StanCollender'sCapitalGainsandGames Washington, Wall Street and Everything in Between

Dean Baker Explains Why The Bowles-Simpson Report Isn't The Report Of The Bowles-Simpson Comimission

28 Mar 2012
Posted by Stan Collender

 A quick good read from Dean Baker on his own blog at the Center for Economic and Policy Research on one of the points I made this morning -- that the Bowles-Simpson Commission never actually agreed to anything, took a vote or issued report.

the SB report.

The fact that about only 11 or so out of 18 on the commission thought this was doable does not wipe out the fact that something of substance was put together and can be discussed as a useful contribution to the dialogue. Some people obviously did some good work in there, and should be applauded for at least saying something substantive rather than platitudes or simply "tax the rich."

Obama signed the increase in the total bush tax cuts. He could have refused, but he was bluffing, and was called. We would not be here today, but he would have violated his read my lips no new taxes on those under $250K.

Bowles-Simpson and Obama's failure to follow through

It is a terrific shame that Obama chose not to follow up on the serious work down by the Bowles-Simpson Commission. This effort could have served as the basis for some substantive discussions of the issues and options, led by the White House. Unfortunately, the Rivlin-Domenici effort seems to have suffered a similar fate. Perhaps the 2010 election results punctured some of their self-confidence.
Time and again this President seems to talk "real purty", but just cannot follow up with substance -- whether it be in foreign policy or the economy. The "open microphone" faux pas at the recent nuclear summit suggests that perhaps some of his advisers/shepards are serving him poorly.

Why do some keep pretending

Why do some keep pretending that the BS commission was more than a BS political cover for the failure of our elected representatives to get their "stuff" together? I, for one, was glad it failed at its attempt to screw us over.

Bowles-Simpson -- totally bogus

Couldn't agree more with David. Alan Simpson has no grasp of the reality of people on Social Security, the paltry benefits they mostly get, the actual adequacy in large part of that funding stream (which could be totally fixed by raising the cap), and the necessity to maintain current levels of benefits including inflation adjustments to prevent a return to widespread poverty of old people.

The "Very Serious People" can tout Simpson-Bowles all they like, it's a HORRIBLE basis for anything.

And yes, a serious and a dangerous attempt to "screw us over", especially in an era with few pensions.

Moreover, the Medicare reductions (and unlike with SS Medicare reductions are needed) called for by Simpson-Bowles were a vague and unspecified "black box" not any sort of serious proposal. What a joke!

Perhaps Del should have read last paragraph of the Baker post

"In short, the report of the co-chairs is an outline for redistributing even more income upward. For this reason it is not likely to get much support from the public if considered on its merits. Presumably this is why the elites keep claiming the existence of a Bowles-Simpson commission report. They are hoping that they can force the public to give this document way more respect than it deserves."

Bowles-Simpson Again

@Spring Texan, etc.
I am surprised that commentators as experienced and judicious as yourselves would fall for the claptrap that emanates from the left side of K Street, like the CEPR, any more than for the claptrap which emanates from the right side of K Street. The responsibility for this "policy failure" lies at the front door of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. The Obama Administration has managed to kick the fiscal/debt crisis can down the road for three years. Solid and sustained economic recovery awaits Leadership to address these issues honestly and forthrightly -- a modus operandi which seems to elude this administration with respect to so many policy issues.

Recent comments


Order from Amazon


Creative Commons LicenseThe content of is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License. Need permissions beyond the scope of this license? Please submit a request here.