A Livingston County Look at the Federal Debt Ceiling Deal

President Barack Obama signed the debt ceiling compromise Tuesday not long after a Senate vote to ratify the plan to keep the nation from defaulting on its debts. For the nuts and bolts of the decision, see the last section at the bottom. For reaction, here's a range of views form the local, state and national level:

Wes Nakagiri: Deal likely doesn't stop red ink

Nakagiri, treasurer of RetakeOurGov, a Hartland-based Tea party political action committee that meets in Brighton Township, said he's skeptical of a deal that enacts cuts over 10 years. He said future Congresses and presidents aren't bound by the deal — which is why the balanced budget amendment was key.

"The jury is still out in my mind — did we really cut spending in any meaningful way?" said Nakagiri, who lives in Hartland. "I'm not convinced. It's appalling we're putting mountains of debt on our children and grandchildren. I don't think it's morally right."

He said he was disappointed with U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers' decision to vote for the deal and support House Speaker John Boehener's solution late last week before a balanced budget amendment was added.

"I would have preferred he would have taken a stronger stance on the spending," he said.

He said fiscal conservatives didn't want a default, but he believes the country could have avoided default after the Aug. 2 deadline by choosing to pay the interest on the debt with the money it takes in, so a compromise wasn't necessary at this point.

Nakagiri said the real problem is the federal government is structured to always grow its spending and cuts often are actually smaller increases than recommended.

"You wouldn't do that in the real world in the private sector," he said. "It allows the political class to say they're addressing the spending issue when they're not."

Jordan Genso: Plan best in bad situation

Genso, chairperson of the Livingston County Democrats, said Republicans misunderstood the severity of the issue and the crisis shows they put party ahead of the country.

"I hope voters have a 15-month memory, so come Novemeber 2012, they know who clearly was the bad guy in this scenario," said Genso, a Hartland resident. "The other side was."

Genso said while balancing a budget is important, government spending, especially during tough economic times is an essential tool.

"The government needs to be able to borrow to smooth out the economic cycles of highs and lows and inject demand when needed," he said.

So, cuts that will be enacted as part of the compromise, he said, aren't good for the economy but better than default.

"I'm not happy with the outcome by any means," he said. "(But) I don't think it was possible to get Republicans to come together on a fair deal."

Genso he's glad Rogers supported the compromise to avoid what he says would have been catastrophic for the nation's economy. But he thinks the GOP's decision to hold the economy hostage gives an opportunity to his future opponent.

"This absolutely will be part of the political debate," he said. "I think all Republicans could be vulnerable."

U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers: Compromise provides 'real solutions'

Rogers, whose 8th District includes the Hartland and Brighton areas, issued a statement Monday:

"The Budget Control Act is a realistic approach that provides real solutions to how Congress spends money. The bill cuts more spending — $2.4 trillion according to the Congressional Budget Office – than the debt limit increases. Washington is taking responsibility by paying our bills in a manner that not only ensures that Michigan families’ finances won’t be disrupted by a job-destroying national credit default, but also charts a path of fiscal sanity by cutting $2.4 trillion in spending over the next 10 years without raising taxes a dime.

"It gets us off to a good start, but more spending cuts will be necessary to balance the budget and help to save money that our children and grandkids would be forced to pay in the future. Congress will need to further address the issue through annual appropriations bills and other vehicles that become available, but at least we are now headed in the right direction."

Why Michigan's senators voted for the plan

U.S. Sen. Debbie Stabenow published this statement on her website:

"I'm glad that cooler heads finally prevailed to pass a bipartisan agreement to significantly reduce the deficit and avoid another blow to our economy. It is critical that Congress now focus on the top priority for our families-strengthening our economy so businesses can create jobs."

U.S. Sen. Carl Levin has a YouTube link to her floor speech explaining his vote. To watch, click on the video with this article or click here.

Views of top national leaders

For House Speaker John Boehner's statement, click here.

For Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's statement, click here.

President Barack Obama made a statement in the Rose Garden after the Senate vote. For his statement, click here.

What the compromise does

According to a news article in the Huffington Post:

"The bill allows the president to increase the borrowing limit by $400 billion immediately and mandates $917 billion in cuts over the next decade. Obama can hike the limit another $500 billion later, and only be blocked if Congress actively votes to disapprove.

"It also sets up a select committee of 12 lawmakers that will look for a way to cut another $1.5 trillion from the deficit over the next decade. And the rest of Congress will have very little to say about how those cuts are made.

"The super committee will have to make its recommendations before Thanksgiving. Once it does, the other members of Congress won't be able to make modifications; they will only be able to vote the cuts up or down.

"Congress must pass or fail the committee's package by Dec. 23. Even the rules of the committee will supersede the normal rules of either chamber.

"If the committee somehow fails to agree on cuts, the debt bill also includes triggers to cut $1.2 trillion, divided between domestic spending and the military."