Maxine Waters introduces bill to REPEAL SUPERCOMMITTEE | The Nation

[nashville_brook]

http://www.thenation.com/blog/164243/house-democrats-upset-supercommittee-negotiations




House Democrats Upset With Supercommittee Negotiations

(snip)

Representative Maxine Waters of California has introduced a bill to repeal the supercommittee, and the $1.2 trillion in cuts it’s mandated to make. She believes the committee is “illegitimate” and “borders on unconstitutional.”

At a breakfast meeting with progressive reporters and bloggers today, Waters said she knows her bill probably doesn’t have the support to pass right now, but she wants it on the table if the supercommittee deadlocks. “Of course its’s a long shot. But right now people are getting more and more agitated, frustrated and concerned about this supercommittee and not happy that there are those who are saying, including the president, they want even bigger cuts,” Waters said. “So it may fall apart. If it falls apart my bill is there to say ‘kill it.’ ” She added that she’s spoken to several Republicans who are equally unhappy with the supercommittee’s power.

Waters’s frustration is shared by many Democrats in the House, who feel not only shut out from the process by colleagues in the Senate—Baucus is reportedly acting with guidance from Senate majority leader Harry Reid, leaving House minority leader Nancy Pelosi on the sidelines—but are also shocked at the level of cuts to Medicare and Social Security being proposed.

Representative Henry Waxman told Politico today that he has “no stake” in the committee and called it an “outrageous process” that is “not open and transparent.” He said the “things put forward by Democrats…I would never vote for.”

(snip)

[Fire Walk With Me]

1. K&R!

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

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

[woo me with science]

62. +1000000

[gateley]

2. Hope it gets some legs, but I'm not holding my breath. nt

[nashville_brook]

10. it's a strategy for if the supercommittee deadlocks, which is almost certain.

it'll be on the table, ready to deploy. it think it's great politics.

[gateley]

19. Thanks for helping me see the big pic - it IS a good move! nt

[truedelphi]

82. So there isn't any way it can backfire or

implode?

Are chances good it will get approval?

[sabrina 1]

3. That's worth helping her with. I can't see how this is even

Constitutional. Good for her and I hope some of her colleagues help her with this as they should.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

4. Are the cat food companies worried?

[nashville_brook]

8. heheh! they should be :)

[Skidmore]

5. Time to see some signs at OWS regarding this?

REPEAL THE SUPERCOMMITTE
NEGOTIATE WITH THE PEOPLE

[nashville_brook]

9. i've been working so much with Occupy Orlando, that I've been missing the news...which is crazee

i'm working on getting more info out on this. i see it as the most important issue right now.

[WillyT]

6. HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!!

:kick:

[Jnana]

7. “illegitimate” and “borders on unconstitutional.”

Illegitimate...? Perhaps. Unconstitutional...? Not according to Article 1, Section 8, Clause 14 -- To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

[nashville_brook]

11. Admiralty Law? really?

[Jnana]

26. "Rules for the Government" is the pertinent verbiage.

[a2liberal]

36. great job deliberately misparsing the sentence

It's "(make Rules for) (the Government and Regulation of) (the land and naval Forces)" and that's patently obvious unless you're being deliberately obtuse. There would be no reason to stick two such unrelated concepts in one clause. Note that I'm not saying it's unconstitutional (I don't know) just that it's not that section (if any) that gives them that power.

[nashville_brook]

38. +1

[Jnana]

40. No, the House and the Senate (Congress) each make their own rules for governing.

For example: In the United States Senate, rules permit a senator, or a series of senators, to speak for as long as they wish and on any topic they choose, unless "three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn"<36> (usually 60 out of 100 senators) brings debate to a close by invoking cloture under Senate Rule XXII.

The super-committee was created by means of a "rule" negotiated between the the House and Senate for the purpose of reducing the deficit. Thus, it is indeed constitutional.

Don't misunderstand, I do not support it, because I believe it represents an act of moral cowardice on part of our legislators.

[a2liberal]

53. I wasn't saying it's unconstitutional

In fact I think you're probably right. But it's a different part of the constitution (I don't want to try and look it up on my phone right now). The part you quoted does not say what you said it says.

[a2liberal]

56. ok I looked it up

Here's what you're looking for... Article I Section 5 "Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behavior, and, with the Concurrence of two-thirds, expel a Member."

Please use that instead of misappropriating a completely unrelated section.

[Jnana]

69. I believe that you are right...

I often refer to Article 1, Section 8, to determine whether or not Congress has the power to enact a particular piece of legislation. And while the power to tax and spend is enumerated in Section 8, the rules and procedures for exercising that power are defined by Section 5.

Thanks for correcting me.

[Veilex]

37. I think you missunderstand....

In this context I'm fairly certain "Government" is meant as to govern,
not the government IE: the white house & congress.

[Jnana]

41. Not at all...it means what it says and it says that Congress has the power

To make Rules for the Government.

[cui bono]

44. No, I think you did misunderstand. Government is used as in governing.

Not as a noun.

