Politics & Government

Locals Think Compromise is Coming

On debt ceiling, legislative leaders say a deal will happen.

While the nation is embroiled in a divisive standoff over the debt ceiling, the national debt, and federal spending, on the Main Streets of America, ordinary people, including those involved in politics, are finding some common ground on the issue.

State Rep. Rick Watrous, D-Concord, and state Sen. Andy Sanborn, R-Henniker, the owner of The Draft on South Main Street in Concord, sat down for a roundtable discussion about the issues last week. Not surprisingly, there were a lot of disagreements, but there were some agreements too.

Watrous, who watched both speeches by Democrat President Barack Obama and Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said the country was at a “very pivotal point,” and that both leaders realized the debt ceiling needed to be raised. He was disappointed though in the tenor of Boehner’s speech, which seemed to attack the president.

Find out what's happening in Concordwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

Sanborn said he found himself let down by both political parties and said the debt ceiling controversy was “a perfect example of Washington politics gone awry.” He said the debt ceiling should never have been was raised automatically, without accountability, between 1979 and 1994. Sanborn said when the Republicans swept into Congress in 1995, they repealed the automatic increase provision and forced then-President Bill Clinton to work together to deliver budget surpluses. The larger conversation though should be about federal spending, that is $2 for every $1 coming in, he said. 

Watrous noted that the debt ceiling had been raised a number of times during the last 40 years, adding that former President Ronald Reagan raised the debt ceiling consistently during his two terms.

Find out what's happening in Concordwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

The plans

Sanborn was surprised that Boehner was focused on raising the debt ceiling instead of spending. He said it was a form of a “flip-flop,” compared to the 2010 campaign. But, he added, that officials seemed to be focused on a temporary fix, to cover obligations, which would allow a larger conversation to take place later in the year.

Since the president doesn’t introduce bills, Obama has been handcuffed, Watrous said. However, he agreed with Obama’s positions on ending tax cuts for the wealthy as well as closing corporate loopholes. Watrous also agreed with putting together a long-term solution that fixes the problem all at once. 

“[The president] wants to do it on the whole shebang,” he said. “That made sense to me.”

Watrous said the Reid plan proposed deeper cuts than the Boehner plan, although both were short-term and will force the issue to be raised again in six months to a year, right in the middle of campaign season.

“To my mind, we would be in the exact same point … a stalemate,” he said.

Sanborn said that the political divide created by scare tactics – like threats the president made about retirees not receiving their Social Security checks – really needed to stop. Pitting one group against another group was not going to solve the problem it was only going to make the situation worse, he said.

“It’s that rhetoric and that extremism, not ideological, but the threat side,” he said. “We need to start focusing on the problem … we’re spending too much money.”

Watrous said no one really knows exactly what would happen if the country went into default. He said the federal government could pick and choose what bills to pay, whether it was soldiers, retirees, or others. However, Watrous said that the time for compromise on the issue was now.

“The House Republicans are just saying, ‘Our way or the country can go to hell,’” he said. “’We don’t know what’s going to happen but we’re willing to say no unless you agree with us.’”

Watrous said that Congressional Democrats had made huge concessions, things that weren’t on the table six months ago, like cutting trillions in spending that will hurt people. 

Agreements and ...

Despite being from different political parties, both Sanborn and Watrous found common ground on some of the outlying issues around the debt ceiling.

Both agreed that it was time reform the tax code for both individuals and businesses, as well as closing loopholes and subsidies in the system. Both agreed that it was time to bring the troops home from military actions overseas. And they also agreed that another federal commission - something that was proposed in both the Boehner and Reid plans - was not needed, with Sanborn saying, “If we don’t have the expertise today, to look at the condition that our budget is in and make the appropriate decisions, then we should replace all of Washington.”

“It’s the political will … the will to sit down and find a compromise,” Watrous said.

On the subject of a Balance Budget Amendment, Sanborn supported it while Watrous called it "a bad idea,” saying that the president and Congress should be allowed to raise deficit spending in an emergency like a disaster or a war.

On the subject of raising more revenue to solve the problem, Sanborn said the message was a failure of Washington-speak. He said leaders hadn’t proven they were spending current revenues efficiently. Sanborn said households and businesses could never operate the way the federal government operates.

“The statement shouldn’t be ‘No new taxes, no new taxes,’” he said. “It should be, ‘Let’s spend they money we’re getting in wisely.’”

Watrous said that difficulty seemed to be that many new Republicans swept into office last year took the “no new taxes” pledge and now, can’t compromise on anything.

“It’s not the responsible way to run a government,” he said. “This is the same party … in 2000, we had a surplus. George W. Bush became president, started two wars, did a tax cut, and the surplus vanished and we’re trillions in debt.”

Default or deal?

Neither Sanborn nor Watrous know exactly what will happen before Aug. 2, the deadline for a deal on the issue. But both are hopeful and optimistic for resolution on the issue. 

Sanborn said he expected the gnashing of teeth from both sides but added that they were really not that far apart on an agreement. In the end, a deal would be made, with both sides coming to the center, he said.

“They are much closer than people give them credit,” he said, “and, in this case, you have to give the Democrats credit that they have offered to make cuts which we know they are typically loathe to do. But they have manned up and said it. At the same time, Republicans have come to the middle and are offering to raise the debt ceiling, making concessions themselves. I think the deal is much closer than we think it really is.”

“I hope there’s a deal,” Watrous said. “But I’m fearful that it becomes a political battle … there are Republicans on the hill that have said, ‘We want to do things that will make Obama lose the election.’ And they seem to put that above what’s good for the country. And I think this crisis, that should have been resolved weeks before now, is a sign of brinkmanship, that scores political points and that ultimately hurts the country.”

Editor’s note: This is the first in a series of conversations with local politicos about federal issues. If you would like to be involved in future roundtable discussions, please email tony.schinella-at-patch.com


Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here