iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Obama Debt Ceiling Press Conference: President Keeps The Pressure On

DAVID ESPO   07/15/11 10:27 PM ET   AP

WASHINGTON — Struggling to avert an unprecedented national default, congressional leaders jettisoned negotiations on a sweeping deficit-reduction package Friday despite a plea from President Barack Obama to "do something big" to stabilize America's finances.

Instead, lawmakers embarked on competing fallback plans as a critical Aug. 2 deadline neared, a House Republican version given little chance of success, even by some supporters, and a bipartisan Senate approach holding out more promise to avert what Obama called financial "Armageddon.".

Late Friday, the Treasury Department announced it was resorting to the final steps in an unusual series designed to avoid exceeding the current $14.3 trillion debt limit. Numerous officials have cautioned that a default will occur if the limit is not increased by Aug. 2, warning also of a calamitous effect on a national economy struggling to recover from the worst recession in decades..

At the behest of conservatives, House Republicans announced plans to vote next week on legislation to permit more borrowing automatically if Congress approves a balanced-budget constitutional amendment. Senate approval of that amendment seemed extremely unlikely in a vote set for the next few days.

At the same time, Senate leaders from both parties worked on their own fallback measure that would allow Obama to raise the debt limit without a prior vote by lawmakers, discussions that now have expanded to include House officials and top White House aides.

That plan was likely to include limits on spending across thousands of government programs, and possibly a down payment on cuts, as well.

As part of that proposal, a panel of lawmakers would recommend cuts in benefits programs by the end of the year, with the House and Senate required to vote yes-or-no on the package without possibility of changes.

"If they show me a serious plan I'm ready to move," declared Obama at his second news conference of the week, even though he said he wanted a far more sweeping deal that might even have raised the age of Medicare eligibility from 65 to 67 if Republicans would increase selected taxes.

"We are obviously running out of time," he said.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell said, "Now the debate will move from a room in the White House to the House and Senate floors," an indication that the daily closed-door negotiations on Obama's home ground were a thing of the past.

The House Republican rank and file were advised in a GOP meeting that, barring action by Congress, the government would be able to pay only about half its bills after Aug. 2, and separately that a default could cost the government trillions of dollars in the form of higher interest rates on the debt.

"No matter what 50 percent you choose to pay, there are things in that 50 percent you don't pay that would have really severe consequences," Rep. John Campbell, R-Calif., said afterward.

"There are people out there who keep saying we don't need to increase the debt limit at all. I think this was a way of saying, the people who are saying that need to look at the practical consequences of what they are saying."

Rep. Paul Ryan, of Wisconsin, chairman of the House Budget Committee, told reporters after the meeting he had discussed the additional costs generated by a default – an event that would be likely to raise interest rates.

At his news conference, Obama said that would mean "effectively a tax increase on everybody" by affecting car purchasers, students and businesses.

The second White House news conference in a week was a testament to the overriding political and economic significance of the issue that has convulsed Congress as well as the administration.

Urging lawmakers to cut trillions from deficits at the same time they raise the debt limit, the president said he favored a balanced approach that included spending cuts, changes to huge government benefit programs and higher taxes on wealthy individuals and certain industries.

It was an offer Republicans could – and did – refuse.

"There are going to be no tax hikes because tax hikes destroy jobs," said House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio.

While Boehner had earlier shown some flexibility on closing tax loopholes as part of an unprecedented deal with Obama, many Republican lawmakers are adamant that deficit reductions be limited to spending cuts.

To underscore their conservative priorities, GOP leaders scheduled a vote for next week on legislation they said would cut $111 billion in the budget year that begins Oct. 1. It would also require a steady decline in spending as a percentage of the overall economy over the next decade.

Even some supporters conceded it was a symbolic gesture given the realities of divided government.

"I think everybody knows the president won't sign this," Campbell said after the closed-door Republican meeting.

"But we're putting a marker down, and that's an important step that begins the process of resolving this," he added.

If so, it was in a style that only congressional insiders might recognize as the beginning of the endgame to an unprecedented problem.

McConnell issued a statement announcing the Senate would vote on both a balanced budget amendment and the House's "Cut, Cap and Balance Plan."

His statement didn't say so, but neither measure has much, if any, chance of passage in the Democratic-controlled Senate.

Still, the votes themselves would clear the way for debate on the fallback plan the two Senate leaders have been working on for the past several days.

Senate aides said the measure was not yet fully drafted, but likely to come up for debate by the end of next week.

