Plan B

So what do you guys think about Speaker Boehner's inability to sell any sort of tax increase to his own party to try to broker a deal on the fiscal cliff? What does it say about the state of the Republican Party and of party politics in general?

Plan B is a tax increase and should make the Dems somewhat happy. It increases taxes on the top 1%. I thought that's what they wanted.

The bigger and more important question is what do you think about the Dems inability to come up with any real spending cuts???

This is supposed to be a comprimise ya know. You can't ask one side to go against what they believe in and not do the same. What does that say about the current state of not only the Democratic party, but the media who still refuses to be bias in their coverage???

Marconius wrote:Plan B is a tax increase and should make the Dems somewhat happy. It increases taxes on the top 1%. I thought that's what they wanted.

The bigger and more important question is what do you think about the Dems inability to come up with any real spending cuts???

This is supposed to be a comprimise ya know. You can't ask one side to go against what they believe in and not do the same. What does that say about the current state of not only the Democratic party, but the media who still refuses to be bias in their coverage???

Am assuming from past conversations you mean the media who refuse to be "unbiased" in their coverage?

So the dems didn't put 1.2 trillion of proposed spending cuts on the table? What about the fact that Plan B never got as far as having the democrats vote on it, it was shot down by the tea partiers in the Republican party who refused to budge on even a single tax cut? The "You can't ask one side to go against what they believe in and not do the same" works both ways, except for the Tea party by the looks of it. They want the dems to cave on spending cuts and nothing but spending cuts and aren't wiling to compromise on even Plan B which was way off what Obama was asking for in the first place. Compromise doesn't exist on the Tea Party side, it's their way or nothing, even though the opinion polls and the election results show that most ppl have a slightly different opinion of their plans.

Well...its a catch 22 situation.

If the GOP caves in and agrees to raising taxes ...even on only those who make over $1 million, the Dems can point to that and sink the next GOP campaign by saying "see, the GOP broke their promise". (Like they did with George Bush Sr).

If the refuse to cave in, the Dems will say its all the GOP's fault that your taxes are...whatever.

Right now the GOP's hands are tied on this issue I fear. They can point out that the Dems didnt want to meet em halfway, but clearly the public doesnt care. They'll believe the propaganda coming out of the White House.

Dennis324 wrote:Well...its a catch 22 situation.

If the GOP caves in and agrees to raising taxes ...even on only those who make over $1 million, the Dems can point to that and sink the next GOP campaign by saying "see, the GOP broke their promise". (Like they did with George Bush Sr).

If the refuse to cave in, the Dems will say its all the GOP's fault that your taxes are...whatever.

Right now the GOP's hands are tied on this issue I fear. They can point out that the Dems didnt want to meet em halfway, but clearly the public doesnt care. They'll believe the propaganda coming out of the White House.

Perhaps the public didn't like the idea of meeting half way? Balanced doesn't have to mean a 1:1 ratio.

Dennis324 wrote:Well...its a catch 22 situation.

If the GOP caves in and agrees to raising taxes ...even on only those who make over $1 million, the Dems can point to that and sink the next GOP campaign by saying "see, the GOP broke their promise". (Like they did with George Bush Sr).

Their promise to who, Grover Norquist? Someone who has never been elected to any position of authority by anyone, someone who isn't an economist, someone who should really have no say in the discussion at all, bar their own personal opinion, and yet someone who has been able to effectively hold the entire republican party hostage for years? As Marc said, this is supposed to be a compromise, how can you compromise if you're apparently unwilling/unable to budge on one of the major issues?

If the refuse to cave in, the Dems will say its all the GOP's fault that your taxes are...whatever.

And the GOP backed themselves into a corner where the dems can get away with saying this. They have the whip hand. Rightly or wrongly, the presidential election was in a large part a referendum on which side the people believed had the better economic plan for the country, and you can go on all you want about moochers and the 47% and buying the elections with mobile phones or whatever, but the republicans lost that argument.

Right now the GOP's hands are tied on this issue I fear. They can point out that the Dems didnt want to meet em halfway, but clearly the public doesnt care. They'll believe the propaganda coming out of the White House.

The White House are definitely making hay while the sun shines on this, but the reps handed it to them on a plate. Obama campaigned in the election on wanting the cuts to stay for everyone earning under 250k, then upped that in the negotiations to 400k, so straight away he looks like he's willing to negotiate, even against the wishes of a lot on the left, who are calling him a traitor for even going that far. Boehner tried to start at 1 million, fair enough, with haggling you start high and end up in the middle, but then the zealots in his own party pulled the rug out from him on even that. So, the Republicans come across as being willing to up taxes on 100% for the sake of trying to protect the 2%, not exactly "the party of the little fellow". And it isn't as if this whole fiscal cliff thing was a sudden surprise, it's been on the cards since the republicans outmanoeuvred themselves on the debt ceiling last year, and yet it gets left to the last minute, as usual. And it was the Republicans who went home for xmas first.

