Mon, May 28, 2012, 7:16 PM EDT - U.S. Markets closed for Memorial Day

Super failure: Deficit-cutting panel gives up

Supercommittee gives up: No deficit-cut deal, setting stage for possible military reductions

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Congress' supercommittee conceded ignominious defeat Monday in its quest to conquer a government debt that stands at a staggering $15 trillion, unable to overcome deep and enduring political divisions over taxes and spending.

Stock prices plummeted at home and across debt-scarred Europe as the panel ended its brief, secretive existence without an agreement. Republicans and Democrats alike pointed fingers of blame, maneuvering for political advantage in advance of 2012 elections less than a year away.

The impasse underscored grave doubts about Washington's political will to make tough decisions and left a cloud of uncertainty over the U.S. economy at the same time that Greece, Italy, Spain and other European countries are reeling from a spreading debt crisis and recession worries.

Lawmakers of both parties agreed action in Congress was still required, somehow, and soon.

"Despite our inability to bridge the committee's significant differences, we end this process united in our belief that the nation's fiscal crisis must be addressed and that we cannot leave it for the next generation to solve," the panel's two co-chairs, Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., and Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Tex., said in a somber statement.

They added it was not possible to present "any bipartisan agreement" — omitting any reference to the goal of $1.2 trillion in cuts over a decade that had been viewed as a minimum for success.

President Barack Obama — criticized by Republicans for keeping the committee at arm's length — said refusal by the GOP to raise taxes on the wealthy as part of a deal that also cut social programs was the main stumbling block.

"They simply will not budge from that negotiating position," he said.

Obama pledged to veto any attempt by lawmakers to repeal a requirement for $1 trillion in automatic spending cuts that are to be triggered by the supercommittee's failure to reach a compromise, unless Congress approves an alternative approach.

Those cuts are designed to fall evenly on the military and domestic government programs beginning in 2013, and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta as well as lawmakers in both parties have warned the impact on the Pentagon could be devastating.

"In my four decades involved with public service, I have never been more concerned about the ability of Congress to forge common-sense solutions to the nation's pressing problems," Panetta, a former House budget committee chairman, said in a statement. "The half-trillion dollars in additional cuts demanded by sequester would lead to a hollow force incapable of sustaining the missions it is assigned."

In reality, though, it is unclear if any of those reductions will ever take effect, since next year's presidential and congressional elections have the potential to alter the political landscape before then.

The brief written statement from Murray and Hensarling was immediately followed by a hail of recriminations.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said Republicans had "never found the courage to ignore the tea party extremists" and "never came close to meeting us half way."

But Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., who authored a GOP offer during the talks, said, "Unfortunately, our Democratic colleagues refused to agree to any meaningful deficit reduction without $1 trillion in job-crushing tax increases."

Said Gov. Rick Perry of Texas, a GOP presidential hopeful, "It's amazing to what lengths he (Obama) will go to avoid making tough decisions."

It was unlikely the outcome would materially improve Congress' public standing — already well below 20-percent approval in numerous polls.

And the panel's failure left lawmakers confronting a large and controversial agenda for December, including Obama's call to extend an expiring payroll tax cut and unemployment benefits. Democrats had wanted to add those items and more to any compromise, and lawmakers in both parties also face a struggle to stave off a threatened 27 percent cut in payments to doctors who treat Medicare patients.

Based on accounts provided by officials familiar with the talks, it appeared that weeks of private negotiations did nothing to alter a fundamental divide between the two political parties. Before and during the talks, Democrats said they would agree to significant savings from benefit programs like Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security only if Republicans would agree to a hefty dose of higher taxes, including cancellation of Bush-era cuts at upper-income brackets. In contrast, The GOP side said spending, not revenue, was the cause of the government's chronic budget deficits, and insisted that the tax cuts approved in the previous decade all be made permanent.

The Democrats' "idea was this was the opportunity to raise taxes,'" said Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona, the Senate's second-ranking Republican and a member of the supercommittee. "It didn't matter what we proposed; the price of that was going to be $1.3 trillion in new taxes," he added in a CNBC interview, although Democrats made at least two offers that called for smaller amounts of additional tax revenue.

Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., said on MSNBC, "I have demonstrations outside my office. I've had rallies. I've had unbelievable amount of pushback because we were ready and prepared to put on the table some of those so-called sacred cows." Republicans, he said, refused to consider cancellation of the tax cuts for the wealthy.

The talks also were hampered by internal divisions within both parties.

