The return of Bowles-Simpson, sort of

I'm skeptical that anyone actually cares about Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson's reboot, but here's what Ezra Klein has to say about it, which seems about right:

[T]his plan sacrifices the most useful element of the original Simpson-Bowles effort, which was that it created a model ... for how you might go about reducing the deficit if you weren’t bound by the various promises, interest groups and political constraints of the two parties. This plan, by contrast, is an effort to split the difference between the two parties while amping up the total deficit reduction.

Krugman is even more dismissive. In a blog post titled "Snark That Writes Itself," he notes:

Erskine Bowles tells a Politico event--now that’s a match made in heaven--that "The idea of a grand bargain is at best on life support"....

So let’s disconnect that respirator, and let Bowles and Simpson spend more time with their families.

But Paul, who then would scold us for being the silly, carefree, fiscally unvirtuous children we are? Only the humble Bowles and Simpson stand naked but blessed before Our Fatherly Accountant. Well, they and Rep. Ryan.

Comments

[Robert Lipscomb]

I will begin taking the Bowles-Simpson Plan seriously when the committee members themselves vote for it.