Why Oh Why Can't We Have Better Deficit Commissions?

Because Obama chose the wrong people to chair it. Stan Collender on the clown show that was Simpson-Bowles

Bowles-Simpson Offers Lessons on the Deficit: I am one of the people who never thought the deficit reduction commission co-chaired by Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson had much chance of succeeding.... The Bowles-Simpson commission was set up on a pass-fail basis, and it unquestionably failed.... Some of those who have tried the hardest to impose an alternative definition have an ulterior motive because they supplied staff to the commission and were deeply involved in the plan’s development. To say the least, their position that the plan should be viewed as a success has to be treated skeptically.

Some people are taking solace in the fact that more than a simple majority supported the plan, but my strong suspicion is that the 11 supporters were actually an overstatement. Several members likely announced their support for the plan only after they were certain it wouldn’t be adopted....

[L]essons from Bowles-Simpson are important.... First... commissions seldom work when it comes to revenue and spending... [that] most of the questions can’t be answered objectively... dooms from the start almost every effort to do what commissions are supposed to do: take the politics out of what is an inherently political decision.... Second, Bowles-Simpson showed clearly that any commission... has to make a convincing case to the public for its proposals in order to be successful... Bowles-Simpson didn’t do this.... Third... staffing is almost always a critical element.... My commission relied on Treasury staff and a few paid outside consultants; Bowles-Simpson seemed to rely on staff on loan from outside organizations with an interest in the outcome. This is a huge problem in general; in this case it also called the commission’s objectivity into question.