iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Bipartisan Deficit Solution Now Rests With Obama and Boehner


First Posted: 06/23/11 03:21 PM ET Updated: 08/23/11 06:12 AM ET

WASHINGTON -- With Vice President Joseph Biden's bipartisan deficit talks suddenly unraveling, all eyes are now turning to the two people ultimately responsible for resolving the partisan standoff on spending and taxes: President Barack Obama and Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio).

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) caught many off guard Thursday by pulling out of Biden’s group, which has been meeting frequently since May 5 to hammer out a massive bipartisan deficit reduction package. Cantor said in a statement that while Biden “deserves a great deal of credit” for leading discussions, the group is at an impasse on taxes that only their bosses can sort out.

“Regardless of the progress made, the tax issue must be resolved before discussions can continue," Cantor tweeted shortly after bowing out of the group. "The House doesn't support tax increases."

Aides in both parties said it should come as no surprise that Biden’s deficit group could only carry negotiations so far.

“Everyone knew at some point the hot potato would get passed to the President and Boehner,” said one senior Democratic aide. “No one wants responsibility for cutting the deal that increases revenue. Even though they know it has to happen.”

The aide added, “I don't know how it ends.”

A top Republican aide concurred that “the assumption has been for months” that Obama and Boehner would have to take over and reach the final deal. The good news, the aide said, is that Biden’s group already pored over the budget and did much of the legwork.

“The group has found trillions in spending cuts,” said the aide, “and there is a blueprint in place for them.”

But the real test will be how Obama and Boehner reach an agreement on whether -- and how much -- to factor tax hikes into the mix of options as they aim for $2.4 trillion in cuts over ten years. Democrats have insisted that revenues be part of the mix, while Republicans say now is not the time to raise taxes, given the shaky economy. House GOP leaders also say they simply don’t have the votes to pass tax increases.

Alternatively, Republicans have called for making cuts to Medicare programs as a way to bring down the deficit, a proposal that Democrats say is off the table.

Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), the only other Republican attending Biden’s meetings, also pulled out of Thursday’s scheduled meeting and cited the same concerns as Cantor.

“The White House and Democrats are insisting on job-killing tax hikes and new spending. That proposal won’t address our fiscal crisis, our jobs crisis, or protect and reform entitlements,” Kyl said in a joint statement with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).

“A bill with new spending and higher taxes would fail with bipartisan opposition - as it should. President Obama needs to decide between his goal of higher taxes, or a bipartisan plan to address our deficit. He can’t have both. But we need to hear from him.”

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney maintained that debt talks are merely in a state of “abeyance” and that things are moving along as planned.

"It has always been the case where these talks would proceed to a point where the remaining areas of disagreement would be addressed by leaders and the president,” Carney told pool reporters aboard Air Force One. “I don't have any announcement about what happens next, but this process is sort of proceeding as envisioned.”

Carney said Obama and Boehner met Wednesday night at the White House “to discuss a variety of issues,” but he wouldn’t elaborate. Carney also wouldn’t say if Boehner gave Obama a heads-up about Cantor planning to leave Biden’s group, but he said Cantor called the vice president today before he announced he was leaving the talks.

The White House spokesman reiterated that Obama supports “a balanced approach” to reducing the deficit, meaning tax hikes as well as spending cuts. “He does not support an approach that provides for a $200,000 tax cut for millionaires” while simultaneously cutting Medicare programs to achieve savings, Carney said.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) knocked “the non-adult attitude of Sen. Kyl and Leader Cantor” and said it is now up to top Congressional leaders to get the job done.

"I think it's now, with what Kyl and Cantor's done, I think it's in the hands of the speaker and the president and sadly, probably, me,” Reid said.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON -- With Vice President Joseph Biden's bipartisan deficit talks suddenly unraveling, all eyes are now turning to the two people ultimately responsible for resolving the partisan standoff on ...
WASHINGTON -- With Vice President Joseph Biden's bipartisan deficit talks suddenly unraveling, all eyes are now turning to the two people ultimately responsible for resolving the partisan standoff on ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 2,751
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (42 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
boomer59
04:02 PM on 07/12/2011
Still waiting for those jobs the GOP promised during the last election.....
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
olerealist
retired trial attorney; former member of VA abd Wa
11:24 AM on 06/25/2011
WHO CAN AFFORD TO PAY TAXES?
CORPORATE EXECUIVE PAY: Big business fights big time to hide this from public scrutiny.
Source: Washington Post, 6/25, page A10.

