Response from Mike Crapo, (R-ID) concerning the "Super Committee"

To save time I've reprinted (from a previous post) my email sent to Mr. Crapo on Wednesday, August 3, 2001 voicing my concerns about the so-called "Super Committee." 


I received a reply today which I have reprinted following my original email.


My email to Mike Crapo (R-ID)

Dear Senator Crapo,

I took time out from my busy schedule to attend a "meet and greet" with in Coeur d'Alene before the last election.  Based on what I heard my vote was cast for you.

During the Kubuki theater that occurred in Washington concerning the debt ceiling, I did my best to ignore the fact that you embarrassed the state of Idaho by being one of the "gang of six." 

It is impossible to ignore, however, the agreement reached with the Democrats on the debt ceiling which includes a committee being formed to make recommendations on spending cuts - the so-called "Super Congress." 

If I understand this correctly, this committee of six Republicans and six Democrats will decide where and how much will be cut from the budget.  This will be presented to the House, who will have only the power of an up and down vote with no ability to offer amendments. If they vote no, automatic "triggers" will be released, none of which are too palatable. Am I correct, so far?

If you are not one of the Republicans on this committee, then you are not really representing me. I have been effectively disenfranchised.   I voted for you to represent me, not some committee that would make the likes of a Vladimir Lenin proud. 

Please explain to me how this committee can even be considered constitutionally legal.  Are we not all to be represented by whom we elected or is this just reserved for special interests and "elites."

You appeared to be a level-headed and concerned person who held the best interests of this country as your number one goal. That's why I voted for you.  Let me repeat - I voted for you, not some committee of inside the beltway types.

Now if I've completely gotten this wrong, please feel free to enlighten me.

I am posting this on my blog, Adrienne's Corner, and will be happy to print your response.

Sincerely,

Adrienne Streeter
Post Falls, ID

From Senator Crapo:

September 20, 2011

Dear Adrienne:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the important budgetary issues facing our nation.  I appreciate the time you took to reach out to me and I apologize for the delay in responding.  As you may know, my offices (as well as most other congressional offices) have experienced an extremely large volume of calls, emails and letters from constituents in the last few months, making it difficult to respond in a more timely and specific manner.  I hope this update on my activities in Congress in recent months relating to the budget will help address questions you might have.

On February 14, 2011, President Barack Obama submitted his FY 2012 budget request to Congress, a budget that did not change the status quo-- it recommended a continuation down the same unsustainable path toward spending, taxing and borrowing, to the extent of tripling our national debt over ten years. This is not the solution that the American people and economic reality have demanded of our elected leaders.  Our country now borrows over 40 cents of every dollar it spends, so enacting such a growing budget at a time when spending needs to be reeled in is a gross misdirection.  However, the Senate will take his budget proposal under consideration during the construction of its own budget resolution.  After extended debate on the proposed budget that the Budget Committee agrees upon, the full Senate will consider a budget resolution.  As a member of the Senate Budget Committee, I will be taking an active part in crafting a responsible budget and will be able to ensure that Idaho’s priorities are included in the final version of the budget.

Throughout my tenure in Congress, I have reviewed and voted on many 10-year budget plans, but without adequate enforcement provisions, Congress inevitably finds loopholes to avoid spending controls that are put into effect in out-years of such budgets.   It is time to stop borrowing money from future generations, as these actions do not lead to long-term growth and economic stabilization.  The solution to our problems will require dramatic action and shared sacrifice.  The sheer scope of our fiscal situation means every part of our government ledger sheet must be scrutinized.

The deficit crisis has grown as our country continued a rapid approach toward the debt ceiling.  As you may know, Congress imposed a statutory limit on federal debt in 1917, through passage of the Second Liberty Bond Act, which enacted limits on certificates of indebtedness and on bonds that the federal government could issue.  Since 2001, Congress has voted to raise the debt limit ten times.  As of April 1, 2011, the total federal debt was $14.251 billion and rising.  On May 16, 2011, U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner announced that the federal debt had reached its statutory limit and declared a debt issuance suspension period, which would allow certain extraordinary measures to extend Treasury's borrowing capacity until about August 2, 2011.  On July 1, 2011, the U.S. Treasury confirmed its view that its borrowing authority would be exhausted on that day.

