{"id":178722,"date":"2018-09-05T19:36:00","date_gmt":"2018-09-06T00:36:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/2018\/09\/05\/dump-nancy\/"},"modified":"2018-09-05T19:36:00","modified_gmt":"2018-09-06T00:36:00","slug":"dump-nancy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/2018\/09\/05\/dump-nancy\/","title":{"rendered":"Dump Nancy"},"content":{"rendered":"

Nancy Pelosi has decided that she will do her damnedest to re-institute pay-go<\/a>, which will once again make advancing any meaningful Democratic Party agenda nearly impossible.<\/p>\n

In addition to the fact that this is horrible policy, this sort of pandering to rich beltway pundits bullsh%$ that led to the Democratic Party losing the House, the Senate, the White House, and something like 2\/3 of the state houses in the nation:<\/p>\n

In the first outline of the legislative agenda House Democrats would pursue if they take the majority in November, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has made the public a big promise, vowing to handcuff her party\u2019s progressive ambitions, including in the event that a Democratic president succeeds Donald Trump, by resurrecting the \u201cpay-go\u201d rule that mandates all new spending is offset with budget cuts or tax increases. <\/p>\n

\u2026\u2026\u2026<\/p>\n

Forcing budget offsets for every piece of legislation would make it more difficult for Democrats to pass a host of liberal agenda items, from \u201cMedicare for All\u201d to tuition-free public college. It continues a trend of Democrats caring far more about deficits than Republicans, constraining the activist impulses of liberal policymakers while giving conservatives free rein to blow giant holes in the tax code.<\/p>\n

According to Axios<\/a>, Pelosi \u201cis committed to reviving\u201d pay-go, which she instituted as a standing rule upon taking over the House in 2007. Though she waived the rule to pass the economic stimulus bill responding to the Great Recession, most of the other major legislative initiatives of the early Obama era \u2014 including the Affordable Care Act \u2014 were paid for. In 2010, Obama took this even further by signing the Statutory Pay As You Go Act<\/a>. It enables presidents to enforce across-the-board cuts if Congress violates the rule. <\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

A note here:  Given that the Supreme Court ruled that the line-item veto bill was an unconstitutional violation of the separation power in 1998s<\/a>, the Pay as You Go Act is also likely unconstitutional.<\/p>\n

Pelosi\u2019s planned legislative package<\/a> for the beginning of a potential House takeover would include establishing ethics and lobbying reforms<\/a>, lowering the costs of health insurance premiums and prescription drugs<\/a>, and spending $1 trillion for infrastructure investment<\/a>. The latter two would cost money, and under pay-go it would all have to be offset. <\/p>\n

That\u2019s not necessarily a problem \u2014 liberals have plenty of ideas for how to raise revenue. But it puts them in a box, having to propose tax increases that Republicans gleefully broadcast. Meanwhile, Republicans, unconcerned with deficits, get to play Santa Claus, without having to match tax cuts with anything unappealing. <\/p>\n

\u2026\u2026\u2026<\/p>\n

Progressives have grown incensed by Pelosi\u2019s insistence on budget neutrality. \u201cThe pay-go thing is an absurd idea now, given the times and given what\u2019s already been done to curry favor with corporate America,\u201d Rep. Ra\u00fal Grijalva, D-Ariz., said to The Hill<\/a> in June. He argues that, unlike Republicans who are happy to cut taxes by $1.5 trillion without offsets, Democrats would try to solve nagging problems with unnecessary shackles. Grijalva called it \u201cirresponsible to try to tie up Congress\u2019s ability to respond to economic downturns or, in the current discussion, to slash programs.\u201d <\/p>\n

A new vanguard of economists in Washington, including former Bernie Sanders staffer Stephanie Kelton<\/a>, has argued that under modern monetary theory, public spending is only constrained when the economy is running at full capacity and inflation starts to rise \u2014 which is not remotely the case today. Public deficits, she points out, are just another way of talking about private surpluses. She has warned of the dangers of balanced budgets that take money from the hands of ordinary people, and has made some headway inside Washington. Kelton has been involved in strategy sessions with Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and remains close to Sanders, who would chair the Budget Committee if Democrats take the Senate. But Pelosi has been unmoved. <\/p>\n

In a statement, Kelton said that \u201cpay-go is a self-imposed, economically illiterate approach to budgeting.\u201d Republicans, she said, know this, which is why \u201cthey have unabashedly used their power to expand deficits and, hence, deliver windfall gains for big corporations and the already well-to-do.\u201d <\/p>\n

She continued, \u201cInstead of vowing budget chastity, Democrats should be articulating an agenda that excites voters so that they can unleash the full power of the public purse on their behalf.\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

I’m increasingly of the opinion that the Democrats won in 2006 and 2008 was in spite of Pelosi’s complete lack of ideology as leader of the House Democrats, not because of it.<\/span>

<\/span>Seriously, to paraphrase someone who was not Tallyrand, he appropriated the quote, “She has forgotten nothing, and she has learned nothing.”<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Nancy Pelosi has decided that she will do her damnedest to re-institute pay-go, which will once again make advancing any meaningful Democratic Party agenda nearly impossible. In addition to the fact that this is horrible policy, this sort of pandering to rich beltway pundits bullsh%$ that led to the Democratic Party losing the House, the …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[446,374,406,403],"class_list":["post-178722","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","tag-budget","tag-politics","tag-stupid","tag-wanker"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/178722"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=178722"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/178722\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=178722"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=178722"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=178722"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}