More

Super Committee Stalled After Democrats Reject Latest GOP 'Spitball' Offer On Tax Hikes

Super Committee

First Posted: 11/18/11 05:42 PM ET Updated: 11/18/11 08:54 PM ET

WASHINGTON -- The gap between Democrats and Republicans on the debt-cutting super committee appeared as unbridgeable as ever going into the last weekend of its work, with little movement on either side and Democrats rejecting a scaled-back offer from the GOP Friday afternoon, sources said.

One GOP leadership aide said the offer was for $643 billion in cuts. Another broke it down as $229 billion "in fees and revenues"; $316 billion in cuts, $100 billion of which would come from the defense budget; and $98 billion in canceled interest.

The aide further described this as "the low-hanging fruit that everyone agrees on, nothing controversial, no Medicare, no Medicaid, and no Social Security."

But it wasn't all exactly low-hanging fruit to Democrats, who were quick to point out that the revenue component was paltry.

While there would be fees on such things as spectrum use and land sales (according to the GOP aide), the only tax hike that was publicly reported was the elimination of a break for corporate jet owners. The amount of money raised would be $3 billion.

"It wasn't even a formal offer," emailed one Democratic aide. "This is just spitballing by the Speaker's office. Only $3 billion in revenues out of a $600 billion-plus package is even less serious than the [Sen. Pat] Toomey offer. It was laughed at when it was floated. The talks within the Super Committee continue."

Talks may indeed be continuing, but they're running up against deadlines, and sources expected little progress over the weekend. The super committee is supposed to report out recommendations by Wednesday. But it is also required to have those recommendations scored by the Congressional Budget Office first, and that will require at least two days, making the real deadline to agree on a deficit-cutting plan Monday at midnight.

The real sticking point appears to be the treatment of the Bush-era tax cuts, which expire in 2012. The Democrats insist on an end to those cuts as they apply to wealthy taxpayers, and the Republicans want to keep them all. A GOP aide said the last offer was "silent" on the cuts, but the previous Toomey offer kept them -- and indeed lowered overall rates.

The advantage of this latest proffer by the GOP is that it gives Republicans something to point to as evidence that they are trying, and although it does not hit the full target, it takes some of the sting out of the automatic $1.2 trillion in "sequestration" cuts that will kick in if the super committee deadlocks.

As for the Democrats, although they've been saying they want the committee to succeed, they might actually be better off letting the sequestration happen, since the Bush cuts expire already under current law. They would then just have to figure out how to extend the cuts later for the middle class.

"Sequestration will give us progress whether we like it or not. I'd rather have a human hand attached to the progress than, as I said before, the blunt edge of a guillotine," Rep. Xavier Becerra (D-Calif.) told Roll Call. But he added, "I'm not giving up the weekend just so I can watch sequestration take effect."

Also, Democrats think that taking the smaller offer would be giving up valuable ground gained in the debt talks, when they settled on an even split of cuts from defense and domestic spending.

"That would be a cave," a Democratic aide said. "Taking this offer would make it more domestic than defense."

Republicans insisted their offer raised far more than $3 billion in taxes, but the Democrats disagreed vehemently with what the other side considered a tax hike.

