to the governor of Indiana talk about debt reduction -- I find that unlikely -- the fact that there's continued support for the Simpson-Bowles plan in various GOP circles strikes me as odd.
Perhaps now would be a good time to note a relevant detail that's gone largely down the memory hole: Republicans used to hate the Simpson-Bowles plan.
In fact, the reason it's called the "Simpson-Bowles plan" instead of the "Simpson-Bowles commission plan" is that GOP officials on the panel refused to support it, guaranteeing the commission's failure. Indeed, how many of the Republican lawmakers on the panel agreed to endorse the chairmen's plan? Zero.
And why did Republicans hate Simpson-Bowles? Because, among other things, it raised taxes -- even more than President Obama's debt-reduction plan -- and slashed defense spending. It also allowed all of the Bush-era tax breaks to expire on time at the end of 2012.
Indeed, Matt Yglesias recently asked a good question: "Do Simpson-Bowles fans know what's in it?"
Part of me is left to assume that some Republicans have decided they like Simpson-Bowles as some kind of bizarre knee-jerk reaction -- Obama hasn't embraced it, so it must be good. But the fact remains that Simpson-Bowles is much further to the left that anything Republicans have been willing to even think about on debt reduction.
Does Mitch Daniels understand this?
Leave a Comment:
"Do Simpson-Bowles fans know what's in it?"
No.
Ditto ACORN, Planned Parenthood, and "ObamaCare" (also, the King James Bible!)
Actually every now and then a republican will actually speak the truth - because he usually doesn't believe that people are paying attention.....
Damn, Steve, you blew it.
The header should have been, "Mitch Daniels Advocates Tax Hikes."
Paul Krugman, Dean Baker, Brad DeLong, Mark Thoma and a raft of others have pointed out repeatedly how Republicans conveniently overlook the tax-revenue side of what Simpson and Bowles included in their - what to call it since it wasn't really a report - long memo. On the Hill, the GOP treated the recommendations like a Chinese menu: Pick one from Column A but if you don't like what's in Column B, don't mention it. So Mitch Daniels is just another yahoo pushing a political, rather than economic, point.
But his conference call yesterday showed yet another dark side of Republican politics. The party is so desperate to shift the talk away from jobs and income inequality and back to the non-existent problem of the deficit, they'll try any tack. It hasn't worked since #Occupy and it won't work now.
Simpson-Bowles DID NOT ISSUE A FINAL REPORT because the panel that composed it did not pass it! Everyone seems to forget that.
Indeed, how many of the Republican lawmakers on the panel agreed to endorse the chairmen's plan? Zero.
Actually, not true. Senators Coburn, Crapo, and Gregg indicated that they would support the commission's recommendations.
There's no downside to thumping the table with Simpson/Bowles. It's just one more thing that they can attack the Kenyan Usurper for: he didn't even implement the entitlement cuts from his own Catfood Commission.
If (fat chance) he were to actually call the bluff and submit the proposal, they can just shift to attacking him for his one-sided radical leftist program (with no Republican fingerprints!) of raising taxes, for cutting Social Security, etc.
It's not like they have any issues with attacking their own ideas once Charlie Brown signs on to them.
I live in Indiana and I have to endure this assclown. Enough said.
Republicans are going to be floating a lot of ideas until the election. If they lose or they realize they are going to lose the elections, then they are going to try to strike deals with Obama. But their ideas will all be based on their previous proposals which is that they get everything they want and Dems get nothing in return. Obama and the Dems will be in a better position to dictate the terms of surrender if they wait until after the elections and before the new Congress. That will be the last chance for Republicans to save face as they are leaving the door. If they don't want to negotiate or are unable to negotiate because of the divisions in the party, then Dems can sit back and wait for the new Congress.
This is just ripe for a great headline... something like
"Daniels Advocates Undoing Only Achievement," or "Bush Tax Cuts Abandoned by Creator."
Steve,
I'm confused by this comment: "Indeed, how many of the Republican lawmakers on the panel agreed to endorse the chairmen's plan? Zero."
In fact, a report was released on December 1, 2010, but failed a vote on December 3 with 11 of 18 votes in favor, with a supermajority of 14 votes needed to formally endorse the blueprint. Voting for the report were Bowles, Coburn, Conrad, Crapo, Cote, Durbin, Fudge, Gregg, Rivlin, Simpson, and Spratt. Voting against were Baucus, Becerra, Camp, Hensarling, Ryan, Schakowsky and Stern. Some of the yes votes were Republicans.
Any clarification would be appreciated. :)
Voting for a report is merely a procedural means for sending the report to the whole House and not an endorsement of the recommendations.
Talking about deficit reduction without mentioning the Bowles-Simpson plan should be considered blasphemy.
Bowles-Simpson is not only the most sensible plan to get our economy back on track it is also the only one that leaves no sacred cows untouched. Shared sacrifice is the only way Congress will be able to simplify the tax code, improve fairness, and spur economic growth. http://bit.ly/noTDPF
Apparently there is a movement afoot in the corporate world to revive the dead Simpson-Bowles plan. A Nashville wealth management person has launched an organization called "Citizens for Enacting The Bowles-Simpson Plan":
http://southernbeale.wordpress.com/2012/03/12/get-in-line-@!$%#/
Catchy name, I know ....