DOWNLOADS: (140)

PLAYS: (727)

Embed

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) is insisting that Republican budget plans which drastically cut discretionary spending on programs for the sick and the poor is an "opportunity" instead of "austerity."

NBC host David Gregory on Sunday pointed out to Ryan that New York Times columnist Paul Krugman recently argued that "the willingness of the government to keep spending was one of the main reasons we didn’t experience a full replay of the Great Depression."

"Well, we can debate the efficacy of Keynesian economics or not, and I think that it's pretty clear that it doesn't work," the former Republican vice presidential nominee quipped. "We're not preaching austerity; we're preaching growth and opportunity. What we're saying is if you get our fiscal ship fixed, you preempt austerity."

"A debt crisis is what they have in Europe, which is austerity," he continued. "You cut the safety net immediately, you cut retirement benefits for people who have already retired, you raise taxes, slow down the economy, young people don't have jobs. That's the austerity that comes when you have a debt crisis. And when you keep stacking up trillion dollar deficits like this government is doing, it's bringing us to that moment."

"Our job is to prevent and preempt austerity so we can get back to growth."

New York magazine's Jonathan Chait noted last week that House Speaker John Boehner's (R-OH) plan to balance the budget within 10 years was "utterly impossible" because it was as plausible as a "Unicorn Being Ridden By Santa Claus Who Has Lost 50 Pounds Through One Weird Trick."

Chait explained: "Now, if you assume that Republicans aren't going to actually figure out how to go further than the domestic discretionary cuts they've already voted for — I doubt they can actually carry those out — then the available pool of spending is the $900 billion-some dollars spent on programs for the poor and sick: Medicaid, food stamps, etc. So we're looking at close to a 90 percent spending cut on programs for the poor and sick."

"I suppose Paul Ryan could spin this as a super-compassionate plan to help starving children and people with awful diseases learn to stop being moochers and take care of themselves," he added. "But the inescapable fact is that Boehner has committed now to voting on something that would require even more draconian cuts to social spending than the Ryan budget."

The NewStatesmen has defined "austerity" as "an economic policy: deficit-cutting, slashed spending and the mysterious evaporation of benefits."

DOWNLOADS: (204)

PLAYS: (912)

Embed

Naturally we couldn't make it through another Sunday without our corporate media bringing on Sen. John McCain to prove he's living in Republican upside-down land.

I don't have much to add to Steve Benen's take on this, and please go read the entire post, but here's part of it -- McCain: Americans 'don't want compromise':

It’s safe to say Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) doesn’t have his finger on the pulse of public opinion. [...]

In every meaningful way, McCain’s assumptions are exactly backwards.

What the conservative senator seems to be arguing here is the notion of a mandate: Republicans campaigned against taxes, Republicans won, ergo Republicans can’t allow a compromise that imposes any tax increases on anyone ever. It’s an “elections have consequences” kind of approach.

And that’s not a bad pitch, if McCain were in any way correct about the details, but he’s not. For one thing, Americans elected a Democratic Senate. (McCain may have forgotten, but his caucus is still in the minority.) If voters left us with a Republican House and a Democratic Senate, how exactly does McCain perceive this as an anti-compromise electorate?

For another, the evidence is overwhelming that the American mainstream absolutely supports additional revenue as part of a larger debt-reduction deal.

And naturally we got no follow up from Crowley on just how wrong-headed McCain's assertions are or why he thinks it's acceptable to call something a "negotiation" when one side is completely unwilling to compromise.

McCain also floated the idea that the GOP might be willing to consider "certain revenue raisers" as long as no one dares call them a tax increase, but of course he refused to say just what those "revenue raisers" are.

Full transcript below the fold.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (246)

PLAYS: (1009)

Embed

A group of tea party Senators plans to filibuster over raising the debt ceiling, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) announced in an interview that aired on C-SPAN Sunday.

"I was part of a group this week that said, 'No more,'" Paul explained. "We're tired of talking about extraneous issues. We've had not one minute of debate about the debt ceiling in any committee. We haven't had a budget in two years. We haven't had an appropriations bill in two years."

"So I'm part of the freshman group in the Senate that's saying, 'no more.' We're not going to let them go to any issue if we have a say in it. We will filibuster until we talk about the debt ceiling, until we talk about proposals, and many of us in the conservative wing are going to present our own proposal next week. And that is to raise the debt ceiling. We will actually vote in favor of raising the debt ceiling next week if we can but it will be contingent upon passing a balanced budget amendment."

DOWNLOADS: (758)

PLAYS: (12435)

Embed

Eliot Spitzer and Rand Paul had a rather contentious debate over his income, his stance on Medicare payments for doctors being reduced and just what he'd cut to balance the federal budget on CNN's Parker Spitzer. After Paul's reaction at the end of the segment, I don't think he'll be coming on with Spitzer again any time soon. He might be more likely to show up on Rachel Maddow's show first.

Time for your weekly podcast with The Professional Left, our own Driftglass and Bluegal. Have a great weekend everyone, and happy birthday to Driftglass.

You can listen to past editions or make a donation to help keep these going at http://professionalleft.blogspot.com/. And here is the article from Esquire magazine which was discussed during the podcast.

How to Balance the Federal Budget (in Three Days)