Not literally, of course - but they expose their real feelings about the American taxpayer and their concept of "shared sacrifice" quite clearly.
My morning routine involves watching CNN's American Morning.
This morning, they had two Bagger-ific guests on to talk about the debt ceiling issue, one a Senator and the other a Governor. They got nailed by both of CNN's financial reporters, who are also co-hosts of the show (Ali Velshi & Christine Romans).
More over the flip.
The wind up and pitch began with Pennsylvania Republican Senator Pat Toomey. From the transcript:
VELSHI: If August 2nd comes and goes without a deal to raise the debt ceiling, the treasury might have to decide which bills get paid and which ones don't. There's a new bill this morning that would prioritize which payments would get made first. They include payments on the nation's debt, Social Security checks, and paychecks for U.S. troops.
Joining me to talk about this is Republican Senator Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania. He's the former president of the Club for Growth. Senator Toomey, thanks for being here. Good to see you again.
Ah... The Club for Growth. Sounds so... growthy and clubby. Like a nice RV filled with financial advisors or something. But I digress. Continuing (and I've edited out the obligatory "must raise the debt ceiling" schtick and the balanced budget amendment schtick, which you can read in its entirety at the provided link):
VELSHI: And the fact is the balanced budget amendment would be a long process, longer than this process would be, so that's something we have to consider as a discussion a little bit later. But at this point I know you're working off the same figures we largely are. If we hit the debt ceiling about 40 percent of our government spending would stop. That's got to be worse for the economy than closing some tax loopholes wouldn't you say?
TOOMEY: No. I think the most important thing for the economy is getting us on a sustainable fiscal path. We have seen what's happening in the periphery of Europe to countries that just refuse to grapple with this problem. And raising taxes a little bit here and there or a lot is going to do some harm to the economy and it's not going to solve the underlying problem.
No? Really? The most important thing is to go ahead and cut Federal spending by 40% overnight so that Corporations and individuals who earn $250K or greater can continue to have their tax cuts? Well. At least we know where he stands. I hope Pennsylvania was listening.
Now they continue into a discussion of what Toomey has "prioritized" in the event a debt ceiling deal is not reached. Let's all bear in mind that he's clearly pre-prioritized tax cuts for the wealthy as a given, immovable part of the equation:
So my legislation is designed to deal with the possibility that we might have that interim period. And we will have the ongoing revenue from taxes to easily be able to afford interest on our debt so that we don't have a catastrophic default. We can easily afford Social Security benefits and we can easily afford to pay military pay.
VELSHI: Like I said, I don't think we have a dispute as to what the figures are. So business, based on the math we did on your proposal, if you do pay the interest on debt and you pay Social Security checks and you pay active military, here's what you might not be able to pay -- the department of justice, FBI, courts, salaries of federal workers, department of education, Pell grants.
TOOMEY: It's a long list.
"It's a long list" of functions that you would elect to halt so that the wealthy can keep their tax cuts. That's not parsing on my part. It's just fact.
VELSHI: Yes, it's a long list. What happens? I mean that is a big shutdown. That is jobs that could be lost.
TOOMEY: Look, there would be a partial government shutdown. Those payments would be delayed until this were resolved. My guess is it would be resolved in a matter of days. And I'm not advocating this. I'm not suggesting it's a good idea to go ahead down this road.
Where to start. I'm sure those with "delayed" payments aren't living hand to mouth in this economy or anything. I mean, it's not like they'll have to choose for whatever period of time about what their priorities are - like eating and paying the rent or mortgage. What's even more fun is that "delayed" income doesn't allow you to ask for unemployment assistance. Good times! But at least his "guess" is that it would be resolved in a "matter of days".
TOOMEY: But what I am suggesting is none of us can guarantee that there's going to be an agreement that raises the debt ceiling by August 2nd. And since we can't guarantee that outcome, we ought to have a plan b. And a plan b, you know, the administration is quietly making phone calls according to published reports, to big banks that they won't default on our debt. That's fine, but how about sharing that with the American people so they can have that comfort?
If "tone deafness" had a visual, it would be Toomey's picture. I rather think that this is not very "comfort"ing to a vast majority of non-senior non-military Americans.
[Note: snipped a bit of the interview here] VELSHI: Yes, let me just ask you one last question. I want to show you a new poll, a Pew poll that has come out, and the question was, for lawmakers who share your views on this issue, they should -- 68 percent say they should be willing to compromise, 23 percent stand by their principles.
Now, the number that say you should be willing to compromise is up 13 percentage points since April. And if you just looked at Republicans, 53 percent want lawmakers to compromise, and that's up 10 percentage points since April. How do you read that?
TOOMEY: Look, I think people want us to get this resolved. They want a solution. So do I. And the solution that I think is laying on the table available to be had is for the president to join us and say you know what, it does make sense to put us on a path to a balanced budget.
