Mirror, mirror on the wall, who was the most "childish" of them all?

[Bull Moose Base]

Read the article and it sounds right to me.  It's a little strange, since grabbing what Boehner was offering, $800 billion in taxes which seems to have included rolling back the Bush tax cuts on the top 2.5% and maybe the Dem estate tax package, would have given the Dems more bragging rights too-they have been pushing for the upper-tier rollback for quite a while. 

The article says:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's lowering the tax rate on the richest.  There is no chance the GOP would agree to anything they couldn't argue was a tax cut.  If they are too afraid of their caucus to go back with a plan that's 3/4 spending cuts, that's their issue.

Democrats and Obama should be uniting around a simple message.  We and Republicans agree we can't agree.  Let's take an easy step to raise the ceiling clean and enough to get us past the next election, we'll both present visions and you decide at the voting booth how you want to reduce the debt.  Anyone who votes to let us default is responsible for what happens.

[Bull Moose Base]

Just to clarify here...  Obama is not interested in a clean lift (though presumably would sign one).  I think he ought to rake the Republicans over the coals for using the entire economy as a hostage but he's not doing that.  He continues to frame the situation as an opportunity for a big debt reduction deal.  I don't get why they're linked but that's that.

Harry Reid added 1.5 trillion in spending cuts to McConnell's escape hatch offer: to raise the debt ceiling clean provided Republicans could fake like their trying to stop it.  The Democrats added 1.5 tril in cuts into the mix.  McConnell-Reid received a chilly reception from House Republicans initially and it's gotten even colder today.  Going by reports, $1.5 trillion in cuts and no revenue in exchange for a ceiling lift big enough to get us into 2013 is being rejected by House Republican leaders (who voted repeatedly to raise the ceiling clean when the debt kept growing under a Republican president).  That is all.

[Bull Moose Base]

OK. Obama must not carry through with his veto threat. It's time for him to cave. This is a Judgment of Solomon moment.

When will it end though?  Reagan caved to radical Islamic guerillas and 20 years later we had 9/11.  If Obama rewards economic terrorism, it'll encourage it as a tactic and American democracy will be permanently damaged.  14th, like Clinton said.  Let the GOP sue to destroy the economy.

[Bull Moose Base]

Hi everyone,

This is my first post on this forum. It seems to be a reputable forum but, as I see, it does have its fair share of hacks (what forum doesn't?). However, unlike other forums, this one seems to have some thought-provoking commentary.

Anyways, I just heard that Harry Reid is offering spending cuts amounting to around $2 trillion in "his own plan" this evening that would take us past the election. The specifics aren't clear but with Boehner and Reid now seemingly having competing plans, It seems that we are, again, at an impasse.

I don't know if Reid's plan can get get Pelosi's and her liberal posse's support, however. A 100% spending cut plan would go against everything they've said previously and I don't think that Reid can get to $2 trillion without including entitlements unless he really squeezes domestic and defense discretionary...

I never thought we would get this close to default but with all these competing ultimatums... I just don't know...

Reports are it's 2.5 trillion from Reid.  The odd thing about this story is that reports last week that Obama was about to do a deal with Boehner for no revenue spurred Reid to protest against a revenue-free plan.  I apologize in advance for being a hack.  I've considered not being one, but the Republicans suck so I have no choice.  Welcome.

[Bull Moose Base]

What if Dems unite around: this new Reid plan + announce intention to expire Bush tax cuts for the top 2% (unless GOP can agree to a tax reform plan that generates more revenue in a fair way) + we'll tackle entitlements in the 113th which will hopefully be less insane?

[Bull Moose Base]

Do you think there's any meat to the Obama administration's argument that a short debt ceiling extension would cause economic instability and bond problems? To me those claims sound strike me as an half-assed explanation to avoid the electoral problems a Boehner deal might entail. I don't think the President has any other option but to take the deal, Boehner's rhetoric is pretty strong and would win popular support if Obama doesn't take it and we get close to the deadline.

Well, as mentioned, in my view, the Boehner deal is actually better for Obama electorally; it allows him to claim he got something that was important not only to his own constituency, but to a majority of self-identified independents too.  I don't think the Boehner deal is a short-term deal either; it lays out ten-year budget targets.  

I do think there is truth to the charge that not wanting to accept a short-term deal reflects Obama's hope that he won't have to have the debt ceiling leveraged against him before election time.  But the initial McConnell solution, allowing Obama to raise the ceiling three times before the '12 election time, had political intentions as well; it was a fail-safe on the debt-ceiling and at the same time would allow the GOP to pot-shot Obama every time he raised the ceiling until November of '12.  So, the fact that Obama had political worries about that scenario, since it had a political aim to begin with, is at least understandable.  Anyway, given what seems to be on the table at the moment, Boehner's offer is better than Reid's, both in terms of policy and even electorally for Obama.

The problem with the short-term solution is that it sets a precedent for toll-booth spending cuts so the GOP can effect austerity as brutal as Cut, Cap, Balance piecemeal.  I do also think it's a plausible argument that Moody's and S&P will downgrade anyway because of the probability of a repeat.  Now, that the GOP took the entire economy hostage and made real the prospect for default, S&P has changed their tune from months ago and now demands political prescriptions.  They say they will downgrade our rating anyway without a $4 trillion debt cut.

http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-cohn/92552/obama-wanted-deal-payroll-holiday-unemployment-ratings-downgrade

That article also cites sources that Obama was going for jobs stimulus in his deal with Boehner, by the way.  I think Obama thought jobs stimulus and doing what he could to avoid the downgrade the GOP is driving towards would help his re-election more than the specifics of a deal which would piss off not only his base.  I don't know how he responds to the GOP go-it-alone strategy now.  I think he needs to outline spending cuts, threaten the expiration of Bush tax cuts for rich and hopefully give the GOP vicious criticism for creating this crisis, as well as a large part of our debt in the first place.

[Bull Moose Base]

Here is the revenue-free plan Pelosi outlined last week that TPM speculates this resembles.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/07/pelosi-outlines-revenue-free-path-forward-on-debt-limit-fight.php

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Bull Moose Base]

Here is the revenue-free plan Pelosi outlined last week that TPM speculates this resembles.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/07/pelosi-outlines-revenue-free-path-forward-on-debt-limit-fight.php

You must be logged in to read this quote.

"Cuts" from ending wars that hopefully will end, but maybe not. Whatever.  We have a long ways to go yet methinks.

We'll have to end them to avoid hitting the ceiling and crashing into the 30s.  Terrorists finally scare the US into withdrawing from the Islamic world.  (Except not Islamic terrorists.)

[Bull Moose Base]

Don't worry, Anvi, Reid's plan won't pass the House.  Even if it did, revenue will be enhanced in 18 months when Bush cuts expire.

By the way, all, I don't think rejecting short-term is because it helps Obama's re-election as much as it is an effort to say that's enough playing with the ing ceiling for the 112th.  Look at how all-consuming this thing is.  The worst, least-productive congress in history.  I can't recall a party winning back a chamber and becoming so deeply unpopular so quickly.

[Bull Moose Base]

I wonder if Obama-Pelosi-Reid are really just really banking on the House being beholden to the Republican's who don't want any debt ceiling increase whatsoever to kill any plan they offer. Perhaps they know that even Reid's all-cuts plan will not sit well with the Tea Party elements and they just want to be able to say "hey, we tried to compromise and cut spending without any tax hikes and the GOP wouldn't even accept that". It's an interesting, but risky, theory.

In any case, entitlements will need to be tackled relatively soon. There's no doubt about that. There are ways to sustain the programs without gutting them, however. Linking Medicare premiums to income is one way that comes to mind.

Yes, of course rejection is the Democrats' expectation.  This is essentially McConnell-Reid.   Entitlements don't need to be tackled in this congress and I prefer they be used to reverse GOP 2010 gains (largely powered by Mediscare tactics).  The GOP exploited Mediscare to win a House majority and then threatens deliberately crashing the economy for leverage to demand deep cuts to Medicare.  Guess what?  I have no problem with Democrats now using Medicare as a tool to undo that majority and approach entitlement reform in a more precise way and from a dominant position.  The prposals don't even dig at the root of the problem of medical inflation.  We should be starting with trying to cut out waste and using cheaper drugs before we play with eligibility age if necessary.

We didn't even need to deal with the debt in the 112th until the GOP created potential Depression as a consequence for not doing so.  Trying to cut spending with unemployment over 9% is a counterproductive way to tackle the debt, like the GOP describes raising taxes.  It's almost as foolish as cutting taxes when you go to war.

The thing about Boehner's offer is that the repeal of the individual mandate makes it impossible to cover people with pre-existing.  And that's obviously a trap Obama can't take because the GOP is probably more interested in repealing that then tackling entitlements (since they don't really care about the debt but are obsessed with stripping away any victories for him) so what's their incentive not to block Medicare changes in order to fatally wound Obamacare.  The end of which would take away from millions potential to access healthcare. And grow the debt.  In any case, trying to use the debt ceiling to fight Obamacare is like trying to use a continuing to fight Planned Parenthood.

Nor do I see why the voodoo revenue offered by Boehner via top tax rates dropping by 5-10% is so much more desirable than just doing nothing and letting the Bush tax cuts expire in 18 months.  Is the 800 billion in revenue in comparison to permanent Bush tax cut rates? Expiring top 2%?
In any case, not the Democrats' fault conservative Republicans went public with another plan and undercut Boehner (and McConnell and Reid and everyone else).

If it comes down to the GOP saying, take our bad offer or we'll blow up the economy in an unprecedented step, which it seems we're at, Obama at least has to draw the country's attention to the fact that the Republicans are acting like terrorists.  I know that gets called out as hyperbole but I don't see how it's not an apt way to describe people introducing a threat to deliberately expose the economy to collapse unless their demands are met.

[Bull Moose Base]

More details are emerging about Reid's proposal.  Supposedly, it's going to include detailed discretionary cuts taken right out of Paul Ryan's budget. It's going to include cuts that Republican's previously went on record as voting for so as to back Republican's into a corner and define them as hypocrites if they vote against the Reid proposal. 

It's a sad day to be a Democrat when your leaders consider $2.7 trillion in cuts and no revenue a "win".

Not to mention the GOP already came out against a short-term deal recently.  How long until the GOP insists any deal MUST include revenue?  This is like a Bugs Bunny argument.

[Bull Moose Base]

BigSkyBob,

I really don't see how the 'peace dividend' and interest savings could account for the entire $2.7 Trillion in Reid's proposal.  Even the most optimistic estimates regarding the 'peace dividend' only gets us to $1.3 trillion in deficit reduction. Where does the difference come from?

This is all you have to know: White House organ in press announces of the Reid plan, "Nothing is agreed to until everything is agreed to." That is, there is not single dime of current spending that the Democrats are willing cut for the sake of fiscal discipline no matter what is done about the debt ceiling.

In a nutshell, if the debt ceiling is not raised, they are against any cuts whatsoever. That is why we have a 14 trillion dollar national debt.

Seriously, guys, this is no time to talk about the debt ceiling.

[Bull Moose Base]

http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/92664/republican-debunks-myth-400-billion-tax-demand

Unsurprisingly, Boehner's account of why he walked away from a grand bargain with Obama turns out to be a lie.  Is it a surprise after his dishonest speech last night (in an unprecedented allotment of equal time for response to the oppostion)? Obama wants a blank check?  Created this crisis? Can't take yes for an answer? 

[Bull Moose Base]

*btw let's drop the fantasy that Boehner misunderstood Obama.  Boehner's primetime address destroyed any credibility he had in reporting what's going on here.  His walk was most probably a move to up the pressure on Obama and Democrats so he could get to a deal less poisonous to his trying to stay Speaker.  Like many Boehner gambits, it sort of backfired.

Torie, Obama hasn't that I recall divulged any specific numbers of negotiations or negotiated in public.  He did say Boehner was refusing to call him back and informed him he was breaking off negotiations.  Who knows how few GOP votes JB could deliver on a Grand Bargain?  He can't even pass his own horrible plan for all we know. Is it so implausible that Boehner is just too scared to close the deal and ran and Obama didnt delve into specific offers?  

Anvi, why do you assume Obama hasn't?  Geithner hinted at as much on Sunday shows.  And Obama's speech seemed to rally the public to push for grand bargain over Reid.  I'm skeptical (but open-minded) about the extra revenue from lower taxes even with closed loopholes.  Let's not forget the Bush tax cuts didn't create jobs.  There's also the chance Bush tax cuts at all levels may be repealed if GOP holds them hostage for leverage to get richest tax cuts and Obama refuses to sign extension for all.  So both sides blame each other and disagree while the rev comes in.   Even if it doesn't happen, the politically risky prospect of it for both sides could motivate both sides to do tax reform that brings in less revenue than a full repeal

[Bull Moose Base]

Also CBO just scored Reid's plan as saving more than twice as much as Boehner's.  Sort of hilarious.

[Bull Moose Base]

After Boehner refused to negotiate with Obama anymore and went to Reid, McConnell is now refusing to negotiate with Reid.  He'll only talk to Obama.  What was the question again?

[Bull Moose Base]

After Boehner refused to negotiate with Obama anymore and went to Reid, McConnell is now refusing to negotiate with Reid.  He'll only talk to Obama.  What was the question again?

Why are Democrats behaving like children with no budget and no plan?

Children are notorious for not having a budget.