In 1970 average executive pay at the nation’s top companies was 28 times the average worker income. By 2005, executive pay had jumped to 158 times that of the average worker.

My hunch is that, if these figures are used to make a projection to 2011, the ratio of worker pay to executive pay would have risen to about $ 200 for exec's vs each $ 1, 00 per worker.

All this has led to an enormous lobbying effort by the big companies to squelch the rules drafted pursuant to “Dodd-Frank” which would require them to disclose the ratio of their executive compensation. For example, the H R Policy Association represents certain executives of 325 large companies paid a SINGLE law firm 1.5 million dollars for lobbying against the proposed rule.

Added to this is the fact that a large proportion of corporate executives obtain income or “capital gains” from stock options that equal many times the sum of their salaries.

Of course executive compensation in all of its permutations does not by itself explain the huge wealth gap separating the richest of us from the rest of the nation but I would submit that it is a big chunk of the phenomenon.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jobscabin
Its just as normal to be different
07:40 AM on 06/25/2011
America has a revenue problem. Tax capital gains the same as earned income. Then eliminate the cap on FICA. Then install a millionaires tax. Then make major changes to the armed forces by eliminating our "two war capability". Then hack away at corporate welfare subsidies for oil companies and big agriculture. Then raise the minimum wage to a living wage.Then turn a blind eye when Rush bursts an artery.
11:48 PM on 06/24/2011
Hmm-next door neighbor in Houston (staunc Liberal) just told me while I was watering the yard.
Have you heard what the Presdient said stupid today?
I just smiled and felt sad for America
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
boomer59
03:59 PM on 07/12/2011
I bet you felt sad all right, sad for the filthy rich, corporations that don't pay taxes, those sad oil companies that get money us, the US taxpayer!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AuldLochinvar
04:04 PM on 06/24/2011
It is time for Obama to draw attention to what the postwar British Labour government Minister of Health said about progress. That was Aneurin Bevan, and he said that progress inflicts pain upon some people. The important thing is to inflict it upon the right ones.
Bevan was the mastermind of the British "National Health Service" -- note that it is quite properly not regarded as an industry.
10:16 AM on 06/24/2011
It seems intuitive cutting taxes would reduce tax receipts to the Federal government yet throughout history tax cuts have actually INCREASED federal tax revenue........EVERY TIME.

The Revenue Acts of 1921, 24, and 26 reduced tax rates from 77% in 1921 to 24% by 1929 and LOW AND BEHOLD federal tax receipts INCREASED!!!!

In 1961 tax rates were once again in the 70's. The US suffered through recession after recession following WWII. The US was still struggling with a recession that started in 1958 when JFK walked into the WHite Hosue in 1960. JFK lowered tax rates and the economy BOOMED!! By 1965 the US auto industry sold more cars than any year in history.

In 1981 Reagan lowered taxes and it resulted in a historic 25 year economic boom in which tax receipts were up. Over the years lobbyists created loopholes .......... but the Reagan tax cuts initally..... increased tax revenue as the economy boomed.

The 2003 Bush tax cuts resulted in a $785 billion dollar increase in Federal tax revenue, the largest tax increase over a four year period in US history!!!

A booming economy creates tax revenue while raising taxes stifles the economy and lowers tax revenue.........
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
ManwithaParachute
Not Seeking Your Approval
11:21 AM on 06/24/2011
"It seems intuitive cutting taxes would reduce tax receipts to the Federal government yet throughout history tax cuts have actually INCREASED federal tax revenue...­.....EVERY TIME."

Revenues increase generally every year regardless of the tax rates. This is due to many factors not the least of which has been an increase in population and wages. BUT, the revenue increases come from a shifting in the tax burdens. Taxing UE and Social Security benefits and eliminating deductions. Lower tax rates on the very top and increase the burden on the lesser income earners AND those in distress or at the bottom.