Now, how quickly we get there, what we cut to get there, whether we reform the tax code as part of that process, all those things we all ought to be flexible and be willing to negotiate. But I think the country desperately needs to have a sustainable fiscal path.
Except.... for the whole tax increase on the wealthy thing. That's not part of any compromise, and failing to raise the debt ceiling is preferable to raising taxes on the wealthy.
Got it. Loud and clear.
The swing and a miss, though, came from Florida Governor Rick Scott. This was like - unbelievable to me. Again, from the transcript linked above:
ROMANS: Now, in the ongoing debate over the debt ceiling and raising it and what to get in exchange for raising it, almost everyone whether Republican or Democrat agrees that the debt ceiling has to be raised. If not, the results could be catastrophic. The Florida Republican Governor Rick Scott is saying the opposite. Listen.
[snipped to edit out video clip of Scott]
ROMANS: Joining me now live from Tallahassee is Governor Rick Scott. Governor, welcome to the program. I mean, your opinion and advice runs counter to just about what everyone from both parties is saying.
And it goes against what everyone in the financial markets is telling me in 15 years of my own capital markets reporting experience. So tell me exactly why raising the debt ceiling wouldn't have an effect on markets in the economy or state?
SCOTT: Well, what do families do? If one of the parents loses their job, they stop spending. They have to. They don't just keep borrowing money. What do businesses do if the revenue go down? They have to stop borrowing money.
Our government is no different. We have to -- what's the limit? Is it $14 trillion, $16 trillion, $20 trillion? Who's going to pay for this? Our kids are going to pay for this. We have got to say that look, we have enough revenues. We have to prioritize how we spend money.
There is an ocean of difference between what families and governments do - I couldn't even begin to list it all here. Right out of the gate, this creepy idiot is showing why he has a 29% job approval rating from Florida voters.
That's what we had to do in Florida. When I became governor in January, we were looking at almost a $4 billion budget deficit. We had to pick and choose what we're going to do. We can't do everything. Government can't do everything. Now we are walking into --
ROMANS: Those are two different arguments. You're right, our deficits and our debt is unsustainable, it just is. That's a question through the democratic process we have to figure out how to fix that.
But raising the debt ceiling, that's paying for what Congress has already spent. That's paying for the obligations that Congress, both parties, over the past decade, the money that they have already spent. What about the message it sends to the rest of the world that we're not going to pay all our bills?
THANK YOU Christine Romans, for finally starting to address the issue that the debt ceiling has nothing to do with budgeting and policies to address overall deficit reduction.
SCOTT: No. We can pay our bills. All we have to do is stop spending. We have enough revenues. We need to say look, we're not going to borrow any more money, today. Today, just like what we do in business, today what we're going to do is we're going to figure out how we're going to spend the money we get. We're going to prioritize what's important.
ROMANS: OK, so if you prioritize what's important, what that means is that if you don't raise the debt ceiling, at some point either August 2nd, maybe August 10th, sometime in the coming days, you have 40 percent less money available to pay those bills.
Not all the bills can get paid. The rest of the world looks at us and says the United States is picking and choosing what bills it's going to pay. How is that sustainable for markets, how is that -- what if there are companies in your state that have to -- they see higher interest rates for the debt that they're taking on to grow and to create jobs for Floridians?
SCOTT: Higher interest rates are going to be caused by borrowing more money. I mean, this is not different than a company. If a company has a drop in revenues, you have to stop spending money, you have to say that was a nice to have, but doesn't make any sense.
The mind boggles. Let's start with the idea that "higher interest rates are going to be caused by borrowing more money." That's funny... I am refinancing my mortgage as we speak (I close on Friday) and during the 30 days it's taken me to refinance with no cash out (i.e., same amount of money), interest rates on refis have moved from 4.5% to 4.65%. If I were to apply to refi today, I would get that latter rate - only I haven't borrowed more money. I shouldn't even be explaining that ridiculous statement on Scott's behalf, actually, so I'll press on.
I used to work for a large company. I know for a fact that it and other large companies routinely use short-term borrowing to cover payroll on an ongoing, bi-weekly (or weekly) basis to allow for peaks and valleys in actual cashflow. It's a simple thing: Acme company may be totally healthy from an overall cashflow perspective - but at payroll time, they may not have enough cleared cash in hand to cover it, so they utilize short-term borrowing to cover the shortfall and then pay it back in a matter of days. If Rick Scott ran any one of these companies, they would just constantly lay off and rehire people rather than borrow that payroll money.
He is truly a ridiculous human being.
SCOTT: We have to prioritize. That's what our states are doing, that's what we did. That's how we're going to get our economy going again. We should not be spending more money. There's a limit on how much money we can spend.
ROMANS: With all due respect, they're spending more money and paying for what we already spent.
VELSHI: If you don't mind, I just have to -- Governor, I'm not understand. Christine has asked you this four times already. We're talking about paying the bills you already committed to. Why is this difficult for you to understand, Governor?
