With a Jewish holiday coming up tonight thoughts turn to what I should be neurotic about. Matt Yglesias says I should freak out about Europe, and he’s right. But that’s been the case for two years. And the powers that be over there are religiously opposed to the proper steps to take to end the crisis. In short, seen it! So what’s next?
I’ve noticed a cottage industry of late in getting people to care about the “fiscal cliff,” the combination of measures that will hit at the end of the year producing a significant fiscal drag. The three measures are: the expiration of the Bush tax cuts, the end of the payroll tax cut and extended unemployment insurance, and the “trigger” from the Budget Control Act of across-the-board cuts to defense and discretionary spending. I’ve written about the Bush tax cuts, which I think we may be better off letting expire, with a follow-up of some more progressive tax changes. But today, Jim Dyer and Scott Lilly (former Republican and Democratic staff directors on the House Appropriations Committee, respectively) explain what they believe are dangers from the trigger:
One problem is the apparent belief that slicing $110 billion out of a $3.6 trillion budget is no big deal. The truth is that those cuts will come from a much smaller part of the budget — and in a time frame that will make them impossible to absorb without major dislocation for the economy at large as well as for government bureaucrats.
Some of the most serious damage will be directed not at the big programs about which the two parties have deep and long-standing disagreements but at basic, critical functions of government that are broadly supported by members of both parties. Take U.S. marshals, who, among other things, protect judges and juries during federal court proceedings. Some recent analysis indicates that the U.S. Marshals Service will have to furlough (suspend salary payments) every deputy marshal in the country for five weeks during the nine-month sequestration period. Because U.S. court dockets are already so crowded that it is difficult to find enough marshals to maintain adequate protection levels, it is possible that each federal court in the nation will have to cancel five weeks of court dates during the first nine months of next year.
Similar scenarios are possible with an array of federal services: Processing of applications for patents and trademarks, Social Security benefits, and federal land leases would be reduced. So would food and meat inspections. Perhaps even more problematic would be a 12 percent personnel cut among air traffic controllers. One budget analyst we spoke with suggested the possibility of “flightless Fridays.”
Dyer and Lilly suggest that lawmakers… do something about this. But that’s precisely the problem, right? If there were any consensus on what to do to eliminate the trigger, it would have happened in the Super Committee, under very favorable rules for passage. The House Republican budget proposes a one-year patch for the trigger by cutting the federal workforce, which Democrats oppose. Democrats haven’t really come up with an answer. But if Dyer and Lilly are to be believed, there’s a serious disruption that would come from an across-the-board cut like this.
If it were up to me, I’d just flat-out cancel it. Let Standard and Poor’s do their worst. A damaged credit rating that does not affect the sale of debt is nothing compared to this kind of damage on the economy.
Meanwhile, the head of the IRS brought up a separate issue:
Allowing tax provisions to be unsettled as 2013 begins will cause confusion for taxpayers, said Douglas Shulman, IRS commissioner, speaking at the National Press Club in Washington.
“We’re going to have real risk in the system,” if Congress delays, Shulman said.
“You could have a real disaster in the filing season where there’s total confusion,” especially for the alternative-minimum tax “patch,” he said.
This is a fourth expiring measure that I didn’t even include in the first three. The AMT patch impacts millions of taxpayers. Shulman is actually talking about delaying the tax filing season next year, if uncertainty reigns.
In short, a ton of tricky work is being left for the lame duck session. To this Congress.
OK, I’ve found something to be neurotic about!





13 Comments


Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Not neurotic, David.
Prescient.
Principals of S&P should have been indicted – still should be – for their role in the biggest pump and dump FIRE scheme in all recorded history.
In that case, would S&P have had the audacity to downgrade or threaten to downgrade the credit rating of the USA?
Since nothing has been done to correct S&P for their role in the biggest financial fraud in world history, we might assume that we are “out of the loop”*. All pending layers of additional austerity appear to be orchestrated by the one percenters to choke out the remnants of America’s “Vibrant Middle Class”**.
*Poppy Bush
**Oilbomber
That should read :The three measures are: the expiration of the Obama tax cuts,
I would love to see defense spending lowered, which is one thing the trigger does. But the 1% Congress does not want that to happen. They bluffed. And when it’s time to call their bluff they will ask for a new deal (lower caps) and the 1% President will support that whole-heartedly. “Uncertainty” seems to be the current buzz word to justify policies. Hell, I wouldn’t be surprised if fuckin’ O finds a way to extend his tax cuts for the wealthy again.
David, eat hardy and enjoy!!!
President Obama did not market his own “Tax Cuts Plan”. Instead, he chose to wear the Bush Tax Cuts like an albatross around his neck. The Bush cuts became his own by extending a Republican plan which heavily favors the rich (not job creators – job outsourcers – as we can attest).
With both houses of congress and the bully pulpit, it would have been so very simple to design a tax plan that favored workers and the Middle Class and let the Bush cuts expire (they were supposedly designed to time out after ten fcking years).
The bully pulpit can be used to appeal to the American People for policies that benefit them directly! Gee Whiz!
Obama pretends not to be aware of this fact.
Obama is a tool of the one percent.
Yeah, Obama owns the tax cuts – simply by doing nothing, they would have expired.
Thanks for posting the analysis and comments.
This is all post election – and under the rules tax changes enacted during the year can begin with the first of the year. There is no crisis over the AMT – it will be fixed by the next Congress.
I agree that the Clinton rates should come back for all of us – screw the $250,000 pledge – and then pass better laws for the under $250,000 crowd in the next Congress – all retroactive to the first of next year – indeed dare the GOP to oppose these “new” tax cuts.
If they want to shut down government after the election over the debt ceiling increase – let them. Actually it will not come to that as games can be played with the numbers to effect a 60 day delay – allowing the new Congress to handle this also.
In short I agree with all your points David.
Maybe all this kicking the can down the road means Obama will finally get his precious Grand Bargain to raise SS to 70 and Medicare to 67 in return for preserving the Bushama Tax Cuts amd anther year of payroll tax cut. win win for him. Lose lose for we the Sheeple
Let’s split the difference and henceforth call them the Bushama Tax Cuts
Does anyone seriously believe the the Bush/Obama tax cuts will be allowed to expire?
“Obama tax cuts”
BINGO!
Right now, outside of Medicare, Medicaid, and SS, Americans are getting a dogshit return on investment from their tax dollar. Does anyone believe that any prospective new tax revenue will be spent on American needs? The need to shrink the hell out of SS, Medicare, and Medicaid precedes any need for new revenue streams for military adventurism, prison building, insurance subsidies, Wall Street/corporate handouts in the minds of elites (though they are merely two sides of the same coin). Is it really even perverse anymore to want to hold onto more of one’s paycheck? Can that even be considered conservative/libertarian?
Not at all. It’ll be the first thing taken care of in the lame duck session.