Obama offered measured praise for that option: "It is constructive to say that if Washington operates as usual and can't get something done, let's at least avert Armageddon."

A two-thirds vote of each house is required for passage of a constitutional amendment. Approval would send the issue to the states, where ratification by three quarters of the legislatures is needed to make it part of the Constitution.

Presidents play no official role in amending the Constitution, but Obama expressed his opposition to the GOP-backed measure anyway.

"We don't need a constitutional amendment to do that. What we need to do is do our jobs," he said.

___

Associated Press writers Alan Fram, Jim Kuhnhenn, Stephen Ohlemacher, Andrew Taylor and Erica Werner contributed to this story.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON — Struggling to avert an unprecedented national default, congressional leaders jettisoned negotiations on a sweeping deficit-reduction package Friday despite a plea from President Bar...
WASHINGTON — Struggling to avert an unprecedented national default, congressional leaders jettisoned negotiations on a sweeping deficit-reduction package Friday despite a plea from President Bar...
Filed by Alexander Belenky  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 8,079
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (123 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Kyrillos Wickenberg
11:22 AM on 07/18/2011
It was bama that more than doubled the debt from a little over $5T to nearly $15T. Now he wants to extend it beyond? Did he not state in 2006 that raising the debt ceiling is a sign of failed leadership?
11:40 AM on 07/19/2011
Ok first off it's Obama not bama and if you really think( if your capable.) W was the one who blew the debt up and remember he was given a surplus by Clinton. And if you look a little deeper you would also see Regan was the one who started spending more and cutting taxs on millionaires. While at the same time rose taxes on working families. For god shake STOP LISTENING TO RUPERT MURDOCH he is a crook and so is his fox cronies
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sanityisneeded
No one said it was going to be easy.
12:29 AM on 07/18/2011
I thought Obama was about change in the way government does business. Obviously, he is not. He has not submitted a plan, the Dems have not submitted a plan. You may not like Ryan's plan, but the Republicans did submit a plan and got both barrels from the President. Where is his Plan, where has he chastised the Dems for not moving from their entrenched position? He is posturing for his 2012 run and will not submit a Plan - he is not a leader - he is a follower. He can criticize a Plan, but puts no specific forth and commits his party to nothing. Afterall, you can't criticize what doesn't exist. What a pathetic example of leadership.
11:50 AM on 07/19/2011
Really I guess you think cantor is doing the job of a wanna be leader. It's the GOP that is stopping the debt and deficit from haunting the recovery from taking place..All to protect the mega rich who have made their millions off the blood and toil of American workin families . So go spread your lies and miss information somewhere else.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sanityisneeded
No one said it was going to be easy.
02:17 PM on 07/20/2011
You totally missed the point. Cantor and Republicans have presented a Plan - like it or not. I think we need to close the tax loop-holes and make sure everyone pays their fair share. But our President has no Plan. He only says in very general terms what people want to hear. He has no specifics and only pokes fun at the one that does exist. That is not a Plan. He hasn't been able to develop a budget for a fiscal year and get it approved like all our Presidents have done in the past. He's never run a business before so I am not surprised. What I don't understand is why people think he does when it has never seen the light of day. The lies are in your camp as I just want our President and Congress to both work together and come up with a Plan for all Americans - not just for Democrats or Republicans. Guess you don't care as you only look at one side of the equation.
03:34 PM on 07/17/2011
You know what I love the most about being an African American, is that my culture has been through many storms, but we are still strong. We are mistreated by so many cultures who discriminate against but yet we still rise, so when I hear all the prejudice remarks and stereotypes and it doesn't bother me because We know the truth and so does everyone else. God BLESS NOT ONLY America , but the Whole World!
02:46 PM on 07/17/2011
Mr. Obama could learn by his mistakes. It would take an honest look. Government is a dismal mess.

Do what's best for the country, not the party. Cut taxes. Cut expenses. Close programs. Balance the budget. Say some positive things about the American people and businesses.

