Earlier today President Obama made a public plea for Republicans to embrace either a long-term or short-term “balanced approach” to avoid the sequestration cuts. Speaker Boehner’s response made it clear the House Republicans are not interested in any possible compromise. From Boehner:
“Today the president advanced an argument Republicans have been making for a year: his sequester is the wrong way to cut spending. That’s why the House has twice passed legislation to replace it with common sense cuts and reforms that won’t threaten public safety, national security, or our economy. But once again, the president offered no credible plan that can pass Congress – only more calls for higher taxes. Just last month, the president got his higher taxes on the wealthy, and he’s already back for more. The American people understand that the revenue debate is now closed. We should close loopholes and carve-outs in the tax code, but that revenue should be used to lower rates across the board. Tax reform is a once-in-a generation opportunity to boost job creation in America. It should not be squandered to enable more Washington spending. Spending is the problem, spending must be the focus.
“Washington Democrats’ newfound concern about the president’s sequester is appreciated, but words alone won’t avert it. Replacing the president’s sequester will require a plan to cut spending that will put us on the path to a budget that is balanced in 10 years. To keep these first responders on the job, what other spending is the president willing to cut?”
(emphasis mine)
Obama believes he could get Republicans to agree to more “revenue” by having all the money come from closing tax loopholes instead of changes in tax rates, but Boehner is closing the door on that possibility. There will be no balanced approach that Republicans will accept. Any additional revenue, regardless how Democrats try to spin it, will be labeled a tax increase by the House Republicans.
In addition, the only thing Boehner proposed to replace the sequester with is other cuts that would put us on a path to a balanced budget in 10 years. That is a nearly impossible goal to achieve using only spending cuts and would effectively require dramatically larger cuts than the sequester. Boehner’s proposed alternative to the sequester is basically something even worse than the sequester.
This is not the kind of statement you use to start serious negotiations, it is the the kind used to shut it down. Get ready for the sequester to happen.
Photo by Gage Skidmore under Creative Commons license





23 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
What is this “his sequester” Boehner is on about? “The President’s sequester?”
Nice try, TanMan, but you’re on video saying you got 98% of what you wanted when the sequester was invented and passed.
Our Congress has become fourth-graders: it’s all about who gets blamed for the chaos they cause.
Boy oh boy, Boehner is really gonna screw the pooch. I guess we see the place wrecked. What a freaking disaster.
Well there’s always Simpson Bowles . those gents have some brand new ideas.
So far it seems the Rs got the talking point here. Obama asked for it. Obama also gave those two idiots the original go ahead. And we all suspect he still wants his grand bargain. Now it seems it may even be grander. Another recession may be just around the corner, no matter what happens. Lets just hope it also doesn’t involve grandma.
Methinks it’s all about involving Grandma.
Sadly I suspect you are right.
I AM grandma and I’m royally pissed off. Have already sent e-mail to the WH today. Won’t matter but just maybe they will count the ones who say NO. I will not give up and I won’t be silent.
The plan for the aged:
Pensions and SS:
Be rich. If you are not, Die Soon.
Chained CPI:
Substitute and eventually live in a back alley, eating garbage. Die Soon.
So, let the executives orders begin! Lets see what this president does to take care of his people.
He doesn’t have any “people” – he has aides and fluffers bowing to his every wish.
Good point, Teddy, on the video. There are sooooo many ways that Obama could take this on. Congress passed the sequester so it seems like it is “Congress’ sequester”. Romney (and Repubs) ran on closing tax loopholes as a way to raise revenue, so what is their objection to that now? He could emphasize how lower taxes and gov’t cuts decrease job growth and cuts to SS and Medicare are not what Americans, who have already paid for these things (at lease for SS), want. He could even emphasize how the sequester cuts military spending which no one (in Washington) wants. So many ways to handle these little men.
Sadly I expect he will take it as an opportunity to offer unpalatable concessions rather than an opportunity to have them back down once again as they have recently shown they will do if he pushes back.
It’s not a “concession” if it’s something he has been saying he wanted to do since 2009, and for which he appointed a commission, when no one forced him to do that.
I love you.
You wish. I think maybe it’s the other way round.
Well, that ruined my day. Man, don’t you hate it when somebody hits the nail on the head!
Yes.
moody little bugger, ain’t he?
Yes.
The mess of sequester seems good cover for a new taking. Which bubble will pop? This way we will be in too much pain to notice.
Boehner?
Who proposed the sequester?
The President has always taken care of his people.
Oh, wait. Did you think we were his people? If so, what gave you that impression, other than his speeches?
As for Executive Orders, per the Constitution, Congress and only Congress, has the power of the purse. He can propose things to Congress, as he did with the sequester, and he can sign or veto or pocket veto a bill, but that’s all.
It’s not only about Grandma. There’s Grandpa, disabled people, and the surviving spouses and kids of workers who died before their time.
Yes. I agree.
No one forced him to set up the cat food commission.
No one force him to set up the joint commission, which is probably unconstitutional anyway, to reach a Grand Bargain that would be binding on Congress.
No one forced him to propose the sequester.
For that matter, no one forced him to end run his own Senate so he and Senate Turtle could agree to enact the Obama tax cuts in 2010, while Democrats still held both houses of Congress.
For that matter, no one forced him to leave the Bush tax cuts in place. He could have asked Congress to repeal them on Day One, due the severe and unforseen crisis the nation was in at the time.
If I were in Boehner’s place, I would probably do pretty much what Boehneer is doing.
If so many of us know that Obama wants cuts at least as much as House Republicas want them, they know it too. Knowing that, House Republicans have little reason to cave.
Obama proposed both the Grand Bargain Committee and the sequester. If the sequester is really too awful to contemplate, and his only back up plan was the House surrendering, he was totally irresponsible. He had zero reason to assume a cave in on their part. And he probably knew that.
As for tax increase, Obama definitely knew full well Republicans were not going to give him more than one tax increase in this battle. Knowing that, he offered them $400,000 and they took it. Done and done. If he’s acting shocked he can’t another increase a month later, or even a year later, he’s faking.
He’s a duplicitous scoundrel, a lying racketeer.
As for the tax “loopholes,” most people don’t think of a tax deduction for home mortgage interest as a loophole. And if that goes into effect, what is going to happen to the housing market. Are we going to get another round of foreclosures and short sales as people can’t make mortgage payments without that tax deduction? Most people are living too close to the bone as it is.
The only thing that can stop Obama and Republicans from cutting entitlements now are members of the Senate Democratic Caucus.
Good luck with that, especially since they refused to change Senate filibuster rules.