The Super Committee and Michigan

Three members of Congress from Michigan discussed the so-called Congressional super committee, formed towards finding comprehensive agreement on reducing the federal deficit, in Detroit yesterday before the Detroit Economic Club. All they really had to say was that the disagreed on the matters before the committee.

Representative Candace Miller, a Republican, and Representatives Sander Levin and Gary Peters admitted they liked one another personally but were sharply divided on where to cut spending and where to raise taxes. It is no surprise that the Republican wanted most of the savings to come from budget cuts while the Democratic duo would like to see a mix of added taxes with spending cuts.

Yet they didn't address what might be the most important part of the matter. Why are we having a super committee at all?

Isn't it the job of Congress to handle budget matters? Are we doing a smart thing by essentially funneling the job into the hands of a few people? Or are we merely laying the groundwork for something worse: an oligarchy which, in the long run, will be even father from the people than the local representatives they already have?

As likely as not, the point of this committee is probably to appear bipartisan while giving individual members of Congress a certain deniability. When forced to support things their constituents might not like, they can argue that they had little choice. They had to back the super committee.

This is not good. Not good for the people, not good for Detroit or Michigan, not good for the federal republic we have enjoyed for so long. It is creeping centralized tyranny of the type we objected to in 1776. It is sham democracy and ought to be done away with.