- The Washington Times - Thursday, October 27, 2011

Two very different debt-reduction proposals leaked to the media this week show that Democrats and Republicans on the supercommittee are still miles apart on a deal, as the clock ticks down toward a Thanksgiving deadline for a unified plan.

After almost two months of mostly secret meetings, the 12 members of the bipartisan panel so far are sticking to their partisan guns, with Democrats calling for tax increases and some spending cuts, while Republicans remain opposed to any new taxes.

In keeping with their party’s call for a “big, bold and balanced” approach, Democrats on the supercommittee have proposed a $3 trillion debt-reduction plan that would include about $1.3 trillion in tax increases, about the same amount in spending cuts, and billions more in non-tax revenue.

The Democratic plan, led by Sen. Max Baucus of Montana, calls for about $400 billion in Medicare cuts and about $100 billion in reduced spending for Medicaid and other health programs. The Baucus plan also would use a new inflation formula that would slow the annual cost-of-living increase in future Social Security benefits.

Supercommittee Republicans countered with a plan that would reduce the debt by between about $1.5 trillion and $2 trillion without raising taxes. While details of the plan are sketchy, congressional aides have told reporters it would reap about 75 percent of its savings from spending cuts, with the rest coming from non-tax revenues, such as the sale of government lands and the wireless spectrum. The GOP plan also would cut about $500 billion from Medicare.

Because both plans are working drafts and haven’t been publicly released, debt panel members and party leaders have declined to speak about specifics in either.

House Speaker John A. Boehner said he wasn’t surprised the supercommittee is having difficulty coming together because “this isn’t easy.”

“I expect that it’s going to be very difficult to get to an outcome, but I am committed to getting to an outcome,” the Ohio Republican told reporters at the Capitol on Thursday.

Mr. Boehner then chastised the Democratic plan, saying even most Capitol Hill Democrats would balk at its proposed $1.3 trillion in tax increases. “I don’t think it’s a reasonable number,” he said.

The panel must vote by Thanksgiving on a 10-year plan to cut deficits by $1.5 trillion, on which the House and Senate would vote before Christmas. Failure to pass a package would trigger $1.2 trillion in automatic spending cuts affecting a wide range of domestic programs, as well as the Pentagon.

The savings would be in addition to more than $900 billion debt-reduction measures already agreed to as part of this summer’s bitterly fought deal to raise the nation’s debt ceiling.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said she wasn’t concerned the panel has floated two divergent plans less than a month before a critical deadline.

“That’s how you get to [a compromise], with people putting their proposals on the table, and you go section by section,” the California Democrat said on Thursday. “I’m pleased with the work of my members, and I respect the discretion that they want to use about what they want in the committee.”

Rep. Sander Levin, the senior Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee, portrayed the Republican plan as an unserious and unfair political ploy.

“Their unwillingness to ask anything of the very wealthiest even as they propose devastating cuts to Medicare and Social Security is totally unacceptable,” the Michigan lawmaker said.

But some liberals have criticized the health care cuts in the Baucus plan, accusing Democrats of caving to Republican demands for deep entitlement cuts.

“Instead of starting out at the negotiating table with a proposal the vast majority of Americans support, they’re apparently offering a plan to make deep cuts to Medicare benefits,” said Justin Ruben, executive director of MoveOn.org.

• This article is based in part on wire-service reports.

• Sean Lengell can be reached at slengell@washingtontimes.com.

Copyright © 2024 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Please read our comment policy before commenting.

Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide