Aug 11, 2011 at 11:30 am
Super Committee Fails To Reach Agreement, Sets up Super-Duper Committee
After months of tense negotiations, the super committee of 12 legislators formed by the Budget Control Act signed earlier this year were unable to reach agreement on further deficit reduction.
However, the committee did agree on the formation of a “super-duper” committee, tasked with coming up with what members described as a “really great plan that solves a lot of stuff.”
The agreement stated that the new committee should be “even more super than we were—that’s why we added the word “duper” to their title, even though “duper” isn’t really a word.”
In order to increase the likelihood of a substantive agreement, the new committee will have half as many members as the super committee—3 from each party instead of 6. In addition, the rules state that if the super-duper-committee fails, another committee will form with half-again as many members.
When it was pointed out that this would mean one-and-a-half members from each party, reporters were reminded of numerous Democrats who have achieved notoriety from just the waist down.
The deadlock of the super-committee was widely predicted back in August of this year, when Republican members were forced to take blood oaths not to allow any revenue increases in the deal.
Criticized for their unwillingness to budge on revenues, Rep Hensarling (R-TX) responded, “It wasn’t just the blood oaths–we also did pinky-shakes.”
Early concerns that committee Democrats might cave on this issue were assuaged when it was learned that leadership had implanted spine-stiffening electrodes that triggered high-voltage shocks whenever the words, “OK, we’ll trust you to get the revenues part later” were uttered.
Stock markets reacted strongly to the news, with the Dow rising 600 points before falling 600 points, as it has everyday so far this year.
Thank you for joining the conversation. Comments are limited to 1,500 characters and are subject to approval and moderation. We reserve the right to remove comments that: