Supercommittee Admits It's Failed To Reach A Deal 21NOV11

HERE are some words of wisdom our government and nation should consider, and should be considering with today's announcement that the super committee and congress failed the people again....THIS is NOT saying the Democrats should have caved in to the demands of the Republicans....It is saying that with this failure we should not lie, deceive and manipulate the facts about why the committee failed and who is responsible. There is enough truth in the facts, that the Democrats finally took and stand, and remained united in their commitment to the poor, the retired, the working class and the middle class of this nation and defended them against what seems to be the insatiable greed of the rich, corporations, the banking-financial cabal and the military industrial complex. Finally someone took a stand and held their ground for the the 99%!
Work toward unity, and live in harmony with one another. Avoid thinking you are better than others or wiser than the rest; instead, embrace common people and ordinary tasks. Do not retaliate with evil, regardless of the evil brought against you. Try to do what is good and right and honorable as agreed upon by all people. If it is within your power, make peace with all people.
- Romans 12:16-18

by Eyder Peralta

Enlarge J. Scott Applewhite/AP Democratic Sen. Patty Murray, the supercommittee co-chairwoman, arrives to meet in the Capitol Hill office of Democratic Sen. John Kerry with other members of the deficit reduction panel on Monday.

The co-chairs of the Supercommittee made it official, minutes ago: They said they have failed to reach an agreement over a deficit reduction package.
The AP reports:

"Democratic Sen. Patty Murray and Republican Rep. Jeb Hensarling say that despite 'intense deliberations' the members of the panel have been unable 'to bridge the committee's significant differences.'
"The panel was established by this summer's budget and debt agreement to cut at least $1.2 trillion from the budget over 10 years. But the panel has been divided from the beginning over taxes and cuts to popular government benefit programs like Medicare."

In a statement, Rep. Jeb Hensarling and Sen. Patty Murray, the co-chairs of the commission, said they were "deeply disappointed" in their inability to reach a bipartisan deal.
They add:

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 legislation Congress agreed to in the summer stipulates that if the committee could not reach a deal, there would across-the-board cuts of $1.2 trillion — or 10 percent of the nation's collective deficit — over the next decade. Neither party wants that, because it would hit the defense budget hard, which Republicans don't want, and also hit domestic programs, which Democrats don't want.
That could happen, or NPR's Liz Halloran reports, they could change the rules.
We'll have more as this story develops.
Update at 6:02 p.m. ET. A Bit More On The Impasse:
Like the debt ceiling negotiations of earlier this year, the impasse of these negotiations was about taxes on the rich. The Washington Post captures that divide with rounding up interviews with Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.):

Kerry said efforts ultimately foundered over the Republican refusal to accept any tax increases on the wealthy in exchange for spending cuts.
"This is a matter of fundamental fairness," Kerry told CNN. "We are stuck on this insistence of making the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy permanent. I think the American people will judge that to be insane."
Kyl blamed Democrats for insisting that taxes on more affluent Americans be increased. "Our Democratic friends said we won't cut one dollar more without raising taxes," Kyl said. "That tells you a lot about the ethos in Washington. We went into the exercise to try to reduce federal government spending. What we get from the other side is, 'No, we won't make more cuts unless you raise taxes.' "

Update at 5:49 p.m. ET. Obama Says He'll Veto Rule Changes:
"One way or another, we will be trimming the deficit," said President Obama just moments ago. The president, making a statement in the White House press briefing room, said Congress still has time to reach a deal, but that he does not support changing the rules in order to avoid automatic cuts.
The president warned he would veto any legislation that did so.
Obama opened his statement, however, with sharp words toward congressional Republicans. He said Republicans have refused to give in on new revenue or letting the Bush tax cuts expire. He said Republicans are trying to "protect the rich" despite cuts to medicare and other social programs for the poor.
"Their refusal remains the main stumbling block," he said.
Obama said Congress needs to get back to work and "create a balanced plan."
"They have a year to to figure it out," Obama said.
Update at 5:18 p.m. ET. President To Make A Statement:
President Obama will make a statement at 5:45 p.m. ET. We'll bring you his comments as they happen.

Related NPR Stories

Four Reasons The Supercommittee Isn't So Super Nov. 21, 2011

With No 'Super' Deal, What's Next? Nov. 21, 2011

Stop the Austerity Train Wreck! 18NOV11

ROBERT REICH must feel like one of the Old Testament prophets crying out in the wilderness of political America and the government is not listening. I am afraid it will take us sliding further into recession, maybe depression, before the people actually rise up and force the government to act or take the government by force. It is not inconceivable to imagine things getting so bad economically that violence against the government and the 1% who own them occurs...

The biggest question right now on Planet Washington is whether the congressional supercommittee will reach an agreement.
That's the wrong question. Agreement or not, Washington is on the road to making budget cuts that will slow the economy, increase unemployment, and impose additional hardship on millions of Americans.
The real question is how to stop this austerity train wreck, and substitute the following:
First: No cuts before jobs are back -- until unemployment is down to 5 percent. Until then, the economy needs a boost, not a cut. Consumers -- whose spending is 70 percent of the economy -- don't have the money to boost the economy on their own. Their pay is dropping and they're losing jobs.
Second: Make the boost big enough. 14 million Americans are out of work, and 10 million are working part time who need full-time jobs. The president's proposed jobs program is a start but it's tiny relative to what needs to be done. It would create fewer than 2 million jobs. We need a big jobs program -- rebuilding America's crumbling infrastructure, and including a WPA and Civilian Conservation Corps.
Third: To pay for this, raise taxes on the super-rich. It's only fair. Never before has so much income and wealth been concentrated at the very top, and taxes on the top so low. Go back to the 70 percent marginal tax we had before 1980. And include more tax brackets at the top. It doesn't make sense that any income over $375,000 is taxed at the same 35 percent, even if it's a billion dollars. And tax all sources of income at the same rate, including capital gains.
Fourth: Cut the budget where the real bloat is. Military spending and corporate welfare. End weapons systems that don't work and stop wars we shouldn't be fighting to begin with, and we save over $300 billion a year. Cut corporate welfare -- subsidies and special tax breaks going to big agribusiness, big oil, big pharma, and big insurance -- and we save another $100 billion.
Do you hear me, Washington? Do these four things and restore jobs and prosperity. Fail to do these, and you'll make things much, much worse.

TIM KAINE IS WRONG ON THE SUPER COMMITTEE 18NOV11

While I support Tim Kaine's candidacy for the U.S. Senate I believe he is wrong on the super committee and the affect the mandatory defense budget cuts will have on the economy of the Commonwealth. This from PERI.....
"The simple truth is that, beyond war industry hype, military spending costs us jobs. According to the Political Economy Research Institute’s (PERI) 2009 study, when you compare it to other ways of spending the money, every $1 billion spent for military purposes costs us, at minimum, 3,222 jobs. At the upper end, war spending costs us 17,500 or more jobs per billion dollars. Military spending creates fewer jobs, both directly and indirectly, than every other kind of spending studied by PERI. So, given that we spend well in excess of $700 billion every year on war in this country, it’s fair to say that our obsession with war spending is sucking the life right out of our economy."
Read their report here
http://warcosts.com/2011/09/08/the-war-budget-is-burning-down-our-economy/
Gov Kaine needs to be concerned about the affect of cuts to the social safety net and the devastating impact these cuts will have on the poor, the working class and the middle class in Virginia and across the country. As President Eisenhower stated at the end of his administration
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed." --Dwight D. Eisenhower

by Craig Carper

0.8811042629053099

• play

00:00

00:53

download

Former Governor and now Democratic Candidate for U.S. Senate Tim Kaine is urging the bipartisan Congressional supercommittee to reach a deficit reduction plan by its scheduled deadline next Wednesday. Craig Carper reports.

SUPERFRAUD: Call your senator: No "SUPER-COMMITTEE" cuts to Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security benefits 17NOV11

THE democrats are getting ready to cave to the gop / tea-baggers again, this time in negotiations of the "super-committee" which may result in massive cuts in Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. Click this link to contact your Senators and tell them we will be better off with no "super-committee" deal than the one now being considered, and to remember they are supposed to be representing the best interest of all Americans and not just the 1%.  Be sure to read Paul Krugman's op-ed in the NY Times from 14NOV11.

It's long past time to roll back the Bush era tax cuts for the wealthiest and end corporate handouts. We don't have to pay for it by throwing the poor, seniors and women under the bus with benefit cuts to Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security. Clickhere for contact info and a sample script: Call your Senators and tell them to say NO to a terribleSuper Committee deal., The deficit deal Republicans fear the most is the one they already cut when they created the Super Committee. If the Super Committee fails to pass a deficit reduction bill, a number of budget cuts will automatically be triggered. These cuts, which include defense spending but spare Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security benefits, are much less damaging that what's on the table. All the Democrats need to do to save our social safety net is stand strong. But according to recent reports, Democrats on the Super Committee have floated a proposal that would not only make deep cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid benefits, it would also pave the way for the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy to be made permanent.1 It's simply unconscionable. Make a call today. Tell your Senators Say NO to aterrible Super Committee deal that cuts Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security benefits. Click here for contact info and asample script. Paul Krugman summed up the situation nicely when he wrote: I thought I had worked out all the worst-case scenarios for the supercommittee (there was never a best-case). But this is even worse than my worst imagining: a deal to undermine key social insurance programs in return for a promise that Congress will come up with a plan for raising revenue at some future date. If you think that promise has any credibility whatsoever — if you have any doubts that the end result would be to gut Social Security and actually cut taxes for the wealthy — I have this Nigerian bank account that can be yours if you send me $100,000 in expenses.2 This is not mere pessimism from Mr. Krugman. Not only are the Democrats apparently poised to cut Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security benefits in return for promised but unspecified tax increases, under this proposal the tax reform in the House would be run by Republican ideologues, and in Senate would be determined in a committee chaired by Sen. Max Baucus, the Democratic senator most responsible for the Bush tax cuts. Tell your Sens. Say NO to a terrible Super Committeedeal that cuts Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security benefits. Click here for contact information and a sample script. The Democrats are structurally in a position of strength. Right now the best scenario would be for the Super Committee to deadlock, or barring that, for the Senate as a whole to reject a terrible deal. Let's remember that Democrats still have majority control of the Senate. In the face of massive unemployment, rampant foreclosures, a sputtering economy and widespread anger that the country is systematically prioritizing the needs of the ultra-rich and wealthy corporations over the needs of the other 99% of us, it should be easy for Democrats to reject a plan that makes it harder and more expensive for seniors and the less fortunate to get medical care or pay for their basic living expenses. But the national discussion has gotten so warped, some are calling for benefit cuts to social insurance programs in the name of shared sacrifice as though the middle class and the working poor aren't already paying their fair share and suffering the most. It's long past time to roll back the Bush era tax cuts for the wealthiest and ended corporate handouts. We don't have to pay for it by throwing the poor, seniors and women under the bus with benefit cuts to Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security. Tell your Sens. Say NO to a terrible Super Committeedeal that cuts Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security benefits. Click here for contact information and a sample script. Thank you for speaking out. Matt Lockshin, Campaign Manager CREDO Action from Working Assets 1. "Deficit Panel Seeks to Defer Details on Raising Taxes," Robert Pear, New York Times, Nov. 13, 2011 2. "Superfraud," Paul Krugman, New York Times, Nov. 14, 2011  November 14, 2011, 8:56 am Superfraud It’s a bird! It’s a plane! It’s a turkey! I thought I had worked out all the worst-case scenarios for the supercommittee (there was never a best-case). But this is even worse than my worst imagining: a deal to undermine key social insurance programs in return for a promise that Congress will come up with a plan for raising revenue at some future date. If you think that promise has any credibility whatsoever – if you have any doubts that the end result would be to gut Social Security and actually cut taxes for the wealthy – I have this Nigerian bank account that can be yours if you send me $100,000 in expenses. The worst of it is that Democrats might actually go for it.

Super Committee Democrats Propose Scrapping Bush Tax Cut Debate In Exchange For Billions In Revenue 11NOV11

THE deadline for the "super committee" to offer it's proposals to Congress and the nation nears and the lobbying and negotiating is becoming fierce and frantic. One thing is certain, the committee can not allow the rich and corporations to continue slopping at the trough of the corporate welfare system while the other 99% of the nation struggles to make ends meet. The committee has to consider the possibility that the overwhelmingly peaceful Occupy Wall Street movement, the movement that has brought the greed, fraud and corruption of the nation's financial institutions to the fore of public concern, may turn violent if common Americans, the 99% of the nation, are left to wallow in economic inequality and recession while the rich, the corporations and the financial institutions continue to receive  subsidies and tax breaks paid for by the 99%. From Sam Stein of HuffPost, followed by a link to a Newsy video report.....
WASHINGTON -- Under their latest proposal to the deficit reduction super committee, Democrats would agree to undertake comprehensive tax reform that included a pledge to avoid letting Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy expire.
According to a private document, the authenticity of which was confirmed by a leadership aide, super committee Democrats are eyeing between $950 billion and $1 trillion in revenue raisers and tax hikes as part of a $2.3 trillion deficit reduction package. Between $300 billion and $350 billion of that would come from what one congressional aide described as "low-hanging fruit" -- ending tax incentives for corporate jet owners, closing loopholes for oil and gas companies, changing ethanol subsidies, and so on.
The remaining $650 billion in revenue that committee Democrats are targeting would be raised through a set of "Fast Track Procedures For Tax Reform." As part of those procedures, Democrats would agree to three guiding principles: "(a) corporate tax reform to enhance competitiveness, (b) an individual rate no higher than 35% and (c) a distribution of changes that ensures a tax code as progressive as current law."
Another Senate aide, familiar with discussions, insisted that the document was not a formal Democratic plan but rather a "proposal that's been discussed."
As the law currently stands, the Bush-era tax cuts are set to expire at the end of 2012, at which point the rates on top earners will rise back up to 39.6 percent. Had the tax cuts been allowed to expire at the end of 2010, it would have generated an extra $690 billion in tax revenues over ten years, according to estimates based on Congressional Budget Office and Joint Committee on Taxation data. By committing to place a cap on those rates at 35 percent -- in exchange for pursuing a tax reform process that produces $650 billion in revenues -- Democrats are granting Republicans a potentially significant concession, one that could scrap a major party talking point about higher-income Americans needing to shoulder a larger share of the deficit burden.
The White House has made no secret of the fact that it wants to pursue comprehensive tax reform over the next year. But the president has also insisted that he will veto efforts to extend the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy, and both he and his party have tried to make income inequality a major theme of the 2012 campaign season.
"Will The President keep his promise?" emailed one top Democratic operative familiar with the proposal. "The Senate Democrats' proposal would make the Bush tax cuts permanent for millionaires. More tax giveaways to the top one percent is a complete capitulation to Republicans."
For the super committee Democrats proposing the cap, though, the concession makes tactical sense. For starters, if the committee succeeds in passing comprehensive tax reform, then the debate over the Bush-era tax rates is rendered moot. More than that, they argue, it gives Republicans an incentive to negotiate -- both through carrots (the promise of keeping the lower tax rates for the wealthy in place) and sticks (the threat that if comprehensive tax reform isn't completed, those Bush-era rates could still expire).
"Letting them expire is still leverage if Republicans don't agree to that deal or if tax reform doesn't meet that criteria," said one top Democratic Senate aide. "The question is what will tax reform look like if it really happened."
"It's a lot higher than 28 percent," the aide added, in reference to the House GOP budget authored by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) that would cap income tax at that level.
On top of that, Democrats on the super committee have added other inducements or "triggers" to make Congress undertake tax reform. Under their proposal, lawmakers would be given until January 1, 2013 to figure out tax reform legislation that would produce the targeted $650 billion in revenue. If they don't meet that deadline, then two triggers would be pulled: a limit on itemized deductions for higher income taxpayers, and "a deficit reduction charge on income tax liability before applications of credits." Those provisions would create an estimated $650 billion in revenue between them.
http://www.newsy.com/videos/no-deal-for-super-committee-as-deadline-approaches

Workers' Comp: Senators Look To Slash Benefits For Disabled Civil Servants 10NOV11

TYPICAL of the wanton disregard for the working and middle classes by the gop / tea-bagger kabal and that kapo joe lieberman. These political whores won't consider cutting corporate welfare for fear of loosing campaign contributions from the rich and the business and financial institutions who control them. No, they will turn on those with the least in money, power and influence, those whose interest and welfare they are supposed to be representing. Disgusting.