The increases in tax revenues under Reagan two terms were shallower than the years prior when the top tax rates were higher....BEFORE the tax cuts of Ronnie.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
ManwithaParachute
Not Seeking Your Approval
11:29 AM on 06/24/2011
Based on your contention that decreasing tax rates results in higher revenues it should be easy to find one, just one, person who's tax rate was lower and then paid more in taxes the following year. Adjusting for changing income of course.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
NYC123
10:06 AM on 06/24/2011
We should, the dems, draw the line and let the chips fall. The other party wants to take the country down so be it. We can use a down, long time coming -- and then we'll recover!
11:45 PM on 06/24/2011
Obama did it and you know it. Please stay intellectually honest for a moment
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
boomer59
04:02 PM on 07/12/2011
Really?! How exactly did Obama do this?! By providing an actual solution while the GOP bows to the tea party? lmao, PROUD TO BE DUMB SHOULD BE YOUR ICON!
10:01 AM on 06/24/2011
Oh, why not legalize marijuana and use that as a new revenue source. Lord knows it would create jobs, revenue, and alleviate the judicial and penal systems of much burden!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AuldLochinvar
04:19 PM on 06/24/2011
I've an even better idea. Revive the Integral Fast Reactor, and do it the way France did, as a national asset. With it we have enough uranium and plutonium already in barrels to replace all the coal and gas fired electricity, AND charge enough battery powered or hydrogen fueled automobiles to put the Petroleum cartel out of business. Present day thermal reactors supply about 20% of our electrical energy consumption, using 25,000 tons of uranium a year (well, the figure is given for uranium oxide). But in fact, the total uranium actually fissioned is about half of the U-235, which is 7 parts per thousand of the uranium.
So we get all of that electrical energy from about 50 tons of U-235 per year.
A breeder reactor gets up to 200 times as much energy from the same 25,000 tons of uranium.
It is FAR cleaner than coal, and probably kills fewer people per gigawatt-year than installing photovoltaics on sunny rooftops costs in workers falling off the rooftops.
11:40 PM on 06/24/2011
Obama and Biden no coal.
And then-CBO says we lose 250 billion in 10 years and 9.1 million jobs.
Wow
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AuldLochinvar
07:34 PM on 06/25/2011
Proudtoberight is being naive.
I do not quite understand how the CBO analysis pertains to my advocacy of a national nuclear breeder reactor program, to put coal out of business. But what if coal companies were today charged for the environmental destruction they have wrought?
Suppose the world were to demand an escrow, right now, for the value of the seafront property that global warming is likely to drown. Would the entire fortunes of the coal companies suffice to cover their proper share of it?

But I must in any case cavil at the idea that an estimate of national financial "loss", or loss of "jobs", is a proper criticism of any proposal. We might be able to increase employment, and reduce the consumption of petroleum, by creating a class of rickshaw-wallahs to take the wealthy to and from their places of work or entertainment.
Science and technology ought to be increasing the real (not just monetary) wealth and leisure of the entire populace.

But in any case, I do believe that converting our entire energy consumption to be satisfied by an alternative technology that is both renewable (it creates fissile isotopes) and sustainable will lead to a reduction in drudgery. It is the job of a thinking democracy to support ways that do NOT transfer all the benefits to a tiny minority of capitalists.
The USA was founded on "All men are born equal" meaning that the hereditary possessors of political power had no right to that power.
09:59 AM on 06/24/2011
I thought that since the Bush Tax Cuts were extended the uncertainty within business would be alleviated allowing those corporations to start hiring again! What happened Boehner, Cantor? That is what you promised! Jobs anyone?
10:04 AM on 06/24/2011
Businesses began firing people the day after election day with over 1.5 million gone by January 21st.

With Obamacare, FinReg, Tax hikes looming on the horizon business, the economy and jobs will not pick up until summer 2012 when it becomes evident Obama is one and done.

We saw this in 2010 as the market and economy picked up as poll after polll showed Republicans poised to pick up big gains in the mid terms and Single Party Rule would come to an end. The market hit 13,000 after the mid terms but now is stalled due to the stalemate in Washington.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ElIngeniero
03:42 PM on 06/24/2011
High unemployment is in Wall Street's short tem interest, as it lets corporations squeeze more productivity from workers without paying them more. The CEOs get their bonuses, the fat cats get their dividends, and the only question in their minds is how much unemployment would it take to drag the economy under.
11:40 PM on 06/24/2011
Obama happened
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
npw350
There is no time or distance.
09:15 AM on 06/24/2011
The democrats are letting the republicans lead on message. This has to change.
11:45 PM on 06/24/2011
Yea, after 2012 with their tails wagging
photo
leonel
Lotus flower
09:10 AM on 06/24/2011
Democrats need to make something clear for the public, and the media will fudge this basic question. The public already is for raising taxes on rich people. They are part of the solution.

