Rather than voting to move forward with a balanced plan to protect low- and middle-income people and prevent service cuts that will stall our economy now and for years to come, the House will only be allowed to vote to do the following:
Hands off Social Security. If the Republicans are willing to raise tax rates on high earners but demand more spending cuts in return, the president should offer larger cuts in defense spending and corporate welfare.
Speaker Boehner's "Plan B" deficit package vote is a political stunt designed to feign leadership instead of doing the hard work at the bargaining table with President Obama.
It's naive for members of either party to think they can sign a deal which overrides the voters and defies their values without paying a steep political price. (And Democrats have more to lose on that score than Republicans.)
It's our job to protect and promote, not harm, our real job creators -- the middle class and those striving to join it. Here is how I propose we do it.
The European sovereign debt crisis remains a serious threat, but not because a collapse of Greek, Spanish or Italian debt would infect confidence in U.S. Treasuries. The real issue is that such a crisis would threaten the solvency of many major French and German banks.
Since 2007, the median net worth of the American family has plunged nearly 40 percent. A deficit reduction plan that includes a modest tax increase on the two percent who can most afford it is our best hope for moving ahead in a fair and balanced way.
Is John Boehner just worried about his leadership position? Is he really putting his own re-election as Speaker of the House before all else? Here are Boehner's major possible routes out of the fiscal cliff discussions, in chronological order.
As Keynes emphasized, "The boom, not the slump, is the right time for austerity." Following this maxim, the grand bargain should contain special belt-tightening provisions that raise taxes above Clinton era rates if unemployment falls significantly below the 6 percent mark.
When people say that we need a "balanced approach" to reducing our debt and being fiscally responsible, what I hear is: We need to balance what is good for the whole country with what is good for a few super wealthy and powerful people.
I can tell you that when low wage workers and middle class employees suffer, our nation suffers. Let us hope that our politicians right a fiscal wrong rather than running us over a cliff that they created for us.
Our goal shouldn't be to shift Medicare costs to seniors and make health care more expensive. It should be to make the wealthiest pay more.
The "tax the rich" policies so far being discussed (at least the ones that leak out to the public) are laughably timid and tame, when you really examine the big picture.
Should all the tax cuts be allowed to expire? Probably not. Should the tax cuts on those making over $250,000 expire? I really think so. Do we need to look at cutting our spending, too? Of course.
I've seen you on television chatting up your debt reduction proposal. And while you come across as a likable guy, your claim to be working on behalf of the next generation of young Americans is bogus. Here's why.
Right to the brink! Or maybe not. ...