"Their definition of white is black," a Democrat said.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON -- The gap between Democrats and Republicans on the debt-cutting super committee appeared as unbridgeable as ever going into the last weekend of its work, with little movement on either sid...
WASHINGTON -- The gap between Democrats and Republicans on the debt-cutting super committee appeared as unbridgeable as ever going into the last weekend of its work, with little movement on either sid...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 11,352
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (205 total)
  1 of 8  
COMMUNITY PUNDITS
themodernleader 10:09 PM on 11/18/2011
A worse economic program exists with the present policy of "do nothing" stagnation. About 40 percent of the people are on some form of government largess. Our industry is barely growing and key industries are still being stolen by foreign sovereign funds. Public and private funds go to salaries rather than to building factories and energy sources or repairing our long neglected infrastructure for  Read More...
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
HooYoo2say
My micro-bio isn't empty it's just really tiny
10:51 PM on 11/20/2011
I couldn't figure out how Boehner could walk out on the 4 trillion in cuts over ten years that was proposed by Obama. Boehner walked out in the 11th hour saying something about 400 million in spending appeared in the deal at the last minute that he wasn't aware of so he walked out. I found that hard to believe especially when Boehner refused to say what the 400M in new spending was even for. Then I couldn't understand how the deal Obama had with the Repub leadership included 4trillion over 10 years yet the super committee can't even come up with 1 trillion. I think I know realize what's going on. In Obama's 4 trillion in spending cuts and 1 trillion in spending evidently there were a raise in taxes in some form. Probably the Bush tax cuts being allowed to expire. That's why Boehner walked out. He was given marching orders by Grover Norquist. So despite Obama offering 4 dollars in cuts for every 1 dollar in spending and 4 trillion cut from the deficit over 10 years, it was a no go because Republicans took a Norquist pledge to never raise a dime of taxes even if you receive 10 dollars in cuts in return. The super committee was just a ploy to distract from the absurdity that Boehner would walk out on such an effective deficit reduction deal.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PotomacOracle
The Solution:debt free credit clearing systems
06:36 PM on 11/20/2011
Taxes don't pay for anything.

What happens if you pay your taxes by writing a check. When the U.S. government gets your
check, and it’s deposited and “clears,” all the government does
is change the number in your checking account “downward”
as they subtract the amount of your check from your bank
balance.

Does the government actually get anything real to
give to someone else? No. You can actually see this happen with online banking
- watch the balance in your bank account on your computer
screen.

Suppose the balance in your account is $5,000 and you
write a check to the government for $2,000. When that checks
clears the 5 turns into a 3, your new balance is now down to $3,000.

The government didn’t actually “get” anything to give to
someone else. No gold coin dropped into a bucket at the Fed.
They just changed numbers in bank accounts - nothing “went”
anywhere.

And what happens if you were to go to your local IRS office
to pay your taxes with actual cash? The clerk counts it gives you a receipt.
Then, after you, the tax payer, left the room, he’d throw it in a shredder.

Why? There’s no further use for it. Just like a ticket to the Super Bowl. After
you enter the stadium and hand the attendant a ticket that was
worth maybe $1000, he tears it up and discards it.

http://www.moslereconomics.com/wp-content/powerpoints/7DIF.pdf
12:51 PM on 11/21/2011
It's too bad more people don't pay attention to this. Just the other day here in MN there were $600B + worth of tobacco settlement bonds issued by state. These bonds are expected to pay out over $1.2B with interest. Why do we keep funding our government using ursury & middlemen? If these bonds went directly to the citizens buying them, it wouldn't be as bad, but still unnecessary. But when these bonds go through investment firms & big banks who skim off the top, then it moves from being unnecessary to destructive. It's too bad the newsdrone on MPR didn't stop to ask, 'why are we paying out all of this interest'?
02:34 PM on 11/20/2011
Republicans spend the money like its water to "bail out the banks" at the tail end of Bush Administration and during the Bush presidency money was spent like water as well BUT as soon as a Democrat takes office then its all about reducing the debt! Clinton(last dem) reduced it and balanced the budget. Since they rammed such a HUGE debt down the Americans people throat and foreclosed and gutted the middle class, they want only to be able to trickle it down like raindrops from the sky to show to maintain their "priviledged" status and to pay workers the bare minimum for their work. The Republicans would be happy if the 99% would just be happy accepting minimum wage jobs and shut the hell up... and go take a shower. Talk about pompass!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Charles Queen
I am a disabled nam vet
02:11 PM on 11/20/2011
Well,I said from the start that this so called super committee was a totl waste of time and it is.Others are seeing it as exactly that as well.Seems niether side can agree on anything at all which was no surprise at all.This time it's not just one sides fault,it's both sides fault for not being able to come to an agreement.Either raise tax's on the rich or make cuts in s.s. and other much needed programs that cannot afford to have any cuts made to them.No matter how it ends up there will be repercussions either way
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
psychedelicspell
In the storm of life, learn to dance in the rain.
12:51 PM on 11/20/2011
As both sides banter back and forth we are going deeper into debt. Neither side has the stomach to cut what is really ailing us. Entitlements. So the debts just keep compounding. Once it is reached the worry about what will be cut will not matter. Because the money will not be there. You can only use creative math for so long. Time is just about up. This committee will never solve our debt issues, was not meant to. It was only a show to those that hold our purse stings. Might work with voters will not work with those we beg to borrow money from. http://www.thefinancialphysician.com/blog/?p=7468
photo
Watching rock grow
It's a practice in patience
01:28 PM on 11/20/2011
I for one am tired of the chant Entitlements are ailing us! The truth is the Republicans and their masters are what is ailing us.
05:41 PM on 11/20/2011
and the masters are corporate America who are putting money in the pockets of the politicians.
12:28 PM on 11/20/2011
It doesn't appear that a deal will be reached simply because the two sides involved view the problems as being of two different natures. The Democrats truly believe that our economic problems are the result of TOO LITTLE government spending and involvement in our economy. They thus believe that the answer to the problem comes only from more taxes. The Republicans believe that the problems come about as the result of TOO MUCH government spending over a period of many years, and too much government involvment in the day-to-day lives of the American people. Thus their answer is to reign-in government spending.