Oooh SNAP Ali Velshi. It's a little sad that I'm so thrilled that a reporter finally did - you know - reporting and stuff.
SCOTT: Well, look, this is what we did in Florida. We stopped spending more money. We prioritized how we're going to spend money. We have to do the same. We can stop borrowing money at the federal level if we cut our spending at the federal level. We don't have to keep borrowing more money. I mean, there's a --
How's that working out for you, Florida? Let's review Rick Scott's 5 big prioritization moves to balance Florida's budget:
1. A 10 percent cut in education spending - Stupid children. Definitely a bonus!!
2. Eliminating 1,690 jobs from the Department of Corrections - But it's all about jobs jobs jobs, right?
3. An 8,700 overall reduction in the state government workforce - See #2 above - now we're up to 10,390 jobs cut. But we have our priorities, right?
4. Tax cuts worth $4 billion - No comment needed.
5. A $4 billion Medicaid reform - Where "reform" means funneling the poor into private insurance programs. Excellent!
Looks to me like the 71% of Floridians who do not approve of Scott's "leadership" have it right. Too bad they couldn't have figured that out when it was time to vote.
Back to the transcript:
ROMANS: Tell me what spending? If you had to cut 40 percent of spending, what would you cut? What you would pay is Social Security recipients first, you'd pay active duty military, you'd pay the interest on our debt.
Now you pretty much gotten up to what's coming in. So what do you cut? You cut food stamps. You cut federal education spending, you cut disaster relief, you cut foreign aid, what would you cut?
SCOTT: Well, you go through the most important things, just like what you do at the state level, the most important things and then you have to cut back. You have to figure out what do companies do.
I've already addressed the fallacy of "what companies do" (see above). And I've highlighted what Scott thinks of as "the most important things" (tax cuts).
ROMANS: You don't think this will crash jobs in the near term, if we don't get jobs growing we're not going to have an economy growing and still have a problem.
SCOTT: I agree.
Scott agrees with what? That what he's done and what he's suggesting has and will crash jobs? ???
ROMANS: Even Ben Bernanke says if you don't raise the debt ceiling you have an immediate cut in 40 percent, 40 percent of federal spending, I mean, the impact near term on the economy would be disastrous. Doesn't this have to be done with a little more thoughtfulness than just 11th hour electioneering.
SCOTT: We've been doing this. It hasn't helped our economy. We did the stimulus. It didn't help our economy. What's going to help our economy is --
ROMANS: Years and years of tax cuts supposed to grow jobs and that hasn't helped either, right?
Oooh SNAP Christine Romans! I'm liking you and Ali today.
SCOTT: Well, if you look at the states that are growing like our state. We have no personal income tax. We're phasing out the business tax. Look at Texas. They have lower taxes and they're growing.
Really? Tell that to Lakeland-Winter Haven, Cape Coral-Fort Myers, Miami-Fort Lauderdale, Tampa-St. Pete, and North Port-Bradenton-Sarasota. Those five metro areas are on the US Conference of Mayors' highest metro area unemployment list (source - PDF, Pg. 4). Congratulations! Florida holds 33.3% of the overall, nationwide list for highest metro area unemployment! Let's lower taxes again!!
So absolutely, lower taxes make the economy grow, higher taxes, more regulation, trillion dollar deficits that kills our economy. This is about jobs. This is about our future. We cannot continue to borrow money.
Rick Scott looked like a creepy, ill-informed ass during this interview. Perhaps what I liked most after he was pwned was the anchors' commentary:
VELSHI: There has really to be a distinction. I think we can all have a reasonable discussion about what we spend in the future. I wish this would clear up. That's a different discussion.
CHETRY: This is the clearest, you know, for people who are not in completely into the markets and into the economy and are wonkish about it.
It's like saying, you know what, I'm spending too much money on my credit card. Every month I spend too much so I'm going to not pay the bank back.
VELSHI: That's for the stuff I've already bought.
CHETRY: That is the debt ceiling issue.
VELSHI: Completely.
CHETRY: The cutting the deficit issue is something different. The reason they're linked is because many on the conservative Tea Party Republicans who believe that unless there is some linking of these two, unless there is a consequence.
VELSHI: It will never get solved.
ROMANS: Because we have raised the debt ceiling over and over.
VELSHI: It is very dangerous not to make that distinction. I'm worried that's what Governor Scott is doing.
ROMANS: I respect the ideological purity of the people who are holding on to it. You know, these are not flip floppers. These are people who believe and they were elected on this platform.
But in the very near term it's the worry about jobs and the near term impact on the economy if it's done too quickly and not in the right way.
VELSHI: That's correct.
CNN has never been, for me, very willing to walk out on a limb and add individual anchor commentary to a particular issue - yet all three of the AM anchors underlined and put the punctuation on the sentence that says "The debt ceiling and the deficit are not related."
And good on them.