By J. Randolph Evans

So, here are the two dates to mark on the calendar: November 23, 2011 (the day before Thanksgiving) and December 23, 2011 (two days before Christmas). What makes these dates special?

Wednesday, November 23, 2011 is the deadline for the so-called Congressional ‘super-committee’ (actually named the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction) to issue its recommendations for at least $1.5 trillion in federal deficit reductions over the next ten years.

Friday, December 23, 2011 is the deadline for both Houses of the United States Congress to vote on the super-committee’s recommendations. Neither date will be a ‘fun’ day for anyone.

The compromise that produced this super-committee process was the product of the debt-ceiling crisis just three months ago. Basically, the federal government reached its borrowing limit and House Republicans refused to increase the federal debt limit without significant spending cuts. The resulting ‘compromise’ was the Budget Control Act of 2011. Just days later, the United States’ credit rating was downgraded anyway.

(Experts say this super-committee model looks a lot like the Base Realignment and Closure process when the Congress effectively punted its role in making the hard choices for military base closures. Yet, this super-committee has power that dwarfs the closure of individual military bases around the country.)

For a country that has prided itself on the de-concentration of power, the super-committee is actually a frightening concentration of power. Twelve members of Congress (six Senators and six Representatives) equally divided between Democrats and Republicans effectively get to decide whether taxes are raised (and how much); which (if any) entitlement programs get reformed (and how); whether defense spending is cut (and how much); and everything else associated with the funding and operation of the federal government.

Rather than 435 Representatives and 100 Senators doing their job (as contemplated by the founding fathers in the United States Constitution), all of the taxing and spending power of the Congress has been effectively concentrated into twelve people who were picked but not elected to serve on the super-committee.

Of course, super-committees with such enormous power are referenced nowhere in the United States Constitution. The founding fathers who feared the concentration of power more than anything else must be rolling over in their graves.

The United States Constitution actually does lay out a process for the operation of the government, starting with a provision that “all bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives” – not a super-committee. But, this compromise process is not much for Constitutional protocol.

In fact, other than a token tipping of the hat to a ‘vote,’ the recommendations from the super-committee are not even subject to any of the normal protections associated with a democratic process. For example, while the House and the Senate vote on the super-committee’s recommendations under the compromise, it is only on a ‘take it or leave it’ basis.

In the House of Representatives, this means that the recommendations are not subject to amendments (no matter how valid the amendment) or the ‘majority of the majority’ procedural maneuver to prevent bad legislation from reaching a final vote. In the Senate, the legislation is not subject to filibuster. This means limited debate with a simple majority vote.

Dissent is effectively stripped of any ability to make a difference. Instead, a simple majority, not subject to any procedural protections for the minority, can now impose some of the most important and significant changes (good or bad) in U.S. history to the defense, security, taxes, and entitlements of the American people.

Even then, the majority only gets two options: yes or no to the super-committee’s recommendations. But, the ‘no’ is not without serious consequence. Under the Budget Control Act of 2011, if the super-committee fails to agree on recommendations, or the full Congress fails to pass it, then really bad things happen.

The compromise contains a “trigger mechanism” that, in the absence of action by the Congress and the President, would automatically impose $1.2 trillion in spending cuts.

In the abstract, this does not sound so bad. But, the automatic spending cuts are not intended to be a real solution. Instead, they are intended to be punitive – serving as a huge stick to force the Congress to accept the super-committee’s recommendations. The automatic trigger mechanism imposes an arbitrary 50/50 split of the $1.2 trillion in spending cuts between national security and domestic spending – not including the big entitlement programs like Social Security.

Unfortunately, notwithstanding the rather Draconian nature of the compromise, it actually does little to solve either the federal deficit (spending over revenue each year) or the federal debt (accumulated deficits year after year). With over $14 trillion in federal debt, and continuing federal deficits, the proposed cuts are drops in the bucket.

Now, doesn’t all this make Thanksgiving and Christmas special this year?