October 9, 2011 7:11 PM

Debt "supercommittee" struggling to agree

America's debt battle

The dome of the U.S. Capitol is seen in Washington Jan. 4, 2011.

US Debt-Reduction Supercommittee members: (top l-r) Republican Senators Jeb Hensarling, Dave Camp, and Fred Upton, and Representatives Jon Kyl, Pat Toomey and Rob Portman, (bottom l-r) Democrat Senators Patty Murray, John Kerry, and Max Baucus, and Representatives James Clyburn, Xavier Becerra and Christopher Van Hollen (AP)

(AP) 

WASHINGTON - After weeks of secret meetings, the 12-member deficit-cutting panel established under last summer's budget and debt deal appears no closer to a breakthrough than when talks began last month.

While the panel members themselves aren't doing much talking, other lawmakers, aides and lobbyists closely tracking the so-called "supercommittee" are increasingly skeptical, even pessimistic, that the panel will be able to meet its assigned goal of at least $1.2 trillion in deficit savings over the next 10 years.

The reason? A familiar deadlock over taxes and cuts to major programs like the Medicare and Medicaid health care programs for the elderly, poor and disabled.

Democrats won't go for an agreement that doesn't include lots of new tax revenue; Republicans are just as ardently anti-tax. The impasse over revenues means that Democrats won't agree to cost curbs on popular entitlement programs like Medicare.

"Fairness has to be a prerequisite for it," said House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi. "We have just come through passing a bill that was (all spending) cuts, no revenue." Pelosi was referring to the August debt limit bill, which set tight "caps" on agency budgets but didn't contain revenue increases supported by Democrats.

Gov't records $1.3 trillion budget deficit again
Poll: Most want taxes on millionaires increased
Deficits still go up big in Obama's deficit plan
Pressure mounts on supercommittee to cut big

Democrats are more insistent on revenues now.

"There's been no movement on revenues and I'm not sure the Democrats will agree to anything without revenues," added a Democratic lobbyist who required anonymity to speak candidly.

Asked last week whether she is confident that the panel can hit its $1.2 trillion goal, co-chairman Sen. Patty Murray, a Washington state Democrat, sidestepped the question.

"I am confident that the public is watching us very closely to see if we can show this country that this democracy can work," Murray told reporters. "I carry that weight on my shoulders every day and so does every member of this committee."

The two parties have equal strength on the panel, which has until the Thanksgiving holiday at the end of November to come up with a plan to submit for up-or-down House and Senate votes in December. That means bipartisan compromise is a prerequisite for a successful result.

Thus far, say aides to panel members and other lawmakers, neither side has demonstrated the required flexibility in the super-secret talks.

The $1.2 trillion target evolved after efforts by President Barack Obama and Republican House Speaker John Boehner to strike a so-called grand bargain on taxes and spending fell apart in July.

Those discussions and earlier talks led by Vice President Joe Biden identified numerous options for cutting the deficit. They included requiring federal workers to contribute more to their retirement, cutting farm subsidies, auctioning broadcast spectrum and curbing payments to Medicare providers like skilled nursing facilities, rural hospitals and home health care services.

The supercommittee could scoop up these relatively easy-to-generate savings but still fall short of the $1.2 trillion target. Interest groups like the powerful farm lobby might be willing to accept cuts when everybody else is getting hit, too, but are likely to fight back if they're among the relative few getting singled out for sacrifice.

"Once you start taking things off the table or you pick a deal that only hits some parts of the budget, then you have some people who get hit who say, `Well, why me? Why not other people?"' said Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

To be sure, the supercommittee still has time. And panel members, while divided, earnestly want a result. A more optimistic scenario is that in coming days and weeks, members of the panel will become more flexible as the deadline nears — and as pressure builds from financial markets and credit rating agencies like Standard & Poor's, which in August downgraded U.S. debt from its AAA rating.

At the same time, failure to produce a measure would trigger painful across-the-board cuts to the Pentagon budget and a big slice of domestic programs, including Medicare, food stamps and Medicaid. The idea behind this so-called sequester was to force the two sides to come together because the alternative is too painful.

"I made it clear to the Republican members of the supercommittee that I expect there will be an outcome, that there has to be an outcome," Boehner said at a Washington forum on Thursday. "The sequester that was built behind this is ugly, and it was meant to be ugly so that no one would go there. I don't underestimate how hard it's going to be to come to an agreement by the so-called supercommittee, but we have to get to one."

