The newly appointed congressional special committee, dubbed a supercommittee, has brought some calm to the nation’s deficit debate after the chaos of the debt-ceiling standoff earlier this month. But the sense of calm, if it’s rooted in confidence, could be misplaced.

Although the 12-member committee will have unusual powers to draw up a plan to trim spending and possibly increase revenues, the name “supercommittee” might have been a mistake. Some might believe that the committee is not only powerful, but that it will use that power for the greater good — like Superman.

While the committee might produce the kind of grand bargain that the full Congress could not, it would be foolish to put too much faith in the new panel. Congressional leaders have appointed members to the committee who reflect the conflicts already apparent in Congress. Most Democratic members will fiercely resist any changes to entitlement spending that is predicted to consume most of the federal budget in the coming decades, and most Republicans on the committee have signed the pledge promoted by a conservative group to oppose any and all tax increases.

It’s also true, and troubling, that the supercommittee will be the target of intense lobbying. Every spending program that could be a potential target for cost savings will employ lobbyists to protect the status quo.

The supercommittee can be scrutinized for bias. The committee’s co-chairs, Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., and Rep. Jeb Hensaring, R-Texas, have each received significant financial support from the defense and health care industries. Will they be willing to support cuts in medical reimbursements or elimination of unnecessary weapons systems?

Murray brings the added complication of also serving as the chairwoman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, where her job is to raise money to get more Democrats elected. She has received more than $1 million in so-called honoree payments from lobbyists since 2008 for events held in her honor — with the money used to help Democrats win elections. Will her priority be what’s good for defense contractors in Washington State, lobbyists, fellow Democrats — or America?

On the Republican side, all six GOP supercommittee members have signed the no-tax pledge promoted by the anti-tax organization headed by Grover Norquist. That group of Republicans includes Pennsylvania’s Sen. Pat Toomey, who is seen as a tea party representative with a strong anti-tax position. Will he and the other Republicans honor their pledge to Grover Norquist or will they honor their pledge to the American people, which is the choice posed by Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., when he was blasted by Norquist for suggesting that he might be open to supporting some tax increases to help solve the nation’s debt crisis.

In most respects, the supercommittee looks like a microcosm of Congress, partisan and entrenched in established positions as well as beholden to powerful special interests that fund re-election campaigns. As a small version of Congress, the supercommittee is not likely to produce a compromise solution to reduce the country’s long-term debt.

In a more favorable light, it is possible that the supercommittee members will press for their partisan interests but, in the end, be willing to compromise for the good of the country.

The downgrade of U.S. credit from AAA to AA+ by Standard & Poors was a warning over political dysfunction more than an economic or financial inability to remain solvent.

The supercommittee is not a superhero. Odds of it producing heroic action are slim.

But if the 12 committee members are willing to do what’s right for the country and put aside ideology, pressure from campaign contributors and concerns over the coming election, it is possible an effective and significant package could emerge by the Thanksgiving deadline.

Though the realities of politics in America today suggest more stalemate, it’s still worth hoping the committee will do its job.