Start simple. And soon you will liberate the country like Gorbachev liberated his country in the 80s. Best wishes to you and the American people.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sentimentiques
independent and ornery but purrfectly lovable
10:59 AM on 07/17/2011
I'd just like to thank today's participants for providing me with chuckles and a couple of out loud laughs over your "he said, I said, you did not, did so, mommy he took my ball, make him give it back" antics. One of the most serious comments made by this president in the debt ceiling debate is his threat to withhold social security payments in August. And NO ONE made a peep about it~~guess there aren't any seniors involved in these discussions. What's the matter with you people? Don't you realize that (1) this is the threat of a dictator and (2) the economy would stop dead if seniors weren't able to pay their bills and buy food? The idea that this president could even make this threat is directly attributable to the fact that a Democrat president, Johnson, fixed it so that this Democrat president could hold this over seniors' heads? Long ago, Johnson and the congress at that time decreed that social security funds (which had been held in a separate fund) would now be accessible because of the lousy Vietnam war and its voracious financial needs which had soured the economy. And it was thus evermore that social security taxes went directly into the general funds to be used as the government sees fit. Bring back the autonomy of the Social Security Funds being held strictly for social security payments, and let the government run itself on the taxes it collects for that purpose!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mjc
Avoid printing any..
10:23 AM on 07/18/2011
No one, not the President, the Democrats or the Republicans ever seem to want to admit to what happened to the dedicated fund of Social Security. They don't want us to know? Or they don't believe it themselves? Your comments are appreciated here.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sentimentiques
independent and ornery but purrfectly lovable
06:57 AM on 07/20/2011
Thank you, mjc, here is an excerpt of a most excellent comment on the question of the social security fund being raided from the People's Pension forum:


Thaby James Schaefer
11 Feb 2011 at 12:41

Sirs:

I would like to respectfully disagree. The Social Security trust fund has indeed been raided.

When the Social Security system was set up in 1935, the Trust Fund was supposed to be held “in trust” — literally – by the government for America’s citizens, because FDR was concerned about American citizens actually holding their savings until retirement (Source: David Gergen article entitled “How Much Government?”, 2010). Government was going to hold it for them.

“FDR .......created a program in which Americans would be asked to contribute to a social savings account that government would manage on their behalf and would be there for retirement.....it was to be a partnership that would encourage individual thrift and responsibility.”


In 1969, in an agreement between Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, and the 1969 Congress, the Social Security trust fund was brought “on budget” for the first time, allowing it to be spent for other government programs (Source: the Social Security Administration website; see Agency History). The reason was to turn an $8 billion deficit into a balanced budget.

The surplus has been spent since 1969 on non-Social Security programs, .... In its place are $2.5 trillion in Treasury Securities – IOUs, essentially. This is the raiding of the Social Security trust fund.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
fredisfred
02:57 PM on 07/18/2011
Brooklyn cheer to you!
10:55 PM on 07/16/2011
Congress will not authorize a tax aka revenue increase.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JudgeMoonbox
10:37 PM on 07/16/2011
Sen. Orrin Hatch said that we have a spending crisis, not a tax crisis. Does he have amnesia? The Bush tax cuts played a substantial role in the current deficit.

The impact of the Bush tax cuts is substantial, and the economy did not grow as promised.

So there's no way to argue that we don't have a crisis brought on, in part, by a foolish tax cut. It may be that the economy is too weak to support a tax increase, but it would be equally true that the economy can't support a spending cut on the same order. If Hatch was genuinely concerned about the economy, he wouldn't oppose a tax increase and then turn 180 degrees and demand balancing the budget right this moment.
11:40 AM on 07/16/2011
The pressure is on Obama, the people won't let him raise taxes without cutting the spending or he would tax and spend like the Dems always do.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
acacia72
05:09 PM on 07/16/2011
"The people?" You mean the republicans? The republicans are acting and have acted against "We The People" since 1980. Research it, the average American's wages have stagnated since 1980. Hmmm, who was elected in 1980?
12:56 PM on 07/18/2011
(1) I thought we were talking about taxes and spending, stay focused
(2) Recent bipartisan polls show that over 80% of Americans think we should cut spending as well as raise taxes to pay OUR debt.
(3) I remember 1980 very well, my standard of living has improved dramatically since then, interest rates are much lower and my wages are much higher, perhaps that’s because I have ambition and do not expect a BIG GOVERNMENT to grantee me anything. Put that in your political pipe and smoke it with whatever other drugs you are also smoking.
10:03 AM on 07/16/2011
If not for the Republican stand Obama would be taxing and spending but not reducing government waste, like it or not it’s the truth and this is why our government is the best in the world because the left and right balance somewhere in the middle which is where we really need to be. Yes to a BBA. If Obama really does what he has been forced to say by the Republicans I agree with his statements.
03:39 AM on 07/16/2011
Convince a fool against his will, he will still believe the same. Obama is not doing his job because the GOP will not allow him to do it. As for a surplus, or a balanced budget, the GOP is not after a balanced budget as we see it. To them, balanced means, they get it all. Go ahead and put the GOP in the white house in 2012 and we will lose everything. Case in point, the GOP will not allow stopping Oil subsidies, but they want cuts to anything helping the young and the poor. The Oil companies are making very, very large profits and pay a small tax, if any. The GOP will not allow closing of tax loop holes for the rich; instead they want cuts to anything helping the young and the poor. This is the balance wanted by the GOP.
"I don't think they ought to balance their budget on the backs of the poor." George W. Bush.
• Hands off Medicare!
• Hands off Medicaid!
• Hands off Veterans benefits!
• Hands off Social Security!
• End Corporate Welfare!
• Tax the Rich!
• End the Wars!
• Stop foreign aid!
• Create Jobs Now!
I don’t think this is about America. I think this is about keeping Obama from getting re elected. As A disabled veteran, having served my country as my father did, I cannot agree with the GOP on this matter.
photo
Doyle Perry
Veteran, Conservative, Constitutionalist
08:53 AM on 07/16/2011
How little you liberal/socialists understand about traditional, patriotic Americans. Obama is the worst president in history, and is hurting America immeasurably. So, we will do what is necessary to get him out of office. But, we won't do or advocate anything which will hurt America in itself. So, when a situation arises where supporting Obama is good for America, we have no choice but to support America. We supported Obama's positive decisions to maintain Guantanamo, to continue the War on Terror, and to continue the pursuit of Osama Bin Laden.