Earlier projections had indicated that we were headed in that direction, so in March 2010 (more than 18 months ago), I was selected by Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) to be one of six U.S. Senators to serve on the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform.  The Commission was created by President Obama to identify policies to improve the federal government’s fiscal situation, and I worked diligently with commission members over many months to listen to, and question, experts on all levels about our country’s fiscal condition.  Ultimately, the plan fell short of the 14 votes needed of the 18 members on the panel to force Congress to vote on the proposal.  However, the final report was endorsed by a bipartisan supermajority of the Commission members, including Senators Tom Coburn (R-Oklahoma), Dick Durbin (D-Illinois), Kent Conrad (D-North Dakota) and me.

While I was disappointed that the report of this fiscal commission, though imperfect, did not move forward, the plan did provide a legitimate framework by which Senators Coburn, Durbin, Conrad and I, along with Senators Saxby Chambliss (R-Georgia) and Mark Warner (D-Virginia), could move forward in a bipartisan and aggressive manner to carry on the work of the Commission.  Using this framework, the six of us formed a bi-partisan working group, commonly dubbed the “Gang of Six.”  Over the several months that followed, we worked together to find solutions to this debt crisis facing our nation, and to address these much-needed changes.  On July 19, 2011, we presented to our colleagues an update on our comprehensive plan to tackle the rising debt and deficit and fundamentally reform a burdensome, anticompetitive tax code.  This plan takes on the challenge of transforming the Commission recommendations into a real and bipartisan plan to attack our deficits with $3.7 trillion in savings over ten years, stabilize our growing debt, and impose unprecedented budget discipline on the federal government.

The proposal that we put forward would cut, not raise, taxes.  There has been some confusion on this question because of different “baselines” that the plan may be measured against.  There is no question that the kind of tax cuts included in the proposal are historic and would lower every taxpayer’s rate, and this kind of simplification of the tax code would generate significant growth in the economy.  As a result of this economic growth, additional revenues would be generated, which, according to the plan, could only be used for further tax rate or deficit reduction, and not for additional spending.

All in all, this plan has strong bipartisan support and approaches spending and fiscal policy, and more, in a way that is not typical for Congress, but this is not a typical time.  All the usual solutions have been exhausted and have proven to be inadequate to meet our nation’s problems.  Nonetheless, Congress continued to explore other options, and, after several failed attempts by both House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada), on July 25, 2011, legislation titled the Budget Control Act of 2011 was introduced in different forms by both House Speaker Boehner and Majority Leader Reid.  Subsequently, on August 2, 2011, President Obama signed into law a compromise measure, following House approval by a vote of 269-161 on August 1, 2011, and Senate approval by a vote of 74-26 on August 2, 2011.  Included in this measure were numerous provisions aimed at deficit reduction and an increase in the debt limit of up to $2.4 trillion that would occur in several stages.  These provisions would eliminate the need for further increases in the debt limit until late 2012 or early 2013.

As a nation, we have faced many unprecedented crises that could have been avoided with the earlier enactment of sound fiscal policies.  We, in Congress, have stumbled one too many times over last-minute fixes to problems that should never have reached a critical need for action.  In recent months, we have faced a debt ceiling crisis and a potential government shutdown, yet Senate leadership continues to refuse to pass a budget.  When added to sluggish economic growth, government regulatory policies that are choking small business and continued high unemployment rates throughout the country, it is no wonder that Americans are up in arms over federal spending and debt.

There is much that needs to be done, but there is reason for hope.  The direction of debate in Congress over spending issues has shifted dramatically from how much it can spend to a concentrated discussion about cutting spending.  Just a couple years ago, Congress was focused on things like stimulus spending and bailouts, all of which I opposed.  The wrongheaded notion that we can spend ourselves into prosperity has rightly been thrown out the window.  Instead, the debates are focused on how much spending to cut, and how we can best enforce spending restraint on future Congresses.  This is a positive development for our country, but there is still so much more that needs to be addressed. 

As a member of the Senate Finance, Budget, and Banking Committees, I have been pushing aggressively for enhanced oversight of these unprecedented government interventions to make sure the taxpayer is being protected.  I share your commitment to a cost-effective federal budget and the need to eliminate wasteful spending.  Reducing federal spending has been a top priority for me throughout my public service.   I am committed to restoring the federal budget to balance, and this effort requires careful scrutiny of all programs funded by the American taxpayer.   We owe it to our children, grandchildren and future generations to do nothing less.

Again, thank you for contacting me. Please feel free to contact me in the future on this or other matters of interest to you. For more information about the issues before the U.S. Senate as well as news releases, photos, and other items of interest, please visit my Senate website, http://crapo.senate.gov.

Sincerely,

Mike Crapo

United States Senator