Minnesota Republicans cool to McConnell debt plan

WASHINGTON — Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s proposal to give the president emergency powers to raise the debt limit should Congress be unable to pass a bill was met coolly by Minnesota Republicans, with some expressing hesitancy and others outright deriding the plan.
McConnell’s proposal would give the White House the power to increase the debt ceiling in small spurts three times between now and Election Day 2012. Congress would be able to try and vote down the increase each time, but such measures would only pass if two-thirds of each chamber voted to do so.
Essentially, it would give the president the debt limit increase so many people in and out of his administration say the country needs, while allowing Republicans in Congress to formally show their disapproval for the measure through their votes.
The plan has divided Republicans, but there is a fair amount of agreement among those who represent Minnesota.
Michele Bachmann, who is among Congress’s staunchest opponents of a debt limit increase, had the most forceful words for the proposal, saying, “I’ve been here long enough that I’ve seen a lot of smoke and mirrors.”
Bachmann remains a likely “no” vote on a debt limit increase, having said she’d support it only if Congress is able to repeal President Obama’s health care reform law.
John Kline, however, said he’s open to voting for a debt limit increase, as long as its associated with spending cuts and controls like a balanced budget amendment, which House Speaker John Boehner said Wednesday is likely to be voted on next week.
But Kline said the McConnell plan deviates too far from the current debt negotiations between Congressional leaders and the White House. He said that’s the best way to get the spending cuts he’ll need to see in order to support a debt limit increase.
“This debt ceiling issue is an opportunity to change how Washington spends money,” he said in an interview off the House floor. “That cap and balance approach is the right one and I think its one we ought to pursue. I’ve had no discussions with the Senate minority leader. I’m not sure why he came up with that, but my own preference is to stay on the path that we’re on.”
Chip Cravaack, a freshman Republican who is witnessing a debt limit increase for the first time within the walls of the U.S. Capitol, agreed, saying McConnell’s plan “supersedes the Congress’s authority."
“People sent us here for a reason. I think it’s our responsibility to represent the people,” he said Wednesday. “This gives the president a new type of authority he really has never had before. I think it’s a very dangerous and slippery slope.”
Erik Paulsen said Wednesday that he hadn’t studied McConnell’s proposal enough to take a strong stand for or against it. He said, though, that he thinks the measure is meant to force movement on a debt limit deal that has been stuck in increasingly tense negotiations.
“I’m guessing that what McConnell is saying [to the president] is, if you’ve been running up all this spending, then you should be telling us what you want to do on debt increases,” Paulsen said. “Either way, Congress is going to have to negotiate something. I think he’s trying the break the log jam of the discussion.”
Response from Democrats
Democrats, meanwhile, didn’t take a hard stance on the issue either way.
The White House didn’t endorse the plan Wednesday, calling it a “fall-back option, not the preferred option.”
“We believe the American people expect us to do something about reducing spending, getting our deficits and debts under control,” press secretary Jay Carney said at his daily briefing. “I think the president made clear is that we are the United States of America; we should not be engaged in raising every six weeks, eight weeks, three months, six months a question about whether or not we’re going to meet our obligations. So that still is his position.”
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said the plan has “merit,” telling reporters. “What Leader McConnell has put on the table recognizes that we must … lift the debt ceiling, that we must do that … So it has that merit in that it says, what are we talking about here? We have to pass this.”
In the Senate, Minnesota Democrat Al Franken said he was still considering the plan.
“I’m pleased that he finally recognizes that failing to raise the debt ceiling would be disastrous for our economy,” he said. “That said, no matter what deal we reach on the debt ceiling, we also need to focus on creating jobs and significantly cutting our long-term debt.”
Devin Henry can be reached at dhenry@minnpost.com.
More like this
- McConnell's last ditch debt ceiling plan: What's in it for Republicans?
- GOP intensifies push for a balanced budget amendment. Why now?
- Debt ceiling: Is new GOP plan a step forward or a waste of time?
- 'Cut, cap, and balance' vs. 'gang of six' plan: Which for House GOP?
- Leadership shuffle in Congress: Drama all on the winning side
Recent Stories
Most Commented
-
34 comments
-
21 comments
-
17 comments
-
10 comments
-
10 comments
Comments (7)
Picture Lucy holding the football, Charlie Brown running up to kick it...
Now picture the 2012 election.
Who will be accused of running up the debt limit 3 times? Who will be accused of illegal/unconstitutional actions? Who will be accused of reckless spending?
All it is is a way for the Republicans to retain maximum political viability--still being able to talk the "fiscal hawk", "constitutional", "true-American" talk without revealing their hand that their effort to hold the richest harmless while gutting those programs that benefit the majority of Americans.
It is only a way to save the Republicans bloviating ways with respect to taxes, spending and budget.
If they have a way to a "balanced budget" or reduced deficit, come up with it. Who and what will be cut? After all, if they will not raise revenue, what are the other options?
Time to force a stand on their part.
Enough of this BS!!
Charlie don't kick this ball no more.
Yesterday Mitch McConnell said that if the GOP failed to raise the debt ceiling and we default, the GOP will have to "co-own this economy." My jaw dropped; they don't co-own it already?Puleeze. It tanked two years before Bush left office.
Welcome to the GOP of 2011: Grover's Own Party.
Minnesota Republican Leadership is not skilled enough to understand the word recognize or recognize the professional art of compromise.
They need to go back to the playground and learn the meaning of these words and the word negotiate.
Their inexperience is showing.
President Obama didn't agree to a short-term Debt Ceiling.
The President said he would Veto any short term Bill.
I think Gop Rep. Larry Howes is not for real, and could be playing a game with Gov.
But the people seem to be happy with it and thats all that matters.
The Republicans would cut Medicare,Medicaid, and Social Security which will hurt the Seniors, poor and middle class. But the Republicans don't want raise tax on Corporation millionairies and big Oil Companies. why?.
I know Health Insurers and Big Oil Companies donated huge sum of money to the Republicans Nov.2-2010 election.
Dan Rathner said more money spend on the 2010 election than in the 2008 Presidental Race.
You got to know when that kind of money is involved a lots of influences will be ask of any Politicans.
The Tea Party pac Leader said that this is what the Tea Party wants, but the didn't use the Koch's name but i know these ideal's the the Republicans is comming up came from the Koch's brothers.
Lou Dubose of The Washington Spectator says that no one was talking about the deficit until the
Republicans needed another weapon to use against the president.
With enough "noise" through the media, they were able to move it from an issue that did not exist in the minds of Americans who were surveyed to see what they were worried about to one of the top issues they worry about today.
Now the deficit has become a principal means of attack and refusing to raise the debt ceiling (which was raised about seven times under Bush without most of the public even noticing) has become a way to reduce future spending on social safety net programs by Obama's "irresponsible" government.
Ya know... there's really no point
There's really no point in reporting Republican reactions to Obama or Democrats ideas or initiatives. We all know they're going to reject anything that isn't a tax cut or cut in government spending on civilian services and programs. NEWS would any sudden Republican support for an initiative. Republican rejectionism isn't just predictable at this point, it's boring. I didn't even read this article for instance and I'm sure I didn't miss anything. Just saying.