Liberal/socialists are the opposite. It did not matter a whit what President Bush did or wanted to do. Liberal/socialists were opposed to it. They would throw America under the bus if they could hurt President Bush.
photo
rebelriser
artist, published author, activist
04:22 PM on 07/16/2011
Where were you when Bush was trashing our country, lying to get his oil war in Iraq, not paying for his wars, not paying for the welfare tax cuts for the wealthy torturing war detainees and the many crimes too many to mention here? Are you wealthy? Then why do you want the wealthy corporates to own the world so you can have a slave labor job? Or do you work at all? I thought so, because only uninformed and Baggers think as you do.
photo
GUITFIDDEL
If you PICK on me, you better know the CHORDS
05:29 PM on 07/16/2011
That's funny considering the fact that 3000+ AMERICAN MEN, WOMEN and CHILDREN died because of 9/11 but, even if we considered to be in denial and ignore the fact that it could of been stopped like yourself we would still have to ignore the fact that 4,754 MORE AMERICAN KIDS that came home in BODY BAGS because they we're LIED TO and, under the illusion that they were PROTECTING US FROM WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION but were actually securing OIL INVESTMENTS for BABY'S DADDY!!! I think that BABY and DICK were the worst.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sentimentiques
independent and ornery but purrfectly lovable
10:34 AM on 07/17/2011
Brooklyn cheer to you!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Joseph Glackin
W Nature dsnt do will be done by our fellow man
12:58 AM on 07/16/2011
If it's gotten late enough and the trolls have earned enough nickels and gone back under their bridges, I would like to point out something.
I've been watching politics since LBJ and Sam Rayburn ran the show. What is most alarming over the last ten years is the ease with which people rewrite history to fit their philosophy. Any fool with an axe to grind and a PC can become an author. Forty eight hours later they are being cited as source material for another dingbat's fantasy.
Over thirty years ago Reagan brought us "voodoo economics." He called it trickle down theory. J.K. Galbraith gave it a better name, "Horse and Sparrow". Feed the horse enough oats, and the sparrow will get some, too. It has NEVER worked as advertised. The ultra-rich love it, with reason. The conservative middle love it although it shafts them. But it distorts the economy into a two-tiered plutocracy. It is the definition of class warfare.
That's why the right keeps accusing the Democratic Party of class warfare. It's Rove 101; accuse your opponent of doing what you ARE doing LOUDLY, while doing it quietly.
To free up the $2TRILLION that is sitting on the sidelines, raise the taxes on profits. Also increase the tax credit for returning the profit to the company through expansion or modernization. Make it more profitable to invest than to sit on profits.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tanya OaksBrooks
Sarcastic, left-wing, science-loving rocker chick
07:09 PM on 07/16/2011
:::standing on chair clapping:::