The history and facts seem to support the Republican position. Since the days of FDR, the US has had a very small number of years where actual government spending was less than the amount of revenue generated by taxes/fees. In fact, the US hasn't had this situation (revenues exceeding expenditures) occur since 1965. In other words, deficit spending has been a hallmark of government for more than 80 years. And that deficit spending isn't stopping - Obama's administration has already added another $446 Billion to our debt just since the August national debt deal. Additional taxes aren't a viable answer because there isn't "enough" money in all of the net worth of US citizens to pay off the national debt.

It's time to stop the "tax and spend" ideas of the past, pass a "balanced budget" amendment, and live within our means.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PotomacOracle
The Solution:debt free credit clearing systems
12:53 PM on 11/20/2011
Government spending is not a function of revenue. Government must first spend the money before it can tax us to get money. Moreover, taxation serves as a constraint on aggregate demand. Taxes don't pay for anything. Whatever the amount spent by government is a savings for the non-government sector. In the six major instances when there was a surplus there shortly followed a deep recession. Why? Because by definition as a government surplus increases, non-government savings and consumption decrease. Surplus means, money is being withheld from the private sector thereby constraing consumption. It might be helpful to you to read Warren Mosler's "Seven Deadly Innocent Frauds."

http://www.moslereconomics.com/wp-content/powerpoints/7DIF.pd
01:14 PM on 11/20/2011
And it might be very helpful if you actually used some common sense. Spending monies that you don't have before you try to find that money is sheer idiocy. You don't do that in your personal life, businesses don't pull those kinds of stupid stunts, so pray tell how government is immune to those economic realities. You can't. And BTW, even in Keynsian economics, the junk that you suggest would be consdiered sheer idiocy.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
HooYoo2say
My micro-bio isn't empty it's just really tiny
10:16 PM on 11/20/2011
I'm not following you. If the government has a surplus what would that have to do with how much I spend and save?
cireneed
looking for some light...even a little
01:04 PM on 11/20/2011
Your position, obvious from the very beginning to be Right-biased, would almost make sense were it not for the fact that little items like the Bush tax cuts (both itterations), Iraq and Afghan wars, and Medicare Rx plans were all Republican UN-funded initiatives. Oh, our grandchildren can pick up those tabs (with interest). We'll simply borrow from (Soc Sec) the future.

A "balanced-budget amendment" is, as any economist will tell you, a bomb timed to go off in the future. When an emergency occurs, natural or as an act of war, the government would be restricted, or prevented, in its response as the $$$, which may be in part held in a specific "emergency" account, would not be available. Oh wait!!! The government could always drain the Soc Sec and Medicare accounts (which are taxed separately) to get through the alleged "emergency". Gee, do you think the whole "balanced budget amendment" idea might be an end-run idea to get rid of successful social programs which the Repubs have always hated (they don't in any way enhance the rich, and they are totally paid for by the middle class)?