WASHINGTON -- Lawmakers on Capitol Hill are looking to cut benefits for federal workers disabled on the job, a budget-trimming move that critics warn could leave many injured civil servants and their families without enough to live on in retirement.
With support from Sens. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine), the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs moved forward Wednesday with a Postal Service reform bill that would apply broad workers' compensation reforms to all federal workers. Many disabled federal employees who have reached retirement age currently receive between 66 and 75 percent of the salary they had at the time of their injury, but the bill pushed by Lieberman and Collins would cut that to 50 percent.
Some employees who aren't at retirement age would also lose benefits they receive for children or other dependents they care for. Ron Watson, a workers' comp expert at the National Association of Letter Carriers, says the reductions are "intentionally targeted at injured workers with families, their widows and widowers, and the elderly."
But in a Senate hearing Wednesday, Collins suggested the cuts were targeted at nonagenarians who are bleeding the workers' comp system, citing federal workers who are "99-years-old" and still collecting a substantial portion of their salaries from old workplace injuries. She also said the White House has shown support for many of the proposed reforms.
"These are not draconian changes," Collins said of the bill. "We've worked very hard to come up with a fair approach. This involves substantial money."
Opponents of the legislation say no one has looked closely at how these cuts would affect disabled workers financially, particularly those on the lower end of the wage scale. They also worry that the bill will serve as a model for the congressional super committee, the body tasked with reducing the deficit by $1.2 trillion. Sen. Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii) has been the most vocal skeptic of the workers' comp changes, urging his colleagues to study the issue further before acting.
"We may set benefits too low, seriously harming disabled workers," Akaka said Wednesday. "We must not make arbitrary cuts that could harm the disabled ... who sustained injuries in the service of their country."
For decades the federal workers' compensation program has been considered the benchmark for such programs across the country, providing a generous lifeline for civil servants who can no longer perform their duties because of on-the-job injuries. Lawmakers have talked time and again about the need to reform the program due to costs, but new political pressures to trim the federal budget have made changes all the more likely.
Unions for federal employees have been watching the debate closely. Last week a group of 13 unions sent a letter to Lieberman voicing their "strong objections" to the inclusion of broad workers' compensation reform in a bill meant to address only the Postal Service's financial problems. Postal employees account for about 40 percent of the disbursements under the workers' comp law, known as the Federal Employees' Compensation Act, or FECA.
"The proposed legislation would impose a substantial and unfair income reduction for federal employees who simply came to work one day ready to serve their country but tragically suffered an injury that took away their ability to ever work again," union officials wrote.
A Democratic aide in the House told HuffPost that the cuts would disproportionately hurt workers who were disabled at a young age or while in a low-wage position. Workers' comp benefits are tax-free and will remain so, he noted, but that does little good for a low-income earner who's already paying little in taxes.
"The core premise around workers comp is that you should be no better off and no worse off" after the injury, the aide said. "But with this bill many people will be far worse off, particularly on the lower end of the wage scale."
At Wednesday's hearing, Collins said the committee had adopted "most" of the recommendations put forth by the White House, which could save $500 billion over the course of ten years.
But the savings could come at a great cost for disabled workers, said Joe Mansour, a workers' comp expert with the Council of Prison Locals, which represents prison employees. Mansour told HuffPost that his groups' members are vulnerable to stabbings and other assaults by inmates, and that they'll see less compensation under the Senate bill in the event of a disabling attack.
"It's punitive for being injured," Mansour said. "They're saying don't be involved in any serious accidents, because you're going to go home and make a lot less money."

Defense Secretary Panetta: Wrong on Military Spending & Defense chief Panetta warns lawmakers that cutting military too deeply would be devastating 13OKT11

Sec of Defense Leon Panetta is a liar, totally controlled by the greedy corporations of the American military-industrial complex. He could save billions by cutting the wasteful, bloated and ineffective government contracts with these corporations. These corporations milk the Pentagon, and so the U.S. taxpayers for billions of dollars in cost overruns for weapons systems so behind schedule they are outdated by the time they are delivered or don't perform as they are supposed to. Other contractors are awarded contracts "managed" through fraud and corruption, which are then subcontracted multiple times to the point it is impossible for any auditor to actually verify what OUR money was spent on. And the contractors guarding American embassies and diplomats and other American facilities around the world are nothing but fronts for thugs, mercenaries, drunks and some are even involved in providing children for sex as part of the bribery, fraud, graft and corruption they commit while representing the United States. They are a disgrace as are many of the so called "intelligence" companies who have been awarded contracts paying way to much for the "services" they provide. We aren't getting what we are paying for with most of these contracts, but the contractors, and not the actual men and women in uniform, are who Panetta is fighting for. Check out this video from BraveNew Foundation and the article from the Washington Post.....and for more information on this check out my earlier post on this 

THE WAR BUDGET IS BURNING DOWN OUR ECONOMY 8SEP11

Giving Them Hell, THE FIGHT AGAINST THE MILITARY-INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX PROPAGANDA CAMPAIGN 17SEP11

Pentagon Ignores Child Porn in its Ranks 3AUG10

Vodka Butt-Shot Contractor STILL Guarding the Kabul Embassy 17FEB11

America's Biggest Jobs Program -- the U.S. Military 11AUG10

$960 BILLION IN DEFENSE DEPARTMENT FAT 25AUG10

 Defense Secretary Leon Panetta is flagrantly advocating for war profiteers at the expense of real security for the American people. He's trying to browbeat Congress and other officials into continuing to send huge sums of our money to war profiteers who are killing jobs and ripping off the taxpayer. Our new video busts Panetta's scare tactics and talking points--please watch it and share it.

