The good: The Hill reports...
House Republicans will attach a balanced-budget amendment to Speaker John Boehner’s (R-Ohio) last-ditch debt-ceiling plan, which GOP lawmakers said would move the measure to passage in a high-stakes vote later on Friday.
Republican lawmakers say the Boehner framework would still pave the way for the debt limit to be raised through the 2012 election in two chunks. But it would also mandate that the second hike of the ceiling could only occur after a balanced-budget amendment passed both chambers of Congress and went to the states for ratification.
Sounds good, right? And if kept intact, it might provide a better compromise, but still far from flawless. So let's look into the idea of keeping this revision intact.
Erick Erickson of RedState, like many, has been following this long, twisted trainwreck of negotiations since its heated beginnings; and in doing so, has what I believe to be an insightful gauge on how both sides react, particularly when it comes to Democrats being several steps ahead of Republican leadership in the strategic department.
And thus, the bad:
A balanced budget amendment is worth fighting for. A balanced budget amendment is worth holding the line for. But it is not worth being fooled into voting for a plan by it including a BBA on a subsequent debt ceiling vote knowing with 100% certainty that not only will Harry Reid strip it out in the Senate, but that your own leadership will sell you out on when it comes back to you. Your symbolic vote — and it is a symbolic vote — will be used to play you as a fool.
I can't disagree that this is a real possibility. I wouldn't put anything past Senate Democrats or the President. With all the talk of compromise our dear Leader speaks of, he and Reid are among the biggest practitioners of hypocrisy, with a media happy to oblige. And well, with conservative Principle abandoned, a lack of vigilance and an eternal phobia for fear of blame, we are very aware of the weak spines our leadership members possess.
So there's the two directions Boehner 3.0 could take. But wait...last night we began to hear whispers of a secret plan being discussed behind closed doors (we know how those end up) between Boehner, McConnell and Reid: Plan C.
Fox reports:
The officials said President Obama has spent the past couple of days quietly reaching out to leaders in both parties to try and start hammering out the details, though it's clear this is still only in the discussion phase and they are not close to a deal yet.
Senate Budget Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D., hinted at such a compromise earlier Thursday during an interview on Fox News.
“Let me just say behind the scenes there are discussions underway to find a way forward,” said Conrad. “To how would you harmonize what Leader Reid has come up with and Speaker Boehner has come up with and I'm increasingly of the view that we can do that. That’s good news.”
The focus of this round of talks is on what kind of "trigger" mechanism the debt ceiling legislation will have to guarantee that a new special committee of Congress actually follows up with real spending cuts later this year. And whether or not positive action by the committee will allow the president to get more leeway on another lift in the debt ceiling so there’s no repeat of the current debate early next year.
And similarly, Politico reports:
Under the possible compromise, Congress could still get a second crack at voting on the debt limit within months. But rather than linking the vote to Congress approving the recommendations of a new 12-member committee — as it would be in Boehner’s bill — Democrats prefer McConnell’s proposal that allows President Barack Obama to lift the debt ceiling unless two-thirds of both chambers override his veto of a disapproval resolution, the officials said.
To force action on a deficit reduction package, the White House would agree to strengthen the mechanism that compels Congress to pass the special committee’s recommendations, the officials said. The officials would not detail proposals for a so-called trigger that acts as an incentive for both parties to bargain in good faith and reach agreement.
Hmm, that "trigger" will assuredly amount to tax hikes, exactly what Obama has wanted from the beginning, instead of pursuing any long-term debt-reduction package. So much for fiscal responsibility or stability. Can you hear the sucking sound?