[Jnana]

45. See # 40 for the correct answer.

[cui bono]

48. But we were talking about that other sentence so I agree with #36.

[DirkGently]

12. Worth a shot. Nothing but ill will come from The Catfood Commission, Part Deux.

[glinda]

28. It is committee to divert the blame.

[DirkGently]

29. Seems to be the mode of choice for "bipartisan" adoption of RW policy.

[nashville_brook]

63. aka diversionary tactic

[AntiFascist]

13. Excellent...

seems like the supercommittee only works for the MIC.

[Riftaxe]

14. K&R (nt)

[malaise]

15. She is right

rec

[spanone]

16. well, why have all those congress critters if twelve make the major decisions?

[Golden Raisin]

71. Indeed! The entire concept of

this "Super Committee" is disturbing on many levels. With precedents like this it's a short leap to establishing other especially-privileged layers of government (probably not envisioned by the Founding Fathers). What's next? Star Chambers?

[xchrom]

17. Recommend

[Uncle Joe]

18. Kicked, recommended and kudos to the honorable Maxine Waters.

Thanks for the thread, nashville_brook.:thumbsup:

[senseandsensibility]

20. I don't appreciate these loaded words like"upset" that they only

use in headlines about liberal dems.

[Raksha]

21. K & R

[Starry Messenger]

22. k&r

[chill_wind]

23. Good for her! With much respect and appreciation to her

for at least trying. K & R

[redqueen]

24. K&R

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

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

[Scuba]

27. Go Maxine Go!!!

[avaistheone1]

31. YES!!

K&R
:kick:

[Enthusiast]

32. I love Maxine Waters!

[dotymed]

35. She is a great and warm person.

I agree with her politics also. I have had the privilege to meet her and speak with her on a few occasions and she is one of those people who make you feel good. Her beliefs are are common sense, she is not superficial.

[Sportsguy]

33. K and R!!

Yessssss!!!!

[UnrepentantLiberal]

34. Go Maxine!

I wish she would primary Obama.

[ProSense]

39. I don't agree with her

"She added that she’s spoken to several Republicans who are equally unhappy with the supercommittee’s power."

Wonder why?

It should be allowed to come to an agreement and if it fails to do so, the defense cuts mandated should kick in.

Of course some Republican are unhappy with it.

[cui bono]

46. If I'm not mistaken, the Dems have already offered up big cuts

to SS, medicare, etc... We all know how the Dems cave on everything. You really want to take that chance with less Dems to possibly hold out?

My guy, Becerra, is on it and every time I've looked up his votes he voted the "correct" way. But if he's the only one standing up for us and holding out on caving we don't stand a chance to not have the SC go the Republican way, just like everything else so far.

And who really wants all their own representatives locked out of representing us? I don't. My guy's in there but most people's representative isn't.

[ProSense]

47. It

"the Dems have already offered up big cuts"

...wasn't announced. It was a leak, allegedly from a Baucus aide. It was also rumored that several Democrats didn't support it.

In any case, Boehner and Republicans rejected it.

The committee is mandated to increase revenues, which is why it's deadlocked. No deal means the defense cuts kick in.

[woo me with science]

49. Oh Bullshit.

"Offering up big cuts" started with our Third Way President.

[ProSense]

51. Ah

""Offering up big cuts" started with our Third Way President."

...bullshit back at you!

[woo me with science]

58. ....

:wow:

Repeat after me: "President Obama never put those cuts on the table. Oh, no he didn't. Even though you were there. He would never do a thing like that. Relaaaaax. And the chocolate ration has been increased..."



:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

[ProSense]

66. Here's the thing

despite the idiotic response, this bill is posturing.

The reality is that if the Super Committee doesn't come to an agreement, there will be significant defense cuts.

Maybe the opposition is because some really aren't looking forward to that outcome?

[woo me with science]

67. Never mind that we NEVER should have had this crap committee force-fed to us in the first place.

It's a good thing you did, Anthony,...er, Barack. It's a REAL good thing!

[Recursion]

74. The structure of the supercommittee is a decent idea; it works for military base closures

I think on a general question of discretionary spending something like the supercommittee is the only way real progress can happen (and, remember, mandatory spending is almost entirely off the table here).

The "trigger" cuts are so much political theater: they mean absolutely nothing. This Congress can't bind a future Congress to keep them. They can't even bind themselves on the next appropritation bill. Mandatory spending cuts are the only ones that actually stick, and the committee isn't authorized to make those -- that's one reason I whiff some BS on the Baucus "offer" leak: they aren't briefed to cut Medicare benefits.

[ProSense]

79. Hmmm?

"The structure of the supercommittee is a decent idea; it works for military base closures...The "trigger" cuts are so much political theater: they mean absolutely nothing. This Congress can't bind a future Congress to keep them."

This Congress can't bind a future Congress from doing anything. Congress is a legislative body, if it decides to pass a law in the future, this Congress has no way of stopping them. That is true of every Congress and every law passed by Congress.

The triggers are just as much law as any other legislation. The fact is that the Super Congress now exists, and its mandate is clear.

<...>

Remember, during the debt-ceiling crisis, Republicans needed to give Democrats a concession to resolve the standoff. They weren’t willing to put tax increases on the table, so GOP leaders agreed to a “trigger” that would impose harsh cuts on defense spending. The point was to create an incentive for both parties to reach an agreement — if Republicans didn’t want to slash the Pentagon budget, they’d have strike a bipartisan deal.