Republicans offered a plan crafted by Toomey about two weeks ago that included an additional $250 billion in tax revenue through an overhaul of the tax code that included reducing the top tax rate from 35 percent to 28 percent. Some Republicans criticized it as a violation of the party's long-standing pledge not to raise taxes. Even some in the GOP leadership, including Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor of Virginia, declined to endorse it in public.

At the same time, Democrats ridiculed it as a tax cut for the rich in disguise — even privately criticizing Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., when he said it could signal a breakthrough — and it failed to generate any momentum toward compromise. Reid and others also accused Republicans of bowing to the wishes of Grover Norquist, an anti-tax activist whose organization has gathered signatures from GOP candidates on a petition pledging never to raise taxes.

And Democrats had problems of their own. An offer presented by Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., to cut about $3 trillion from future deficits failed to win the backing of two of the six committee members of his own party. Officials said they objected because it would have curtailed future cost-of-living increases for Social Security recipients, some liberals said in remarks on the Senate floor they opposed it and Republicans criticized them for intransigence.

Baucus jettisoned it from a subsequent offer that also slashed an earlier demand for tax revenues.

The panel's failure marked the end of an extraordinary yearlong effort by divided government to grapple with budget deficits that lawmakers of both parties and economists of all persuasions agreed were unsustainable.

Negotiations in the Capitol led by Vice President Joseph Biden were followed by an extraordinary round of White House talks in which Obama and House Speaker John Boehner sought a sweeping compromise to cut trillions from future deficits. They outlined a potential accord that would make far-reaching changes in Medicare and other programs, while generating up to $800 billion in higher revenue through an overhaul of the tax code. But in the end, they failed to agree.

By contrast, the supercommittee never came close, instead swapping increasingly small-bore offers that the other side swiftly rejected.

Within the past week, Democrats said they would accept a Republican framework for $400 billion in higher tax revenue and $800 billion or so in spending cuts, while rejecting numerous key proposals.

Late last week, Boehner floated an offer that included $543 billion in spending cuts, fees and other non-tax revenue, as well as $3 billion in tax revenue from closing a special tax break for corporate purchases of private jets. It also assumed $98 billion in reduced interest costs.

It was swiftly rejected.

___

Associated Press writers Andrew Taylor, Alan Fram and Laurie Kellman contributed to this story.

 

259 comments

  • MrBone2000  •  6 months ago
    What a bunch of despicable, spineless "leaders" we have in Washington, DC. These guys can't compromise while our country goes to he** in a handbasket. I don't care if you are for the Democrats or Republicans. Every single one of those politicians should hang their heads in shame- get rid of all of them and let's start over. Jefferson, Washington and Adams must be spinning in their graves.
    • Peach 6 months ago
      I agree, but Jefferson, Washington and Adams would be most upset with the fact that the President, unlike them, did not lead, but pushed his responsibility off to this committee. This is the President's job.
    • Julius 6 months ago
      Republicans did a good job of not caving to the Dems and their public union thugs.

      The Dems refuse to budge on their need to hike my taxes to support the out-of-control spending in this country. The country spent 6% more this year than last, and is on track to spend 6% more next year, spending nearly 33% of the GDP, compared to 23% 5 years ago. The Dems are beholden to public employee unions who suck this country into poverty.

      I don't want compromise with out-of-control spending. I want the Dems to back down off their lunatic urge to spend more and more.
    • Kevins432 6 months ago
      Peach, You're an idiot. It's the responsibility of Congress to present a budget to the President to sign off on.
      Julius, ya let those billionaires be taxed at 17% and I'm taxed at 28%. That makes sense. Another idiot who doesn't comprehend basic math...
  • Somebody  •  6 months ago
    Interesting... in the animal kingdom there are names for a group of same type of animals. Like a flock of geese or a murder of crows. When it comes to baboons it is called a congress of baboons. How appropriate is that.
  • howard d  •  6 months ago
    Get their names and vote them out. Their's nothing super about any of them. Just pigs in the public trouth.
    • Reagan 6 months ago
      Public should get the names of every person in Congress who signed pledges to Roger Norquist. Who has ever heard of anyone with an ounce of sense voting for a person who signed a pledge to get elected. The people who did vote for these people should ask themselves who is their Representative working for? Roger Norquist.
  • Todd  •  6 months ago
    Can we try a super duper committee next!
    • Jeffrey 6 months ago
      I do not think it is going to work. What we need is a cyborg cybernetics artificially intelligent like the borg. Trust me. They will work together.
  • BCre8F2  •  6 months ago
    This just makes it abundantly clear that it's time to vote ALL of the people out and put people in that will actually make decisions that are best for the future of the Country and not what is best for future political careers. We the People are sick of this!!!
    • LLLLDoubleZ 6 months ago
      how???
    • conheart 6 months ago
      How? By making sure Ron Paul is elected. He is the last and only hope.
    • Gabe 6 months ago
      People get paid to vote down ron paul comments and spread heinous lies about him. this is ridiculous. If you support the constitution you would vote for him and if he won we would never be in this mess in the first place. He already has made a sound budget which would eliminate the deficit in 3 years while other politicians can't even remember their own budget plans...
  • Bryan  •  6 months ago
    Everyone on the super committee should resign for not being able to do their job.
  • ppdxfsa  •  6 months ago
    "Despite our inability to bridge the committee's significant differences, we end this process united in our belief that the nation's fiscal crisis must be addressed and that we cannot leave it for the next generation to solve," the panel's two co-chairs, Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., and Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Tex., said in a somber statement."