Huge military budgets cost jobs. That's an established fact. The corporations like Lockheed Martin, Northrup Grumman and General Dynamics that make billions every year selling the Pentagon super-expensive and often useless weaponry don't care about the effects of their profiteering. They just want to keep the gravy train rolling (For example, Lockheed Martin's CEO made $21.9 million last year, with most of the money coming from your taxes.). These contractors held a closed-door meeting with Panetta on September 13, and since then, he's parroted their untrue talking points and warned of "doomsday" if elected officials make even modest cuts to the bloated, corruption-filled war budget.

Panetta repeated more misleading spin when he testified before Congress this week. War spending kills jobs and productivity in the economy, but Panetta recently claimed just the opposite. Even the largest cuts to the military budget on the table in deficit reduction talks would simply return us to spending at 2007 levels--which was the highest level ever at the time--but Panetta strangely claims this is "doomsday."
We don't need to spend six times China's military budget on war to keep America safe, and the last thing our economy needs right now is more job-killing spending on war profiteers.

Please watch our video and share it with your friends as soon as you can. Don't let Panetta and the war industry get away with misleading Congress again.
Your financial support makes our effort possible. Thank you for helping us stand strong against the war industry and the Pentagon's spin campaign.
Sincerely,

Derrick Crowe, Robert Greenwald
and the Brave New Foundation team

P.S. After you watch our video and share it with your friends, join War Costs on Facebook.

Defense chief Panetta warns lawmakers that cutting military too deeply would be devastating

By Associated Press

WASHINGTON — Defense leaders and members of Congress drew a line in the sand Thursday, saying the Pentagon must be spared from any budget cuts beyond an initial plan to slash at least $450 billion over the next 10 years.
The military, they said, must not take even deeper cuts — a looming threat if lawmakers fail to agree on $1.2 trillion in federal budget savings by Thanksgiving and instead allow automatic cuts to kick in.
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said President Barack Obama shares his view that the Pentagon should be shielded from any additional budget cutting.
Appearing before the House Armed Services Committee on Thursday, Panetta and Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, pounded home their message that further cuts would create national security risks and devastate the military.
“I don’t say that as scare tactics, I don’t say it as a threat, it’s a reality,” Panetta said. He said the initial $450 billion reduction will “take us to the edge” but any more than that would hollow out the force and “badly damage our capabilities for the future.”
Despite questions from the committee members, Panetta and Dempsey provided no details on any planned spending cuts and they gave no specifics on how U.S. military strategy might be affected. They said they are still reviewing the issues.
The only new hint came when Dempsey opened the door for trimming the troubled F-35 fighter jet program. He told lawmakers that developing and building three versions of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter — one each for the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps — creates fiscal challenges for the department, and he suggested it may not be affordable.
During the early part of the hearing, eight protestors were arrested by Capitol police when they began shouting anti-war chants. Seven were charged with disruption of Congress and one was charged with simple assault.
During a news conference after the hearing, Republicans on the panel echoed the plea to spare defense from further reductions.
“We’re saying: No more cuts,” said Rep Howard “Buck” McKeon, R-Calif., the committee chairman.
And Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, highlighted Panetta’s statement earlier that Obama shares his view that there should be no further cuts.
“I think it’s important for the president as commander in chief to make his views known,” Thornberry said. He said it’s a message that congressional Democrats need to hear.
During the hearing, Panetta urged Congress to consider cuts to mandatory federal spending programs and increases in revenues in order to meet the deficit reduction plan.
Rising deficits and deep debt have forced the federal government to slash spending — even at the Pentagon, whose budget has nearly doubled to some $700 billion in the 10 years since the Sept. 11 terror attacks.
The debt accord reached this past summer between Obama and congressional Republicans calls for a $350 billion cut in projected defense spending over 10 years. The Pentagon and House committee members say the actual number is more than $450 billion. The difference depends on the budget baseline that is used.
Panetta said the military has been stressed by a decade of fighting, squeezed by rising personnel costs, and is in need of modernization. In the last decade the military has focused heavily on fighting insurgencies and terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan, rather than on the skills and equipment needed to fight modern armies, navies and air forces.
Meanwhile, international security issues have grown more complex, Panetta said, noting the United States must be prepared to continue dealing with violent extremists as well as the nuclear ambitions of Iran and North Korea, the prospects of cyber attackers who may target American infrastructure, and other threats.
Panetta also repeated the warning he issued earlier this week — saying that some lawmakers’ favored defense programs could be on the chopping block.
Recalling his time as a member of the U.S. House, Panetta noted that a military base in his district was cut in 1994.
“I lost Fort Ord. ... That represented 25 percent of my local economy. So I know what it means to go through this process,” he said. “We have to do this right, and we can do it right.”
If the special bipartisan deficit-reduction supercommittee fails to come up with at least $1.2 trillion in cuts from all federal spending by Thanksgiving, defense could face additional reductions. If the panel fails to come up with a proposal, or Congress rejects its plan, automatic cuts of $1.2 trillion kick in, with half of that to come from defense.
Panetta said the Pentagon is taking a comprehensive look at its spending, from overhead costs to the size of the force as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan wind down, from modernizing weapons to personnel.
Rep. Adam Smith of Washington state, the top Democrat on the House panel, said in a recent interview that it would be wise for the Pentagon to provide details on its strategic review as Congress considers spending cuts.
“I urge them to get it out sooner,” Smith said. “We’re already deep into” the next budget.
___
Associated Press writers Donna Cassata and Pauline Jelinek contributed to this report.
Copyright 2011 The Associated Press.

TELL YOUR SENATORS TO OPPOSE ANY CUTS TO MEDICARE AND MEDICAID 13OKT11

THIS is an easy way to tell your Senators to vote against any proposed cuts to Medicare and Medicaid, just click the link to sign the petition asking your Senators if they will oppose any proposed cuts and telling them you expect then to oppose any cuts to these vital social safety net programs.