But as the chances of the super-committee reaching a compromise evaporate, Republicans are now confronted with the possibility that their own idea — massive defense cuts — might come to fruition. And what’s their response? Spending cuts will hurt the economy and cost jobs.

<...>

This is why Republicans have been moaning. Tax increases are part of that mandate.

[Shining Jack]

87. "Hmmm?"

You have something stuck in your throat? Do you need someone to perform the Heimlich maneuver?

Hmmm?

[Recursion]

76. It also reeks, since the cuts went beyond the committee's mandate

They aren't allowed to touch mandatory spending, and that's what the "offer" contained.

[woo me with science]

50. Imagine our utter shock at that news bulletin. nt

[ProSense]

52. Right

"Imagine our utter shock at that news bulletin."

...how does it feel to agree with Boehner?

[woo me with science]

59. ...

:rofl:

[frylock]

75. you're either with us or against us

[ProSense]

80. Um

"you're either with us or against us"

...no. I can think for myself, and I rather like the idea of defense cuts.

Are you saying that if the defense cuts kick in, you're going to oppose them?

[Shining Jack]

88. "I can think for myself"

I doubt it but if you say so. :hi:

[frylock]

91. ron paul is for cuts in the defense budget as well..

how does it feel to agree with ron paul?

[nashville_brook]

54. +1

[Shining Jack]

85. "Wonder why?"

So when Obama is reaching across the aisle is it a good thing or a bad thing? You lack consistency.

[Hotler]

42. k&r n/t

[cui bono]

43. I'm going to call my congressman to support this.

And he's ON the supercommittee! :)

[lordsummerisle]

55. k&r n/t

[scentopine]

57. Baucus will grant another gift to wall street donors just like health care "reform" -nt

[nashville_brook]

60. bet on it.

[woo me with science]

61. K&R nt

[adam in oregon]

64. Little Late

i agree with rep Walters, this is totally unconstitutional, but this has been going on for months. Did you just hear about this or what? The whole show is over in like 3 weeks and now you come out against? Of course the cuts are going to be horrible. That is the whole point. We are going the route of Greece but since too many people in America don't read, or don't care it just isn't obvious yet. Wait until they deadlock and the austerity measures start. OWS will look like a camp picnic.

[Soylent Brice]

65. K&R

[TBF]

68. About time ... K&R nt

[Jakes Progress]

70. How long before Maxine sees the underside of the bus?

Good for her. To hell with the cowardly and the complicit.

[nashville_brook]

78. thought that happened a long time ago -- you can't stand up for the people

and not find the underside of the bus these days.

[valerief]

72. Thank you, Maxine! nt

[lonestarnot]

73. Taxation w/o representation. They along with the banks are laughing stocks.

[existentialist]

77. May God bless Maxine Waters,

and The Nation.

[femrap]

81. About time

someone put that Super Committee on notice.

[IthinkThereforeIAM]

83. I agree with Maxine...

... and, “illegitimate” and “borders on unconstitutional.” Where the first thoughts that came to mind for me. The, "supercommittee", reeks of the tombstoned Politburo in the USSR, ie... a group of favored dinosaurs within the Party are, "honored", with admission to the Politiburo due to length of service and favoritism within the Party itself. And they thought we would blink and just let it fall into place? Well, it had occurred to me in the past few weeks that this was happening.

I can put a smile on my face, if only for a while, because Maxine Waters is taking exception to this horrendous endeavor.

[earcandle]

84. How to make this derelict Congress accountable for breach of oath to protect our coffers and safety

nets?  This behavior of the Congress is treasonous and has
been for many years.  Obama should march the military to the
Congress and round them up to jail, and then slowly one by one
release the obviously innocent (those who have stood to
protect us) and prosecute those who have undermined our
constitution and rule of law through negligent tax collection
and defunding and understaffing of our regulatory laws which
also have undermined our ability to stay safe, prosperous and
stable.   What will it take to hold those who have played with
our rights and privileges to be removed, including Supreme
Court Justices and to get our form of governance back?   Work
this out. 

[Fuzz]

86. Well now all the Republicans will have to come out for it and call her a commie.

[suffragette]

89. nashville, too Late to rec but I so appreciate you keeping us apprised

on this.

So important.

And leave it to Maxine to be the brave person who does this.

Exactly why I admire her and why the RW has been using every scummy trick in the book to oust her (since they know that, just like McDermott, her constituents fully support her and they can't take either out in fair elections).

[lunatica]

90. The whole idea of a Supercommittee is despicable

Why are other Congress members abdicating their duties? Are the ones who come from poorer states going to say it's OK to cut social programs their constituents depend heavily on while the rich yet again don't get fazed? Are the rest of the Congress members who aren't on the Supercommittee being handsomely rewarded by the Koch brothers too just to sit back and let themselves be told what to do by their colleagues?

[eridani]

92. Actual bill number and title below

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-h3201/show

H.R.3201 - To amend the Budget Control Act of 2011 to eliminate the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction.