Others have already pointed out the obvious: the newly appointed ‘Super Committee’ is nowhere close to the first committee or commission established with the aim of resolving our worsening fiscal problems. But there are a few differences this time around that may be enough for the newly created Super Committee to succeed in deficit reduction where so many others have failed.

As part of the recent debt deal, the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction must present their recommendations for $1.2 to $1.5 trillion in additional deficit reduction over the next ten years by November 23. If just seven of the members endorse a proposal, both chambers must vote on it by December 23, no amendments, no filibuster. If the committee or Congress fail to agree on a plan by Jan. 15, 2012, automatic, across-the-board spending cuts will go forward.

The most notable difference this time around is the threat of automatic cuts. Neither party really wants to see this happen. Democrats because they will fall entirely on spending, Republicans because half of the cuts will hit defense. The other difference is the guaranteed floor vote without the chance for amendment or the requirement of a super majority to pass. So, if enough responsible lawmakers from both parties can come together, they can get this over the finish line.

The other difference is urgency. As Peter Orszag, the former Budget Director under Obama recently pointed out: “the scope for constructive legislation has now become so narrow and the costs of doing nothing so high, we need to make ambitious proposals and hope that the legislative constraints can be adjusted.”

This leaves the committee itself. The good news about the appointees is that they are all seasoned members of Congress who understand the complexity of the federal budget. The bad news is that many of the members are best known for their tough and uncompromising defense of their own priorities. Senator Murray is famous for her efforts on behalf of defense contractors in her state. Senator Kyl has worked to defend increases to nuclear weapons spending even as other Republicans looked to slash federal spending. Representative Hensarling is a dyed in the wool tax cutter. And Representative Clyburn has a long history as an unapologetic earmarker.

In order to succeed the Super Committee members will have to put aside the specific interest groups they have worked so hard to defend throughout their careers and be open to all solutions. It is good policy and good politics. National polling shows real dissatisfaction with Congress: a National Journal poll found a level of public dissatisfaction similar to polling before the 2006 and 2010 landslides. In other words, the brinksmanship that has characterized negotiations so far have not helped anyone’s reelection chances.

Fortunately, for the committee members, a lot of hard work has already been done. Not only have previous commissions set out bipartisan plans for achieving even more savings than this commission is tasked with, there is some agreement about how to get there. In three instances, the Simpson-Bowles and Domenici-Rivlin commissions, and the Senate’s “Gang of Six” all ultimately offered plans that overlapped in significant ways: they all include entitlement reform, tax reform (eliminating or reducing current tax expenditures), and meaningful defense cuts.

This is where we are: between now and the end of the year, Congress has to come up with a plan to save up to $1.5 trillion, or sit on the sidelines and watch as automatic cuts go into effect. And no amount of rhetorical flourish or saber rattling is going to save members of either party from the political fallout that would surely follow. The public will see Congress for what it is: paralyzed by politics, even in the face of potentially another Great Depression. The Super Committee, with or without the support of their party leaders, should and must take up the different bipartisan proposals before them and submit a savings package that walks us back from the edge of this financial cliff. Failure is not an option.

###

TCS Quote of the Week

“We already have a bipartisan commission: It's called the United States House of Representatives and the United States Senate.”– Representative Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) earlier this week, (ABC News)