I have heard all kind of whispers about this new “bipartisan” Super Congress, but I want to know, do they really intend to target the 2nd Amendment? Will they really be able to act outside of anyone’s control? Here’s an article from Yahoo News, but the details are vague as to what Super Congress is actually for and what they will be allowed to do. Now, on several nut sites, it is said to be part of some conspiracy, and that it just brings us closer to the New World Order, run by the Illuminati/Freemasons and all that junk, but are their fears unjustified?
I don’t understand the issue.
The general principle is that no congress can tie a future congress’s hands. If one congress decides to pass a law saying “in these circumstances, the defense budget drops by $100Bn.” any future law can be passed saying “we budget the defense department to have $100Bn of spending”. Presumably, this law being newer overrides the old law. Does it even need to explicitly say “I override the previous law” or is that automatic?
This is why the tea party wanted a constitutional amendment on a balanced budget, as I understood it. Only a constitutional amendment trumps everything else.
This (PDF) looks like the text of the bill and I don’t see any mention of the Second Amendment nor of a Super Congress. It’s basically 3 Republicans and Democrats (not technically required, but considering how they will be selected, that’s how it will end up) from each house of Congress, for a total of 6 Democrats and 6 Republicans. Their stated goal is:
Jump to page 52 if you want to focus on this committee and what it is tasked with.
All that junk is conspiracy theory. It is not a super Congress. It is a joint committee, with 12 members. It must find a way to reduce the deficit by $1.5 trillion from 2012 to 2021, and seven members must vote to approve that plan.
That plan is drafted by the committee as a bill, then it goes to each body, and must receive a majority vote to send the bill to the White House for signature. This process is similar to many other legislative processes, including the old “fast track” trade promotion authority, or the defense base closure process.
If the bill is rejected by Congress, automatic spending cuts occur.
Here is the most relevent language in the law creating the committee:
Doesn’t seem very mysterious to me.
This refers (I think) to the bi-partisan deficit coalition in Congress.
It will be 6 Republicans, 6 Democrats of which 3 of each party come from the Senate and the House (chosen by their respective party leaders).
They are to contemplate means to reduce the deficit. IF (note big “if”) they agree on a proposal then Congress votes whether or not to accept it. If they do not agree or of congress refuses to pass their recommendations then some automatic triggers take effect:
-
The president can raise the debt ceiling on his own up to a given amount ($1.5 trillion IIRC).
-
The debt ceiling raise has to be matched with an equal amount of cuts (50% defense, 50% other discretionary spending).
Not sure but I think it means if the president is only willing to make $500 billion in cuts then he can only raise the ceiling by $500 billion.
Their fears are not justified. I presume this article is an example of the type of thing you’re talking about - it’s littered with factual errors.
What happened in the recent debt ceiling deal is the parties agreed on $1 trillion in specific cuts to the deficit. They also created a committee of twelve congressmen, six appointed by the Republicans and six appointed by the Democrats, to try and draw up a recommendation for how to make a further $1.5 trillion in cuts to the deficit in November. If the committee comes to a majority agreement on how to make those cuts, that recommendation will then be voted on in regular Congress.
The name “Super Congress” is misleading. It’s just a committee of 12 congressmen which reports to the real Congress. It can’t pass any legislation. The recommendation would have to pass the committee by majority vote, which means at least one member from either parties on the committee would have to vote for it, and the recommendation then goes to the floor of real Congress, where the House and the Senate will take up-or-down majority votes on the recommendation. If the committee can’t come to a majority vote then it gets dissolved and automatic cuts will to discretionary and defense spending will kick in instead. (The Obama administration would not get to cast a deciding vote on the committee, as that link above claims).
So here’s an FAQ on the second amendment worries:
-
Who will be on the committee? There will be 6 current Republican congressmen and 6 current Democrat congressmen, from both the House and the Senate, appointed by the respective leaderships. Paul Ryan and Jon Kyl are quite likely to be appointed on the Republican side, for instance.
-
What powers does the committee have? The only power it has is to make a one-off recommendation in November on how to reduce the deficit that automatically gets an up-or-down vote in both houses of the regular Congress. It can’t pass legislation.
-
Do they intend to target the second amendment? No, their sole mandate is to recommend ways to cut the deficit by $1.5tn. The second amendment will not come up.
-
But if they did try to target second amendment rights, what would happen? Obviously none of the Republicans, and probably not even all of the Democrats, on the committee would vote for it, so they couldn’t get a majority and the committee’s recommendation would fail. And even if - in the realms of fantasy - all of the Democrats and one of the Republicans ended up voting for it, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives would obviously vote it down. The Senate almost certainly would as well because all of the Republican Senators, and a significant number of pro-gun Democrats, would vote against it. It would have literally no chance of becoming law.
-
Can they try and target the second amendment next year instead? No, the committee won’t exist next year. It meets this year, it makes a one-off recommendation about how to cut the deficit in November, and then it’s dissolved. That link above claims it’s a permanent thing; it’s not.
Never underestimate the quickness with which the uninformed will trumpet their outrage over something they don’t remotely understand. The so-called “Super Congress” is just a group of Congressmen, and like dozens of other committees, they’re charged with coming up with legislation for the full Congress to vote on.
The idea that this committee could unilaterally pass sweeping gun control is completely false, and since their sole purpose is to make spending cuts, I’m not sure how the topic would even come up for them.
Bloggers and radio talk show hosts are in the business of manufacturing outrage, which helps them build an audience and generate revenue. I wish more people (on both sides of the political spectrum) would take a breath and realize that.
There are so many things to be legitimately upset with Congress about (this, for example), and so much energy is wasted on stuff that’s complete nuttery. It’s discouraging.
Let’s be a little more direct. This is demagogery and fear-mongering.
The debt conference was modeled on the Base Realignment and Closure Commission. Since Congress couldn’t agree on how to eliminate military installations, they handed the job over to a group. The group makes an all-or-nothing recommendation, and Congress can either accept or reject it.
With that kind of job description, and that much authority, one might wonder why BARC hasn’t already ordered the closing of all American military bases so our overloads could hand us over to the New World Order.