The across-the-board sequester, however, wouldn't take effect until the beginning of 2013, which is already fueling speculation that Congress would simply revisit the issue after the elections next year.

© 2011 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Add a Comment See all 68 Comments
by DrJJJ October 20, 2011 12:37 PM EDT
You'll NEVER solve the budget problem without changing to a flat/fair type tax scenario-NEVER! Too many working under the table, too many tax evaders, a 65,000 page tax code favors the rich, 50,000 working for the IRS, off shore tax evasion, deductions are favortism, we're all motivated to cheat and 51% according to the IRS pay no Fed taxes! Good luck doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result! We can't find the will to shrink government now 40% of US GDP so we better find the will to increase taes on us all! Note: the top 10% already pay 70% of all Fed taxes so even if you triple their taxes, you won't come close to knocking down the deficit, let alone our 100% of US GDP debt! Also, doesn't adress the 10s of Trillions in unfunded entitlements for 80 million boomers ling up either! How's your state doing? Time to raise taxes on everyone and cut spending-no substitute for either! KISS!
Reply to this comment
by gep1955 October 19, 2011 7:26 PM EDT
Remember that what they will be cutting from is part of the $5.5 trillion spent that Obama, Reid and Pelosi shoved down our throats. Democrats had the WH and both houses for two years and never passed a budget. Now when it comes time to pay the bills it looks like the repus are to blame. Brilliant political strategy for the dems but the country suffers teribly.
Reply to this comment
by dantom39 October 16, 2011 6:58 PM EDT
DO nothing congress supercommittee. Waste of time.
Reply to this comment
by Dan1523 October 13, 2011 12:45 PM EDT
Social Security is a contract that should have never been written, but since no one is given a chance to opt out and most everyone has paid into the account. Those that paid in should get what the contract states; that I will agree with. As far as the founding fathers greed and averice, it is not a bad thing. Capitalism is a good economic process, only the most efficient and effective survive. The others fall by the wayside. Rather than being "fair"/ spreading the wealth and promoting inefficiency/laziness like socialism/communism or community activism economics; the central government control of business and economy is wasteful and expensive to all. Kind of like what a community organizer would do if the person became leader of a powerful capitalist country. Socialism is great until the county runs out of the working classes money. Governments do not create money, they take money (tax) to provide only essential services. Welfare is not an essential service. The Preamble statest promote the General Welfare; not provide the General Welfare. I challenge all readers to research what that means. Becareful of any "true" documents printed after 1920.
Reply to this comment
by dantom39 October 13, 2011 9:00 AM EDT
Nobody beleived this PC group would do anything do like working people do spend only what you have sh-can the credit cards.
Reply to this comment
by Kenny777_y October 12, 2011 11:05 PM EDT
all they have to do is hear what RON PAUL is saying and do it problem solved.
Reply to this comment
by kroberts01999 October 12, 2011 9:44 PM EDT
Obama and the Democratic Leadership must realize there is nothing left to compromise on if the opposition refuses to yield on taxes. Democrats must realize that the debt ceiling showdown defeated bipartisanship with great finality. Any further bargaining smacks of appeasement. Nothing more on the table. Time to take off the gloves. If not, you will be defeated and the country will be better off without you. We are going to need fighters in the future who not tainted by one-way compromise also known as surrender.
Reply to this comment
by kroberts01999 October 12, 2011 9:29 PM EDT
So if nothing happens we get an across the board cut in government spending right when everyone is hurting? Good, then the public will really see the reality of a Republican universe. You think this few thousand protestors around the country are making undue noise now, just wait till millions of potential voters lose their jobs, services, checks, etc. Who do you think they will blame then, Obama?
Reply to this comment
by kroberts01999 October 12, 2011 9:28 PM EDT
So if nothing happens we get an across the board cut in government spending right when everyone is hurting? Good, then the public will really see the reality of a Republican universe. You think this few thousand protestors around the country are making undue noise now, just wait till millions of potential voters lose their jobs, services, checks, etc. Who do you think they will blame then, Obama?
Reply to this comment
by wardove October 13, 2011 1:22 PM EDT
no the rep. party they are sabotaging obama , war is coming.
by kroberts01999 October 12, 2011 9:28 PM EDT
So if nothing happens we get an across the board cut in government spending right when everyone is hurting? Good, then the public will really see the reality of a Republican universe. You think this few thousand protestors around the country are making undue noise now, just wait till millions of potential voters lose their jobs, services, checks, etc. Who do you think they will blame then, Obama?
Reply to this comment
See all 68 Comments
.
Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook