Associated Press
Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla)
There are plenty of complexities to the fiscal talks, but the fight over expiring tax rates is pretty straightforward: President Obama wants to leave the lower rates in place on income up to $250,000, while returning to Clinton-era rates on higher incomes.
Congressional Republicans, meanwhile, want to freeze lower rates on everyone, including the wealthy, no matter how much it costs, and have threatened to allow taxes to go up on everyone unless Democrats cede to GOP demands.
Away from Capitol Hill, some notable Republicans think their party should take Obama's offer. Yesterday, for the first time, a GOP lawmaker finally agreed.
A senior House Republican on Tuesday urged his party's leadership to embrace the immediate extension of the Bush-era tax cuts for households earning less than $250,000, then fight out the fate of higher-income tax breaks later.
In a private meeting of the House Republican whip team, the group responsible for vote counting, Representative Tom Cole of Oklahoma broke with the rest of the leadership and said the party should join with President Obama for now, Republican aides said. The meeting was first reported by Politico.
"The first thing I'd do is make sure we don't raise taxes on 98 percent of the American people," he said in an interview Tuesday night. "We'll get some credit for that, and it's the right thing to do."
Cole, whom no one would fairly characterize as a moderate, added, "I don't believe in holding the American people hostage to this debate. Let's get what we can now, then go back and try to get the rest. Where there is common ground with the president, we should seize that common ground."
There are multiple angles to this, including the fact that probably none of Cole's far-right colleagues is likely to go along with the idea, but there's more to the Oklahoma Republican's suggestion than meets the eye. Indeed, Cole's offer very likely has less to do with magnanimity and more to do with shifting the leverage in the larger fight.
Democrats generally don't like to talk about this out loud, but if they got exactly what they're demanding -- if, in other words, the House today passed the Senate bill preserving tax breaks on income up to $250,000 -- they'd suddenly find themselves in an unexpected and slightly awkward position.
Yes, they'd get nearly $1 trillion in new revenue over the next decade, without seeking a penny from the middle class, but Democrats (a) would still be short of Obama's goal of $1.6 trillion in new revenue and with no avenues to get there; (b) would still have the sequester to fight over; (c) would have none of the stimulative measures in place they'd like to get from the fiscal talks; (d) would still have a debt-ceiling crisis on the horizon; and (e) would have lost their leverage, having already won the tax fight.
In other words, if the fight over tax rates were wrapped up this week, and Democrats got exactly what they wanted, the next round in the larger fight would begin immediately, and Obama and his allies would find themselves in a tough spot: trying to strike a deal on the sequester, the debt ceiling, and debt reduction without many cards left to play.
House Republicans will probably ignore Cole and there's a part of Democrats that hopes they do.
Leave a Comment:
This would make the Republicans stronger in the negotiations, and makes complete sense since it's going to happen anyway. So therefore, it's dead in the water.
That sound you hear is a TeaParty stampede, rushing in search of a primary challenger to Rep. Cole.
DAY #2,
We absolutely cannot give one inch to these conservative terrorists. Obama has got to realize that they haven't an ounce of compassion in their make up, are entirely self-serving and treacherous. Compromise is not even in their vocabulary. It's always been their way or the highway.
Obama's Tax plan is not only the right and moral one, it is the only one he should accept. Don't negotiate with terrorists. That includes the GOP House and its T-Party members.
Go over the cliff first.
"7:34 AM PT: House Speaker John Boehner just shot down Cole's proposal. Asked about it in a press conference, Boehner said: "I told Tom that i disagreed with him. ... This is not the right approach." So that's that, I guess."
well it was a good suggestion by him.
Hi Pilot! Never trust John Boehner, or anything he says. He is a two faced cutthroat.
Hello India
hope all is well in your part of this country.
yes i never give a break to someone who i know is not able to tell the truth the first time. or in some case all the time.
i say verify first then trust last.
Boehner, McConnell, and the rest of them , while talking compromise, are currently out in the country trying to stop this tax rate from going up. They are talking to the business people and telling them Obama's tax plan will hurt them. "Them" being the "Job Creators".
They are so two faced it is unbelievable.
Well a Republican Elected Official talking like a rational man. If the Republicans hold true to form he will be ostracized from the party.
What's up with this blog today. I opened Maddowblog and it was blank, no articles posted. Is Steve taking a day off?
I hope that House Republicans don't ignore Cole. They should extend the tax cuts right away.
With regard to the debt ceiling fight, President Obama should call their bluff (while reminding the American people that Republicans are threatening an economic depression if they don't get what they want). Then, if the House doesn't lift the debt ceiling, there are numerous options that the President could take to work around that without harming the country: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/11/27/1165046/-Oh-yeah-the-debt-ceiling-Yawn
My favorite is having SecTreas announce that in the interim the United States will be selling its gold reserves at market rates. Not only will it be a looooong time before we get better prices, but the news alone will send the goldbugs into assault mode on their own right-wing congresscritters.
And for once, we may see Glenn Beck cry real tears.
Of course the GOTP will ignore him, it's much more fun to hold the nation hostage overall! As a nation, we have devolved to crazy & deranged in order to lavish WELFARE on the rich & corporate - and these people are serious! I say let the GOTP wait til January, my taxes will go up, but then maybe more Americans will see exactly who their representatives are actually fighting for!
Bingo! Suffering is 9/10 of the recipe for change. I'm so tired of this horse@!$%#, everybody, especially the wealthy should STFU and pay their god damned taxes already.. Close the loopholes, support your country the "good, old fashioned way" and STFU already!
Poor argument by Cole. No GOPer's going to do anything because it's 'the right thing to do.'
Throw the bum under the bus.. Not an easy deal since the bus just recently had to run over Chris Christie...
How about this for a repuke strategy?; govern well for three years, get jobs/economy going really well, and then during the fourth year b4 the next election start coming up with bizarre/ off the wall lies about how it was the repuke's accomplishments.
If indeed Mr. Benen your observations bear true, Rep. Cole knows how to do politics without the use of his axe and hatchet! -Kevo
The one thing I have never been able to understand about all of this isn't actually part of the current problem but rather a problem with GOP mentality in general.
They seem to have this masturbatory fantasy that you can run a country like ours wile collecting no taxes at all. A genuinely bizarre idea that they never seem to be either willing or able reconcile with all the things they do seem to approve of like government contracts for defence spending and farm bills.
Perhaps now would be a great oppertunity to let them explain exactly what it is they do want. What tax rates they would approve of and what they think Government should be doing. They could make the pitch to the American people and explain why they see their ideas as better. They must think on at least some level that Government has some kind of purpose surely, otherwise why are they in it?
Anti-taxes is great for getting votes. It is also monsterously hypocritical as I'll bet most repukes are on a government teet,,; see military contractors, Louisiana, government contractors, big biz subsidies, etc.
I've often asked my far-right-wing parents what the repubs end game is. As I see it, it can only end with anarchy or fascism. If the purpose of the goverment is not to collect and redistribute taxes, or regulate any part of industry, or defend the country (Halliburton, et al), what is it's function? If it's only to distribute some twisted version of justice via a court system, why isn't Somalia they're guiding sovereignty? They even have religious courts, a la shari'a. They laugh off my comparison, but I think it's perfect.
The term is "accede," not "cede."
Holy sheep@!$%#, I think I'm going to have a heart attack and die!
This whole "reasonableness" of Republicans on doing as Cole did here, or speaking against Grover Norquist as the traitor Saxby Chambliss has, is just to give themselves cover for going after the social safety net. You cannot trust these southern traitors any further than you can see them with your eyes closed.
It's just like their "reasonable" position on Kerry as Secretary of State.
Everything they do is two-faced, all in the service of Power.
You can't trust the Republicans! They don't support the people who voted for them, they only work for the richest 1%.
It is obvious that they don't care about the middleclass by their refusal to extend the tax cut on the middleclass right now, without delay. Instead, they are holding the middleclass hostage. They are owned by the elite priviliged ruling 1%, and the rest of us are simply serfs.
I don't see this strategy having any effect on negotiations. The only people who are upset about the sequester is Panetta who is in charge of the Defense Dept. and the Republicans who are concerned about losing money in their districts and the defense contractors who are their campaign contributors. If the defense budget is going to be cut as part of a deal then some defense contractors and some politicians districts are going to lose money anyway. The only question is which contractors and districts. Second, the public and Wall Street, the banks and business community are not going to tolerate another showdown on the debt ceiling if Republicans trigger another manufactured crisis. Public opinion and pressure from the other sectors are going to be the gun to the heads of both sides in the negotiations. Dems have been willing to discuss cuts in some programs but Republicans have been intransigent with their demands. Another hostage situation is not going to work for the Republicans if Dems continue to be amenable to compromise.
I agree with a post I read yesterday (sorry, don't know who gets the credit) where it was stated that Republicans would likely let the Bush tax cuts expire and then agree to give those cuts on income below $250,000. In this way they can say they didn't raise taxes. What wasn't stated, however, is that they still get to say that they cut the tax rate for all Americans, including the "job creators." They would be cutting the average tax rate on all taxpayers, but cut the marginal tax rate on those with taxable income < $250,000. Once the Bush cuts expire, all rates will revert to the Clinton-Era rates. If the Bush cuts are re-enacted on income up to $250,000, the "job creators" with taxable income exceeding that amount will have an average tax rate that is lower than under Clinton, even though the marginal rate will be the same. It might be somewhat disingenuous for Repubs to make this claim, but hey, they've got no problem with dishonesty.
Hopefully they will up the capital gains rates, some of which are 0%, 5% and 10%. They need to go up, way up.
As an aside, one of the articles yesterday linked to the "Tea Party News Network (TPNN)" site. Scary, I know. So I took a look at it and they had a link to an article on why Warren Buffett is wrong about how increasing tax rates will not dissuade investors from investing. The link went to some other nutjob site (not going to bother to find it again) and their argument was that taxes are to stop behaviors, like a cigarette tax or liquor tax is assessed so that people will use less of them, therefore increasing taxes on income will cause people to make less income. I couldn't believe I was reading something with such a simplistic understanding of taxation. To compare an income tax to a consumption or "sin" tax is moronic. As long as the tax rate isn't 100%, you will always be better off earning an extra dollar than not bothering to earn it because some of it will be taxed. I didn't read the whole article because I felt I was stupider for having read as far as I did. I had to play some soduko to shake the numbness that was clouding my brain.
What TAX INCREASE? It's all in how you slice it...
It's a quarter of midnight on Saturday. You go into a market for a cake, the cake you want is marked down. You pick it up, go get in line. Couple of people in front of you, you wait.
You get to the cashier a little past midnight. You have the money in your hand, give it the the cashier. He says "you didn't give me the correct amount." You question why it's more. "Because it's been on a temporary markdown for the past week, now it's Sunday and it goes back to the original amount."
OK. The wealthy were paying taxes at a certain level. They were given an agreed on temporary (10 year Bush) reduction in the amount of the taxes they would pay. Now it's the agreed upon number of years later, and the temporary reduction comes to an end. Tax reduction is over, back now to original levels.
Republicans howl... "WAIT! You're raising taxes. You can't do that., that's a tax increase!"
Wrong. There was no tax INCREASE involved here. The amount owed was due to an AGREEDâÂÂON REDUCTION, now the reduction has ended ASâÂÂAGREEDâÂÂTO, and now reverts BACK to the ORIGINAL amount. That's NOT an increase. They got a ten-year REDUCTION. Won't even mention they lucked out and got two more years. Looking at it differently, it's just like at the market. The reduced price time ran out, and it reverted back to its original amount. Piece of cake.
A reasonable republican? He'll be on a ice flow by weeks end. They eat their own.
Unknown Congressman, appears from nowhere, says boo, and all the democrats fall for this spoof, Congress man then vanishes, hands the baton off to the next unknown Congressman same trick, new day, works on reporters.
In this fiscal cliff debate Obama's says he wants 1.6 trillion in revenues but what does not get pointed out is that Obama has said before that he wants to lower taxes. In February of this year he proposed lowering the corporate rate to 28% down from 35% and eliminating deductions. He said it would raise revenues but why not just eliminate the loopholes. On the white house website you can find his 5 principles on tax reform. The first principle says that we should lower corporate and individual rates and have fewer brackets. In other words a flat tax which is a republican idea.
So what will Obama do in a deal? Well if 2011 is any indication just look at Obama's Grand Bargain. In this deal Social Security gets cut, the Medicare age gets raised, and programs for the poor get cut. So I think if he could get away with it, he would cut the social safety net while lowering taxes on the wealthy. He might eliminate deductions but I think the rich will end up paying less anyways. So it is possible that a Democratic President will cut Social Security and Medicare while lowering taxes on the rich.