Tell Your Senators Answer the question. We need to know who will stand firmly against cuts to Medicare and Medicaid. Clicking here will automatically add your name to this petition to Senate Democrats: "Are you going to support cuts to our Medicare or Medicaid benefits? Please answer 'yes' or 'no.'" Automaticallyadd your name: Learn more about this campaign On Tuesday, Republicans in the Senate successfully blocked President Obama's jobs bill, despite Democrats gathering 51 votes needed to pass it. That means, it's negotiating time. And "negotiating" in this fight raises the all too real possibility of Democrats giving in on cuts to Medicare or Medicaid. If these cuts make it into the jobs bill or Super Committee proposal, Democrats in the Senate will have the power to save or sellout our social safety net. So we're working now to get them on the record about whether they'll support benefit cuts. We need their response to one simple question. Tell your Senators to answer the question: "Will yousupport cuts to our Medicare or Medicaid benefits? Yes or no?" Click here to automatically sign the petition. Two weeks ago, we hand delivered a letter to Sens. Webb and Warner's office asking this very question. But we haven't heard back yet. It's a simple question that should be easy for senators to answer. Cutting benefits of these wildly successful programs would be as unpopular as it is unnecessary. And we cannot let Democratic senators use the jobs bill or coming super committee negotiations on deficit reduction as an excuse to avoid taking a stand. But Democrats in the Senate already removed a provision in the jobs bill to eliminate oil subsidies, which would have saved over $40 billion dollars. We know what they might give up next, unless we shore up a solid block of support for Medicare and Medicaid, right now. Tell your Senators to answer the question. "Will you support cuts to our Medicare or Medicaid benefits? Yes or no?" Click here to automatically sign the petition. The Republican caucus in Congress remains committed to opposing tax increases. In fact, all six Republican members of the super committee on deficit reduction have taken Grover Norquist's pledge to oppose any increase in taxes. In the face of an implacable and unified opponent, Democrats must remain equally resolute in their defense of Medicare and Medicaid. The White House is calling for shared sacrifice, but believes shared sacrifice may mean levying taxes on the ultra-wealthy while cutting benefits for Medicare and Medicaid. We are not buying this attempt at balance. The middle class and the working poor are already paying their fair share and suffering the most. It's long past time to roll back the Bush era tax cuts for the wealthiest and the carried interest exception. We don't have to pay for it by throwing the poor, seniors and women under the bus with cuts to Medicare and Medicaid. Stand up for Medicare and Medicaid now. Clickhere to automatically sign the petition to your Senators Thank you for speaking out. Your activism matters. Matt Lockshin, Campaign Manager CREDO Action from Working Assets Share on Facebook Post to your wall Tweet this Post to Twitter

Tell the Super Committee - Don't ignore jobs 1OKT11

SIGN the petition to the congressional super committee to create jobs not cut them! Corporate America is lobbying the committee to protect corporate welfare and the tax breaks for the wealthy. The military-industrial complex is lobbying the committee to protect the American war machine. Have your say, tell the committee "Don't ignore jobs!".

Does this email look funny? View it online here Tell the Super Committee: Don't Ignore Jobs. Dear TrueMajority Member, Tell the Super Committee: Don't ignore jobs. My name is Jeff Merkley, and I am a U.S. Senator representing the great state of Oregon. I'm writing today because I need your help in turning our country around, to create jobs not cut them. We can't slash our way to economic growth -- vital programs that the American people support and rely on, like student loans, Medicare, scientific research, and Social Security should be protected. I believe - and I know that you believe - in another strategy: Creating jobs. When we create jobs, we put our economy back on track, and as families get back on their feet, our deficit will close. That's why I'm asking you to sign USAction's petition to the Super Committee to put jobs first as it deliberates on a budget package. This petition calls for two basic principles: 1. Independent review: The Super Committee's budget package should be given an independent review by the Congressional Budget Office to measure how many jobs it would create or eliminate. 2. Do no harm: The Super Committee should reject any budget package that would cost more jobs than it creates. By signing this petition, you make it clear that thousands of Americans are standing with us to insist that we create jobs, not cut them. Please sign the petition: http://act.truemajorityaction.org/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=260. Thank you again. Sincerely, Senator Jeff Merkley for USAction / TrueMajority  Support USAction USAction, 1825 K St. NW, Suite 210, Washington, DC 20006 PH: 202.263.4520 FAX: 202.263.4530 hello

Slashing PBS and NPR Not an Option 21SEP11

THE "super committee" plans on slashing funding for NPR and PBS....we have recently been down this road and literally millions of people told Congress NOT to cut funding for NPR and PBS and WE WON! We can do this again by telling the committee not to cut the funding for these programs, here is the link to e mail them
http://deficitreduction.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contact%20 