BRAVO!
photo
Doyle Perry
Veteran, Conservative, Constitutionalist
11:29 PM on 07/15/2011
HuffPost, why is your "Community Pundit" allowed to use disgusting sexual obscenities like "Bagger", but, I get censored for honestly calling someone a liar?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:24 AM on 07/16/2011
HuffPost, why is your "Community Pundit" allowed to use disgusting sexual obscenitie­s like "Bagger"
------------------------------
My..my...my...aren't you defensive.
photo
rebelriser
artist, published author, activist
04:26 PM on 07/16/2011
Bagger is NOT sexual unless you have a gutter mind. It comes from TeaBagger which comes from Tea Party. Do you understand this now? Or do we need to explain further? You're not even funny.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Bill J White
the truthinator
11:14 PM on 07/15/2011
Hey WashyWizard--ever hear of Hubert Hoover? He was the Republiocan president who let this country go into the depression back in 1929. It was a Democratic President..Franklin Delano Roosevelt who brought this country out of the Depression. I guess republicans like to twist history to suit there twisted little minds, too. Get the facts straight dude.
11:25 PM on 07/15/2011
His democrat congress did that. And FDR's policies only made the depression stronger.

Not a problem though Bill. Guess you were public school educated.
photo
Doyle Perry
Veteran, Conservative, Constitutionalist
11:30 PM on 07/15/2011
Or public school something.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Joseph Glackin
W Nature dsnt do will be done by our fellow man
02:17 AM on 07/16/2011
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/71st_United_States_Congress, (Mar, 1929-1931)

Senate
Republican (R): 56 (majority)
Democratic (D): 39
Farmer-Labor (FL): 1
TOTAL members: 96.

House of Representatives
Republican (R): 270 (majority)
Democratic (D): 164
Farmer-Labor (FL): 1
TOTAL members: 435.

You must have gone to school with Palin and Bachmann.
Your snark is overwhelmed by your ignorance.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
fairandbalanced100
11:21 PM on 07/16/2011
yea , the Republicans keep causeing big recessions & depressions with bad economic ideas, & the Democrats keep bailing us out with better fairer ideas that stimulate economy .
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Bill J White
the truthinator
11:03 PM on 07/15/2011
Horray, Beck's gone. Limbaugh you're next.
11:28 PM on 07/15/2011
Beck has gone on to several greater opportunities to enable him to reach and educate more Americans. Are you just hateful becuase he earned $32 Million last year, and will earn even more this year. Is that what bothers you, bud?

As to Rush, he will have to stay with the new contract he signed. But that is alright, since he reaches and educates more Americans than anyone else does.
photo
rebelriser
artist, published author, activist
04:35 PM on 07/16/2011
Exactly the reason teabagger, shriveled brains make such erroneous statements here. How could school dropout, drug infested brain, Limbaugh be capable of educating anyone? A big difference between lies and real, truthful information, except fried brains don't know the difference.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tanya OaksBrooks
Sarcastic, left-wing, science-loving rocker chick
07:12 PM on 07/16/2011
What's bothersome about Beck is that he's a liar.
photo
Doyle Perry
Veteran, Conservative, Constitutionalist
11:32 PM on 07/15/2011
Right! Glenn Beck moved on to other things. Rush had a TV show years ago, but 1/2 hour of TV every day, plus 3 hours of radio was too much. So he dropped the TV. If he tried to leave the radio, all patriotic Americans would have a fit.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Gingersp
proud to be a liberal
06:54 PM on 07/16/2011
Wrong. THIS patriotic American would rejoice. You don't have a monopoly on patriotism, my friend.
11:02 PM on 07/15/2011
President Obama has the upper hand in raising the debt ceiling, should the republicans fail abide by Constitutional law.
11:31 PM on 07/15/2011
The Republicans always follow constitutional law. Obama has violated it several times so far. Perhaps he should be impeached, for the good of the country. We can ill afford to keep him in office for the remainder of his one term presidency.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Gingersp
proud to be a liberal
06:56 PM on 07/16/2011
Unless the repubs come up with someone else besides of the carload of clowns that they have now, Obama will waltz into his second term.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tanya OaksBrooks
Sarcastic, left-wing, science-loving rocker chick
07:14 PM on 07/16/2011
Name one time he's violated the Constitution. From what I've seen, most Republicans have no idea what's in the Constitution.
photo
Doyle Perry
Veteran, Conservative, Constitutionalist
11:34 PM on 07/15/2011
Of what Constitutional law are you speaking? Ha! As if you knew anything about Constitutional law.