Republicans can mislead by saying that the public is against tax increases. That is fudging what the public wants. But they get away with it because the media does not report more accurately.

It cannot be blamed on any specific channels, newspapers or commentators. Democrats have to take the responsibility, because they will get the benefits, of making this point over and over until it is a clear alternative in the next election.

One way that the fudging is done is to claim that taxing rich people decreases investing and so hurts the economy. The taxes that have been reduced on rich persons are actually a large part of the deficit. Fair and balanced taxation will improve the economy.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AuldLochinvar
04:23 PM on 06/24/2011
Right on leonel!
And the reason you cannot expect news reporting to be unflinching in its criticism of corporations, is that dogs do not bite the hand that effds them, or at least not as often as they bite other people.
You may have noticed that the BBC is more critical of governments Left or Right, and of other big institutions, than even PBS.
11:41 PM on 06/24/2011
Now now
Stck to the facts
or
Run a business and learn the facts
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
OneLiberalLady
Liberals rock!
08:59 AM on 06/24/2011
Someone wrote this summary of Ezra Klein's analysis of Cantor's true motives:
"... Not surprisingly, it was all about Eric Cantor -- if he forces John Boehner to make a deal on tax increases, Cantor not only maintains his credibility with his Tea Party caucus, he weakens Boehner's hold on the Speakership. It is not, as Cantor claimed, the President he wants at the table -- it's Boehner."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
npw350
There is no time or distance.
09:24 AM on 06/24/2011
What an interesting perspective. I'm sitting here chuckling. So that's what that look is on Boehner's face.
11:46 PM on 06/24/2011
Its called Obama is destroying our future
11:41 PM on 06/24/2011
Weiner, Shumer, Rangel, Watters
photo
leonel
Lotus flower
08:59 AM on 06/24/2011
Letting "middle management" work on alternatives and discover sticking points is standard procedure. Things will have to be taken to the brink, that is also standard procedure. How each side maintains their balance and not falls in is a big part of getting the upper hand.

Democrats know they cannot force taxes on the rich, a big sticking point, until after the election assuming they win a majority again. And Republicans know they will get the bigger share of the blame the closer to default it gets.

The solution is temporary, how temporary is the question. This is a war for the support of the public in the next election. From the Democrats standpoint they need to realize how they lost the last one.

The last election was lost because of unpopular, however rational and necessary, medical reforms. It is like having to retreat from a pitched battle that was deemed necessary, learning from it and figuring out new strategy and tactics.

George Washington had to learn not to start pitched battles with the British. Lincoln had to keep changing generals until he got some with fighting spirit. Both of these wars were won with long term tenacity, knowing they they were right and letting history fall into place.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
npw350
There is no time or distance.
09:18 AM on 06/24/2011
Excellent post. I've often thought their should be a compromise on taxes. Raise them for two years (or so) and then bring them back to a starting point when the crisis clears. Everyone would have a stake in belt tightening.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
OneLiberalLady
Liberals rock!
08:48 AM on 06/24/2011
Apparently, letting the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest are off the table. Why? They should have been a first line attack on the budget problem.
Now, the Republicans have forced the Dems in to the position of begging to even close tax LOOPHOLES for the wealthy.
Why should closing loopholes that would produce desperately needed revenue be controversial?
11:42 PM on 06/24/2011
Nope, you need to take some classes (no disrepect intended.
Just too many people talking asbout things they do not understand
photo
cjjanis
Stop eating the poor, tax the rich
08:40 AM on 06/24/2011
They have screamed their plans for years, and now they have almost completed them. Conservatives even signed pledges to drown the nation in debt and cut taxes with a man who promised to strangle our government(grover norquest). There has never been a country that has pulled itself our of debt by cutting spending, its the main reason we ended up in a depression last time. The big lie being pushed by the GOP is we are broke? When you buy a house and go into debt are you broke? We have a revenue problem and its roots are the GOP and their failed policies. To think the very people who piled on the debt with useless wars and unfunded tax cuts for the wealthy are now trying to kill must needed social programs so they can give out more revenue killing tax cuts is too much. Trusting the GOP with the economy is like asking Ted Bundy to baby sit your teenage daughter.