The budget agreement worked out between Republican Paul Ryan and Democrat Patty Murray is being covered mostly as an encouraging sign of bipartisanship. To the extent that much criticism is allowed, most of it comes from those on the right, who wish that there were deeper spending cuts. 
Dec 13, 2013
The budget agreement worked out between Republican Paul Ryan and Democrat Patty Murray is being covered mostly as an encouraging sign of bipartisanship. To the extent that much criticism is allowed, most of it comes from those on the right, who wish that there were deeper spending cuts.
There's plenty of criticism from the left, though. Robert Borosage of the Campaign for America's Future (12/12/13) pointed out that the deal cuts benefits for the long-term unemployed. The Nation's John Nichols (12/10/13) noted that the cuts in pension benefits for military and federal workers means they "will be required to take what is effectively a pay cut in order to pay more for their retirement benefits." These decisions were made because Republicans refuse to consider any tax increases on the wealthy.
Interesting, then, to see what the budget deal debate looked like on the December 12 PBS NewsHour. On the one side was Wall Street Democrat Steven Rattner, who has worked for most of the big banks and currently runs his own investment firm. He was mostly supportive, though he did note that "we need to address the issue of spending on Medicare and Social Security."
From the right, viewers got Douglas Holtz-Eakin of the American Action Forum, which anchor Judy Woodruff called a "policy think tank." Holtz-Eakin was a McCain economics adviser whose think tank is involved in, among other things, helping corporations lobby against tax hikes.
But someone at PBS thought viewers needed one more voice from the right: Romina Boccia of the Heritage Foundation. So the spectrum of debate was right, righter and Wall Street Democrat.
A New York Times editorial today (12/12/13) notes that "the details of the agreement show that Republican loathing of taxes and domestic spending continue to dominate the budget debate." Indeed-even on public television, which, after all, was created to expand the parameters of public discussion.
Why Your Ongoing Support Is Essential
Donald Trump’s attacks on democracy, justice, and a free press are escalating — putting everything we stand for at risk. We believe a better world is possible, but we can’t get there without your support. Common Dreams stands apart. We answer only to you — our readers, activists, and changemakers — not to billionaires or corporations. Our independence allows us to cover the vital stories that others won’t, spotlighting movements for peace, equality, and human rights. Right now, our work faces unprecedented challenges. Misinformation is spreading, journalists are under attack, and financial pressures are mounting. As a reader-supported, nonprofit newsroom, your support is crucial to keep this journalism alive. Whatever you can give — $10, $25, or $100 — helps us stay strong and responsive when the world needs us most. Together, we’ll continue to build the independent, courageous journalism our movement relies on. Thank you for being part of this community. |
© 2023 Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR)
Peter Hart
Peter Hart is the Domestic Communications Director at the Center for Economic and Policy Research.
The budget agreement worked out between Republican Paul Ryan and Democrat Patty Murray is being covered mostly as an encouraging sign of bipartisanship. To the extent that much criticism is allowed, most of it comes from those on the right, who wish that there were deeper spending cuts.
There's plenty of criticism from the left, though. Robert Borosage of the Campaign for America's Future (12/12/13) pointed out that the deal cuts benefits for the long-term unemployed. The Nation's John Nichols (12/10/13) noted that the cuts in pension benefits for military and federal workers means they "will be required to take what is effectively a pay cut in order to pay more for their retirement benefits." These decisions were made because Republicans refuse to consider any tax increases on the wealthy.
Interesting, then, to see what the budget deal debate looked like on the December 12 PBS NewsHour. On the one side was Wall Street Democrat Steven Rattner, who has worked for most of the big banks and currently runs his own investment firm. He was mostly supportive, though he did note that "we need to address the issue of spending on Medicare and Social Security."
From the right, viewers got Douglas Holtz-Eakin of the American Action Forum, which anchor Judy Woodruff called a "policy think tank." Holtz-Eakin was a McCain economics adviser whose think tank is involved in, among other things, helping corporations lobby against tax hikes.
But someone at PBS thought viewers needed one more voice from the right: Romina Boccia of the Heritage Foundation. So the spectrum of debate was right, righter and Wall Street Democrat.
A New York Times editorial today (12/12/13) notes that "the details of the agreement show that Republican loathing of taxes and domestic spending continue to dominate the budget debate." Indeed-even on public television, which, after all, was created to expand the parameters of public discussion.
Peter Hart
Peter Hart is the Domestic Communications Director at the Center for Economic and Policy Research.
The budget agreement worked out between Republican Paul Ryan and Democrat Patty Murray is being covered mostly as an encouraging sign of bipartisanship. To the extent that much criticism is allowed, most of it comes from those on the right, who wish that there were deeper spending cuts.
There's plenty of criticism from the left, though. Robert Borosage of the Campaign for America's Future (12/12/13) pointed out that the deal cuts benefits for the long-term unemployed. The Nation's John Nichols (12/10/13) noted that the cuts in pension benefits for military and federal workers means they "will be required to take what is effectively a pay cut in order to pay more for their retirement benefits." These decisions were made because Republicans refuse to consider any tax increases on the wealthy.
Interesting, then, to see what the budget deal debate looked like on the December 12 PBS NewsHour. On the one side was Wall Street Democrat Steven Rattner, who has worked for most of the big banks and currently runs his own investment firm. He was mostly supportive, though he did note that "we need to address the issue of spending on Medicare and Social Security."
From the right, viewers got Douglas Holtz-Eakin of the American Action Forum, which anchor Judy Woodruff called a "policy think tank." Holtz-Eakin was a McCain economics adviser whose think tank is involved in, among other things, helping corporations lobby against tax hikes.
But someone at PBS thought viewers needed one more voice from the right: Romina Boccia of the Heritage Foundation. So the spectrum of debate was right, righter and Wall Street Democrat.
A New York Times editorial today (12/12/13) notes that "the details of the agreement show that Republican loathing of taxes and domestic spending continue to dominate the budget debate." Indeed-even on public television, which, after all, was created to expand the parameters of public discussion.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.