Our tax rates are currently at/near historic lows, especially when supplanted by very liberal (oops! There's that word!) ifs/ands/buts/loopholes through which only the very wealthy can escape.

I will never understand why the average person is so concerned over the well-being of the truly rich...they're doing just fine.
photo
JimInHouston
Arma virumque cano...
05:44 PM on 11/22/2011
"I will never understand why the average person is so concerned over the well-being of the truly rich...the­y're doing just fine. "

Once you understand how jobs are created, this enlightenment will come to you.
12:23 PM on 11/20/2011
This is nothing more than a smoke and mirror show. The super committee is illegal under the Constitution. They skirt it by calling it a committee. The cuts or increases will come. What won't go away is the committee. We are allowing these fatherless children to slowly and methodically take away our rights. Its not about lib/con. Dem/rep. By keeping everyone worked up and in chaos, they continue to spin their web towards the agenda. I wonder if they will break for the Thanksgiving Holiday? What ya wanna bet? Get ready Washington, the reckoning is coming.
11:13 AM on 11/20/2011
Say no and call it a name. That's all democrats have. Give something a derogatory name, like 'spitball' or 'teabagger,' demean it, and let their media lapdogs run with it.

Where is the democrat budget for 2009? How about 2010? Or this year, 2011? They had majority for two years, couldn't be filibustered, yet it's still all the GOP fault?

I know the media doesn't use the brains God gave them, but I'd hope at least 50% of American voters would do so.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
darkhornetxiii
I should stop expecting too much!
06:12 PM on 11/20/2011
You don't pay very close attation, it's the other way around. The Republicans have offerd no soluiton but let rich people have more and more. Vote yes on a jobs bill that would creat many, many new jobs? No that can't be good. Give me a brake! And yes 97.8% of the fault lies with the republican party. Focus on jobs? No we can just do some minority bashing or try to FIGHT against a GAY agaenda! (that dosen't exist) That has been what the GOP has been prusing. Gay's in the mitilary! it's sad realy.
11:09 AM on 11/20/2011
Sayyyyy, HuPo; your reporters definitely have a liberal tilt, wouldn't you say. This article is nothing but an attempt to paint one side as obstructionist when, in fact, its the D's who want tax increases for all while the R's are trying to cut the spending; this will not happen as long as the Socialist Rep. Clyburn from S. C. and the tax cheat Sen. Kerry are on this ridiculous committee. Also; the reporters failed to acknowledge the fact that even if any agreement is reached (which it won't) the full Congress will never agree to it. Say, O; where is the leadership, silly me, he's out on his Obama World Comedy Tour.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PotomacOracle
The Solution:debt free credit clearing systems
01:00 PM on 11/20/2011
What is also missing from the article is an objective presentation of why the entire debate is unnecessary. We are a sovereign nation with a sovereign currency. We can never go broke and there is no limit on the amount of fiat money we can create. Oh sure there is the threat of inflation but that can be handled through appropriate fiscal, tax policy.

What the Super Committee doesn't know is simple ledger accounting. Here's a primer to demonstrate that they are all wrong to focus on fiscal and monetary policy as if we were still under a gold standard and fixed exchange rates. http://www.moslereconomics.com/wp-content/powerpoints/7DIF.pd
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
darkhornetxiii
I should stop expecting too much!
06:26 PM on 11/20/2011
Quite, now pay attation! Raising taxes on people making over $1 million (USD) Is a good ideal. And pointing out that congress wouldn't pass this is not news every body knows this. Prehaps if the Republicans wolud approve a bill that would creat thousands of new jobs. We wuoldn't be in this mess. Rember the WPA, new deal,TVA and several instatuitions that basicly saved the country in the Depression. Those were what the Obama team was trying to get passed. THose of you not famliar with the Depression consult history. And rember unlss your 75 or older you probly won't reacall this time period. But talk to those people and they will tell you people would have starved if not for FDR and the demacratic party. Really should read that history book. And I don't want to hear this Job creator myth oh no can't tax the rich they make jobs!....Are you kidding me?! They create jobs alright in China! and India and other placese where they don't have to pay what they would an American worker. Of course if the American people would work for free, die young, and not complain then they might be happy. Those poor 1% ers they just have it so rough.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Llib Noswad
aka: Bill, Conservative
11:00 AM on 11/20/2011
A compromise will not be reached. The Democrats want more money to waste and the Republican's aren't going to give it to them.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
thetxsndn
Man Plans. God laughs.
10:17 AM on 11/20/2011
"I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is
like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the
handle." -- Winston Churchill
10:16 AM on 11/20/2011
What did anyone think this super-committee could accomplish. You've still got the party of "no" trying to protect their owners. They've become nothing more than the con puppet party. Their motto should be "kill the middle class, lose the poor, and protect our sanctified owners, the billionaires.
photo
JimInHouston
Arma virumque cano...
10:42 AM on 11/20/2011
"You've still got the party of "no" trying to protect their owners. "

No kidding. The only serious budget proposal has come from Paul Ryan. The Progressives have absolutely NOTHING to offer and have spent a whole year saying "NO".
11:11 AM on 11/20/2011
the dems want more tax increases so they can continue to increase the deficit by 9% a year....
12:32 PM on 11/20/2011
The party of No isn't really a party - it's one individual. And his name is Harry Reid, the Democrat Senate Majority Leader who refuses to allow numerous budget and financial bills to come to a vote on the floor of the Senate. Why would he do that? Because even some of the Democrat Senators know that the "tax and spend" policies of old cannot continue. And that would mean that most of the American populous would understand that Harry Reid IS the "do nothing" Congress that Obama keeps whining about.
photo
AZDave2
Truth is rare...protect it!
10:02 AM on 11/20/2011
We talk alot lately about the "ownership" of congress. It appears that if what is currently coming out of the committee is true that Grover Norquist a lobbyist, owns Republicans in Congress. In this environment they insist on extension of the Bush Tax cuts? Republicans are confident that they will win the House, the Senate, and the White House next year. Then what do they want to do? I think it is clear more cuts for the rich and more damage to the middle class and poor. They think right now that elections are an inconvenience and they are currently doing everything to make sure that as many people as possible CAN'T vote next year!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
darkhornetxiii
I should stop expecting too much!
06:29 PM on 11/20/2011
It's true why are there so many new voter refom bills all of a sudden? They didn't seem soconcearned in 06 or 08 for that matter...
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lowrodiay65
09:32 AM on 11/20/2011
What do the republicans want? The same as always, kill social security, kill medicare, and give more tax cuts to the wealthy and large corporations?
01:35 PM on 11/20/2011
That is BS lib.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
darkhornetxiii
I should stop expecting too much!
06:39 PM on 11/20/2011
Did you have a big bowl of stupied for brakfast? Or are you just like 10? Payattation. You will see that in the years of the bush tax cuts job growth sorta just flat lined. Any bill to make jobs or repair bridges that keep falling down is an autamatic no go for the republican party. Why do you ask? Because the 1% might see an increase in thier taxes. And don't throw that "don't tax the job creator" propaganda myth at me either. If these people wanted to produce jobs the would have done so instead of shipping every thing over to china or india. Yea that's wonderful then wal mart selles the now cheap product back but since the jobs are now gone so is the money to buy it. And by chap I mean cheaply made. So it brakes or sometimes just fails to work. well enjoy your new Corprit overlords.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
viper1ex19
IF IT’S FUN…….IT’S PROBABLY ILLEGAL….
09:28 AM on 11/20/2011
Why is this not so surprising?

The results of a “Super” Committee the exact same as a “Not So Super” Committee.

I certainly hope no-one actually thought these idiots would come to a compromise..

Obama needs to use his executive powers to do what’s right for America and oust these money sucking pigs out of office and get someone willing to compromise.

Politics = Compromise.

By refusing to compromise; our elected officials are refusing to do their jobs and it’s costing Americans Billions