Take A Stand: "The ‘Super Committee’ must not cut funding to NPR, PBS and other public media." The “Super Committee” is set to slash the federal budget by $1.4 trillion, with funding for NPR, PBS and other public media on the chopping block. As the attacks ramp up once again, we must stand together to let Congress know that cutting funding for public broadcasting is never an option. Stand Up and Save NPR and PBS. The last time Congress tried to slash funds for NPR and PBS, an outpouring of protests from people like you stopped it. The upcoming fight promises to be even more intense. That’s why we’re going on the offensive right now. By standing up for public media, you’re protecting your favorite local stations and fending off this new round of attacks. Here's the truth: Funding for public broadcasting comes at a miniscule cost to taxpayers, and it accounts for 1/100th of 1 percent of the overall budget. Every federal dollar spent on public media is matched by six more dollars from other sources. But even this tiny investment from the federal government supports tens of thousands of jobs around the country. And yet here’s what we’re up against: At least half of the 12 Super Committee members have in the past attacked funding for public broadcasting. Taking down NPR and PBS has been a decades-long goal of political extremists in Washington who are threatened by public media’s brand of facts-based investigative reporting. Even President Obama’s deficit committee has recommended that we zero out all funding to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, including support for the educational and news programming on which millions of people rely. These reckless moves put Washington in direct opposition to the vast majority of Americans, who say in poll after poll that public funding for the likes of NPR and PBS is money well spent. Public media supporters like us have beaten off these cuts before. We can do it again. Click here to join the fight. We’ll follow up soon with ways you can take action both locally and nationally. Thanks for standing up for public media. Josh Stearns Associate Program Director Free Press Action Fund www.freepress.net P.S. Free Press doesn't accept any money from businesses, government agencies or political parties. A gift of $20 will help us stand up for public media.

Free Press Action Fund is a national, nonpartisan organization working to reform the media. Learn more at www.freepress.net

Giving Them Hell, THE FIGHT AGAINST THE MILITARY-INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX PROPAGANDA CAMPAIGN 17SEP11

BRAVE NEW FOUNDATION & WAR COST are fighting the lobbyist of the military industrial complex's attempts to influence the deficit reduction "super committee" and prevent cuts in the wasteful, corrupt and fraudulent U.S. defense budget. Here is the latest in their campaign, donate if you can (I did) and share with others. To contact the "super committee" click here
http://deficitreduction.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contact  

This was supposed to be a week dominated by war profiteers’ message machine in Washington, D.C., but thanks to your help, we went on offense and forced them to respond to us. We hit the profiteers with a full-page ad in Politico, forcing them to answer reporters’ questions about the job-killing effect of war spending before they were ready to launch their own campaign. We launched a new video exposing military contractors’ moves targeting the deficit committee and, as of Friday night, we’d received more than 10 times the number of views than the war industry’s competing video. Our push netted two front-page stories on The Huffington Post and CBS News coverage, where we exposed the contractors’ effort to keep their profits going at our expense. This was a hard-fought, rewarding week made possible by your past financial support, and we couldn’t have done it without you. Thank you. We’ve got some sobering news, though: the war profiteers plan to intensify their pro-war-spending campaign. Here’s what their spokesperson said at a press conference on Wednesday: “The campaign does not intend to be your typical, glitzy, high-on-advertising, short-on-substance, short-term, inside-the-Beltway blitz...This is going to be a sustained effort, in states, in cities, towns, as well as in Washington, to caution the American people and our leaders, of the risks associated with cutting our defense budget further.” In other words, this fight is just beginning. These corporations are going to use every trick in the book to protect their profits, and we have to be ready. The good news is that there's never been a persistent effort like ours to fight these profiteers at every turn, and if we keep the heat on, we can catch them off-guard. Thank you for your support. We had a great week this week. We hope you’ll continue your support in the future. Sincerely, Derrick Crowe, Robert Greenwald and the Brave New Foundation team P.S. If you have not yet done so, please join War Costs on Facebook.

Lawmakers Seek Transparency From Supercommittee 16SEP11

THE "super committee" is not constitutional, and there will no doubt be court challenges once they present their recommendations to Congress. Until then, if you want to contact them here is the link
http://deficitreduction.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contact 
The newly formed congressional supercommittee's 12 members are charged with finding more than $1 trillion in budget savings this fall. Their clout could attract more campaign contributions, and lawmakers are demanding greater accountability for the money the panel's members take in.
Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) has a mixed voting record when it comes to campaign finance reform, but he is adamant about making the six Republicans and six Democrats on the deficit-reduction supercommittee more accountable.
"They have before them only everything in the federal budget and everything in the U.S. tax code," he says. "It's enormous power, it's an enormous role, and obviously everybody in Washington, D.C., and beyond, every special interest, is going to be lobbying them."
Those lobbyists will also possibly make generous contributions at the many fundraisers that members of the supercommittee have scheduled this fall. Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH), a member of the supercommittee, says he "canceled a bunch of fundraisers" because the committee responsibilities have taken up so much time. As far as ethical problems regarding the fundraising, he says he's leaving that up to others.
"Every member needs to decide," Portman says.
Earlier this week, Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) told the Boston Globe he'd decided not to do any fundraising while he serves on the supercommittee. However, possibly out of deference to colleagues who do plan to raise funds, Kerry downplayed his decision when asked about it.
"I think that too much is being made out of that. People are doing business here in the United States Senate all the time," he says, "and unfortunately, because of the nature of politics, they have to raise money too. So I'm not going to get into that discussion."

How Super Is The Deficit-Cutting Committee?

Explore what each of the 12 members of the supercommittee is bringing to the negotiating table.

Other members of the supercommittee say they have no plans to alter their fundraising schedules.
"My view is, anything that was scheduled before I was appointed to the supercommittee, I'm going to continue with that schedule," says Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI), chairman of the House Committee on Ways and Means. "And I'm not going to add any new items in a fundraising capacity to my schedule."
Rep. Xavier Becerra (D-CA) points out that unlike senators, who face re-election every six years, he and other House members have campaigns to finance every two years. He says he would happily stop raising election money if he heard his opponents weren't raising money, or if he didn't have to pay for campaign activities.
"Until then, I think it's important for me to do everything that I've done in the past, and do it as transparently and as openly as I've always done it," Becerra says.
Campaign-finance watchdogs say holding fundraisers is not so much the issue.
Bill Allison of the Sunlight Foundation says the problem is that, because of reporting rules, nobody will know who gave supercommittee members money, and how much, until mid-January — two months after the panel completes its work. Allison says that helps special interests give money more discreetly.
"Even if you're not having a fundraiser, they can write you a check. It's not like you have to have an event for somebody to send you some money," he says. "I think it's disclosing the contributions that's really important, and that's what we have to see from these members while they're sitting on this committee."
Rep. Dave Loebsack (D-IA) teamed up with another House Democrat and a Republican last week to introduce the Deficit Committee Transparency Act. It calls for the supercommittee to create a website where any meetings with lobbyists would have to be posted within 48 hours. Loebsack says campaign contributions would also have to be reported.
"Whatever they receive, in terms of $500 or above, to themselves or to their leadership political action committees, I want that reported within 48 hours," he says.
Loebsack says they "haven't heard from leadership on either side of the aisle yet" in response to the legislation. A letter sent to the supercommittee's co-chairmen asking them to adopt the 48-hour rule has gone unanswered.