The 1.2 trillion in supposed cuts aren't cuts and they take place over 10 years. It is nothing more than a plan to not increase spending on certain items. By the time we see the lack of spending, the 1.2 trillion will be used to pay for the interest on money owed.

So no, there have been no real spending cuts introduced. Considering our problem has never been about revenue, I would think this would be higher on people's minds. I guess envy really is a strong motivator. As long as you feel that those with more are being taxed more, you actually think something is getting done.

It is not a mystery to me why most people have personal finance problems today. They have absolutely no concept of finances. Yes, that was a jab.

Miles1 wrote:
And the GOP backed themselves into a corner where the dems can get away with saying this. They have the whip hand. Rightly or wrongly, the presidential election was in a large part a referendum on which side the people believed had the better economic plan for the country, and you can go on all you want about moochers and the 47% and buying the elections with mobile phones or whatever, but the republicans lost that argument.

Um...moochers and mobile phones? I dont remember saying anything about any of that?
The GOP has the whip hand? Anything the GOP house does is gonna get killed in the senate, you know. So I wouldnt exactly say the GOP has the whip hand. But it would be nice if all the GOP could get their ducks in a row.

Miles1 wrote:
The White House are definitely making hay while the sun shines on this, but the reps handed it to them on a plate. Obama campaigned in the election on wanting the cuts to stay for everyone earning under 250k, then upped that in the negotiations to 400k, so straight away he looks like he's willing to negotiate, even against the wishes of a lot on the left, who are calling him a traitor for even going that far. Boehner tried to start at 1 million, fair enough, with haggling you start high and end up in the middle, but then the zealots in his own party pulled the rug out from him on even that. So, the Republicans come across as being willing to up taxes on 100% for the sake of trying to protect the 2%, not exactly "the party of the little fellow". And it isn't as if this whole fiscal cliff thing was a sudden surprise, it's been on the cards since the republicans outmanoeuvred themselves on the debt ceiling last year, and yet it gets left to the last minute, as usual. And it was the Republicans who went home for xmas first.

Eh...I'm not sure who went home for Christmas first. It really doesnt matter though as nothing is getting done. Its interesting you point out (rightly) that zealots pulled the rug out from under Boehner. Zealots = tea party Republicans most of the time.

Rep. Tim Huelskamp (a freshman tea party member) has been one of the most vocal members of the freshmen tea party wave elected in 2010, publicly clashing with Republican leadership and criticizing the process being used to negotiate a deal on the fiscal cliff. He was one of three House Republicans whom Boehner’s leadership teams booted recently from committee assignments.



CNN Reported that Boehner did, however, have a majority of Republicans on his side, but it wasn't enough without help from Democrats. A Democratic source said House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer was successful at ensuring the few moderate Democrats didn't cross party lines. Also one source involved in whipping GOP votes said a number of undecided members fell into the "no" column when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid repeatedly made it clear he would not take up the bill. What's the point, many asked.

I found that interesting. So Dems didnt support the plan either... but now they are complaining that Republicans blew up the whole plan?

The Wall Street Journal has said that "this failure to govern also owes much to President Obama's failure to negotiate with any degree of seriousness." " Boehner first offered to raise $800 billion in new revenue through tax reform as part of a balanced deficit-reduction plan. Obama said no. Then Boehner "finally cracked on raising rates," and offered to let taxes rise for those making more than $1 million. Obama still said no — and he refused to offer specific entitlement reform, while insisting that Republicans let the debt limit be lifted permanently.

So its not really accurate to say that the Boehner or the GOP are unwilling to budge. They have tried repeatedly for a compromise. But the WH and Dems have just as much claim to this failure as the GOP zealots. "For weeks, the White House said that if I moved on rates, that they would make substantial concessions on spending cuts and entitlement reforms," House Speaker John Boehner said before his plan fell flat. "I did my part. They've done nothing."

From what I can tell, its politics as usual. The Tea Partiers and Libertarians will never vote to raise taxes even on those who make over $1 mill/year because they pledged not to raise taxes. They feel that to compromise (even if it might help the country avoid disaster) would kill their chances of getting re-elected. It appears that they are more concerned with their election than they are with compromise. This will be used to further demoralize the GOP.

Furthermore it's clear that the Dems werent going to approve anyway, even though they said they'd compromise.

This is more about destroying the GOP and using it agaisnt them in the next election than it is about the Fiscal Cliff.