    WHAT? YOU JUST DID. IF YOU CAN'T SOLVE A 1.4 trillion DOLLAR DEFICIT, HOW CAN CONGRESS DEAL WITH 15 + TRILLION. BOTH PARTIES: YOU SUCK.
  • Da Bears  •  6 months ago
    it's not defeat, it's failure, and the people who are losing are the Americans dumb enough to tolerate your idiocy.
    • Wolfgangjr 6 months ago
      Dumb enough to keep voting them back into office.
    • JIGG ABOOO 6 months ago
      What a Motley Crew of LOOSer LIBS......"Lurch Kerry, HAIRY Reed, and DIck Duche'in. ALL are Fullofshit!
    • gee cee 6 months ago
      vote all of them out means you will send the same liberal loons replacements ending in the same results, its the democrats and their loyal economic challenge voters fault. This elections is about whether you want the democratic party to destroy the country financially and eventually lead to massive civil disobedience OR move back toward Ron Reagan like prosperity for the productive citizens. Democrats do not create wealth, they can only redistribute it though social programs but all we have is debt.
  • unforgiven  •  6 months ago
    I wonder if they will give up all that lobbyist cash they got for doing nothing.
  • JamesK  •  6 months ago
    whats a trillion going to do over the next ten years? whoopi..they should be cutting 4 trillion in the next 2 years.. we are fried, folks....the people running this place are insane..
  • Joe  •  6 months ago
    Take all 12 of them out behind the out house and tan those butts! All 12 need to know that they will not be re-elected! Failure should not have been an option!
  • Super Poor  •  6 months ago
    A spending cut is now merely a reduction of future increases. It is beyond hysterical. Have 22.5million government employees for 330million people, in 1976 the US had 7million government employees with 220million people with the military being constant.
  • Roland  •  6 months ago
    My wife and I couldn't come to an agreement on how much tax we should pay, so we decided to not send any to the government this year...hope that is ok?
  • Ron  •  6 months ago
    If they worked for me and after all that time they failed, I would fire them so fast they would go super sonic out the door. Worthless POS.
  • Xpat  •  6 months ago
    The Super Committee did not meet their job requirement. They should all be FIRED NOW for non performance. Don't want to hear any whining from either side - they are putting all of us at risk.
  • James  •  6 months ago
    SImple Soloution - Every year there is a deficit, taxes go up for everyone by 5% ( yes everyone - all 100%A), and government worker salaries and benefits are cut by 10%. The problem should be solved in two years, four maximum.
  • watcher1962  •  6 months ago
    get the government out of the hands of our political "leaders" (sic). get a group of actual accountants in there. do a department by department accounting of what they have and what they need. make the cuts as necessary and fire the wasteful people that are NOT producing anything anything worthwhile (oops, I think I just got rid of congress and the President). I bet you could come up with a whole lot more than $15,000,000,000,000 in savings without sacrificing our national defense. I'm not a professional accountant but i do live within a budget and have an overage of cash every week. I will volunteer to do this project without any compensation for my time because I AM AN AMERICAN!!!!!!!!
  • wiprguy  •  6 months ago
    Hmmm...surprise, surprise..more of the same........another middle finger to the working Americans...will we remember at election time , or just pull the lever of the guy we've always voted for??? They have to go, America...all of them.
  • Russel Dean  •  6 months ago
    Stupercommittee :)
  • Stimulate  •  6 months ago
    Why wouldn't one expect super-failure from a bunch of super-losers!!
 
Recent Quotes
Symbol Price Change % Chg 
Your most recently viewed tickers will automatically show up here if you type a ticker in the "Enter symbol/company" at the bottom of this module.
You need to enable your browser cookies to view your most recent quotes.
 
Sign-in to view quotes in your portfolios.

Trading Center

Yahoo! Finance on Facebook

  YAHOO! FINANCE ON TWITTER