Related NPR Stories

Boehner Pushes GOP Ideas On Overhauling Taxes Sept. 15, 2011

A Potential Superhero For The Supercommittee Sept. 13, 2011

Deficit Panel Meets, Vows To Get The Job Done Sept. 8, 2011

Senators meet privately on urging broad debt-reduction plan from supercommittee 8SEP11

PEOPLE need to make their opinions known to their members of Congress as well as to the members of the super committee as this group may have a greater impact on our economy than Pres Obama's jobs program presented to Congress and the nation last night (8SEP11). 
Check out this report from CMD. The members of the super-committee should include action to recovery these funds now and apply them to the savings they are supposed to achieve. Then they need to address the billions in savings to be achieved by ending the corruption and fraud rampant in the US military budget and then address the corporate welfare system that rewards companies for outsourcing American jobs.
Money Still Owed In Federal Bailout: $1.5 Trillion Still Owed to Treasury, Federal Reserve 3AUG11
A new study released today by the Center for Media and Democracy (CMD) shows that, despite rosy statements about the bailout's impending successful conclusion from federal government officials, $1.5 trillion of the $4.8 trillion in federal bailout funds are still outstanding. http://www.banksterusa.org/content/money-still-owe...
THE WAR BUDGET IS BURNING DOWN OUR ECONOMY 8SEP11
CHECK out the campaign against the corrupting influence of the military-industrial complex. Click the links to see just how many jobs are lost with every billion dollars spent on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
http://www.peri.umass.edu/fileadmin/pdf/published_...
From the Washington Post.... 

By Peter Wallsten,  

More than two dozen senators from both parties met privately this week to revive hopes of a grand debt-cutting bargain — exploring how to push the newly formed debt “supercommittee” to find far more than its assigned goal of $1.5 trillion in deficit reductions.

The senators want at least $3 trillion slashed from the deficit over the next decade. In addition, they plan to press the committee to pass a major tax overhaul to lower rates and close special-interest loopholes, as well as changes to entitlement programs such as Medicare, according to several participants.
The effort comes as the 12-member supercommittee begins what is expected to be a grueling process to map out its plans before a November deadline — and it threatens to undercut the chances for President Obama to win passage for portions of a jobs plan expected to cost hundreds of billions of dollars in the short term.
“I don’t think I’m speaking out of school that it was a unanimous feeling among a large group of senators from both sides of the aisle,” said Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), one of the meeting participants. “Most people are far more focused on this supercommittee than any speech the president’s going to give.”
Another in the group, Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.), said the senators want to “encourage” the supercommittee “to reach for a higher number.” He said the committee should “compromise with one another and do what parts of each party will not like, for the greater good, because that’s really what most of the people in the country want.”
Obama, too, is expected to press the committee to exceed its deficit-reduction goal. In his speech Thursday night, he called on Congress to increase the super­committee’s deficit-cutting goals to cover the costs of his jobs plan, and he said that a week from Monday he will announce a more detailed plan “that will not only cover the cost of this jobs bill, but stabilize our debt in the long run.”
Several people familiar with the discussions said the lawmakers felt that, after the pomp and ceremony of Obama’s joint-session speech fades, the center of political and policy gravity on Capitol Hill will be the work of the special committee, chaired by Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Tex.).
Under last month’s debt-ceiling deal struck by Obama and GOP lawmakers, deep cuts would automatically take effect in national security and other areas if the supercommittee fails to reach agreement or if Congress fails to pass legislation by December.
One senior Democratic aide called Obama’s jobs plan largely “dead on arrival” because its expected price tag would roughly cancel out the one year’s worth of savings many lawmakers hope the supercommittee will find.
The Senate on Thursday blocked a resolution of disapproval for an additional $500 billion increase in the debt ceiling. The procedure is required by the legislation to raise the borrowing limit in phases by at least $2.1 trillion.
A Senate staffer familiar with the senators’ private discussions said the effort was intended to be “complementary” to the work of the supercommittee but also to offer a gentle nudge.
The staffer said the senators’ push would “demonstrate there can be some support and safety if they choose to go beyond their charge.”
Both aides spoke on the condition of anonymity in order to discuss the private deliberations.
The private gathering this week, held Wednesday in a Capitol meeting room, included about 25 centrists from both parties. It was organized by Sens. Mark R. Warner (D-Va.) and Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.), two members of the “Gang of Six,” which tried unsuccessfully to engineer a grand deal patterned loosely after the plan laid out by the deficit commission headed by former Clinton White House chief of staff Erskine Bowles and former senator Alan Simpson.
At least a third of the Senate at one time had indicated some level of support for the broad framework being negotiated by the Gang of Six, according to people familiar with that group’s discussions.
More on PostPolitics
Debt supercommittee gets to work
Supercommittee faces super-sized challenges
Members of debt panel have lobbyist ties