Getty Images
Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.)
When it comes to striking a bipartisan fiscal deal, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) argued yesterday that the only compromise he'll consider is one in which Republicans accept no concessions whatsoever. Around the same time, House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said the same thing.
Given this, it's fair to say the prospects for a so-called "Grand Bargain" are finished, right? Almost, but not quite.
Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) said Sunday that he believes Republicans would consider adding new tax revenues by closing loopholes if Democrats show a willingness to embrace "true" entitlement reform.
"I think Republicans, if they saw true entitlement reform, would be glad to look at tax reform that generates additional revenues," Corker said on "Fox News Sunday." "And that doesn't mean increasing rates, that means closing loopholes. It also means arranging our tax system so that we have economic growth."
Corker is clearly part of a very small minority in his party, but it's worth noting he's not completely alone -- Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) made similar remarks shortly before the sequestration deadline about Republicans trading tax-reform revenue for unspecified entitlement "reforms."
It's admittedly difficult to read the available tea leaves -- for every report that says Republicans will simply never even consider a compromise, there's another that says the window is not yet closed and a deal is still possible.
But if we're keeping score, put me down in the "deeply skeptical" category. Putting aside the merits of a "Grand Bargain" -- I'm skeptical about the need for such a deal, too -- I just don't see a scenario in which enough congressional Republicans accept concessions to pass an agreement.
In fairness, the optimists have a compelling talking point: Republicans want changes to social-insurance programs like Medicare and Social Security; President Obama is tempting them by putting the "reforms" on the table; and GOP leaders know the only way Democrats would even consider these cuts is if Republicans make concessions on new revenue.
So why is failure probably inevitable anyway? In large part because when weighing the Republican support for entitlement cuts against the Republican opposition to new tax revenue, it's no contest -- today's GOP is not a small-government party; it's an anti-tax party. On the list of Republican priorities, there's a #1 issue, followed by a steep drop-off to every other consideration.
For proof, look no further than Boehner's and McCarthy's comments yesterday. Yes, Corker sounded a more constructive note, but I strongly suspect he's part of an intra-party minority that would be quickly crushed if a deal started to materialize.
But isn't Obama making them a generous offer intended to garner GOP support? Yes, but let's also not forget two things. First, the president has already put very conservative measures on the table, but they're far short of what Republicans generally consider acceptable (the elimination and privatization of entitlement programs). Second, as we've seen before, the m.o. for Republicans is to simply pocket Obama's offers while demanding more, constantly moving the goal posts to new extremes, before the president eventually gives up and the media blames "both sides."
Indeed, look again at Corker's specific use of words: he'll consider revenue if Democrats accept "true" reforms. Who gets to decide what's "true"? Apparently, Corker and his party do, and chances are, their definition won't line up well with the Democrats' definition.
I realize that on a conceptual level, this seems like the sort of agreement that could be reached in an afternoon. Both sides are looking for similar amounts of debt reduction, and have already made significant progress towards their goal. Democrats are open to spending cuts and entitlement changes, and if Republicans met them half-way on tax-reform revenue, they could shake hands and move on to some other issue.
But if I were a betting man, I'd say the smart money is on "never going to happen." All of the GOP leadership and most of their rank-and-file members not only refuse to consider a compromise, but consider the very idea of meeting the White House half-way to be ridiculous.
Leave a Comment:
Grand Bargain? GRRRR!
I sincerely doubt that the Republicans have a plan that could pass. They still have to contend with their lunatic fringe.
"true entitlement reform" being the abolition of the New Deal.
TC,
Totally. They won't rest until we get The Bad Deal!!
The lunatics are no longer a fringe. Just look at the CPAC participants.
Word typist,
Yeah, they're the whole bagpipe!
Nothing to see here folks... just keep driving... the authorities will clean up the blood on the highway...
I can't help but think that Democrats liberals and progressives need to take a page from of all places CPAC...
We don't need a New Idea we have an idea...and it has worked for over 75 years. We don't need to negotiate or compromise the people have spoken again and again and they like the way we do things and we need to collectively tell the small group of very shrill people who are interested in dragging us back to the Gilded age to sit down and STFU
Let me see if I have this straight: Obama is criticized by Republicans for talking to the people instead of negotiating with them after they publicly say there is no room for negotiation? I would say Obama's most productive moments were getting putting tips from Tiger.
So. It's Corker's turn to play Lucy Van Pelt?
Grand bargain? Are you nuts. That is the last thing the leaders of either party want. All they want is to endlessly "fight" with each other WWF style over taxes and spending so we, the loyal fans, will continue to buy tickets to their pathetic show.
Frankly, I am sick of this game and can't understand why the rest of you continue to take the bait. I guess I am suffering outrage fatigue this morning.
Nobody mentions it, but sequester was the only way either side could agree to DOD and Ag cuts. So far it has worked. Over the next months there will be come adjustments to the sequester program, but in the end the defense budget will take a long needed hit. Maybe we can stop fighting WWII and the Cold War.
Once again, no mention of which loopholes to close. Likely, it won't be carry interest of subsidies to oil companies (you know, sacred ones from holy writ) and will be a limit income tax on employer contribution to health insurance for the average Joe.
Or lifting the cap on Social Security contributions.
I don't see a problem with lifting the cap to make more income subject to SS taxes. Currently 84% of income is subject to the tax, and that number has historically been at 90%. Doing away with the cap totally would make the program solvent through the magic 75 year projection.
I don't see Republicans going for this quick and easy fix, however. When I read the remarks from GOP leaders about the 'grand bargin', I'm hearing "This will only pass if the administration and the Dems in congress accept our terms 100%."
If the teapubs really wanted to do entitlement reform, they'd put the money back they've been taking out. With interest.
That's precisely what the GOTP is complaining about, Phenner, having to pay the interest on the Trust Fund held in US Treasury bonds. That's what's causing the entire deficit, don't you know? (s/o)
I'll concede the point that for the payroll tax holiday, the feds did repay SS for the missing revenue caused by the payroll tax being cut in half. Yes, that did come out of the general fund, but unless you have short term memory issues, the complaining about the so-called 'entitlements' started long before the payroll tax.
The real problem is that they rarely get challenged on any of the BS they vomit out for our consumption.
Screw the republicans, take Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid off the table and leave them off!
Marty,
Absolutely, they don't, in any sense, belong on the table. The GOP is slobbering and drooling over the thought of taking away the entitlements and will use any excuse to do so. Obama should NEVER give in to these people. Their goal is a two class society of the wealthy and slave wage working poor.
The only legislation the Republican House has passed lately is two insane bills prohibiting non-existent problems. They are engaged in taking away precious congressional hours, so that nothing meaningful gets passed in the first year of Obama's second term.
Anyone voting Republican needs to be aware of their ultimate goal. They liked life as it was before 1910. If they'd had to live it, as many of our great grandparents did, they'd be less eager.
A big problem continues to what is or isn’t true. A bit dated, but here’s yet another shameful example of how successful the Greed Over People party has been, even when someone speaks the truth, it isn’t accepted:
http://www.baltimoresun.com/entertainment/tv/z-on-tv-blog/bal-gibbs-axelrod-msnbc-propaganda-20130225,0,6844101.story
With Gibbs and Axelrod, MSNBC now worse than Fox on propaganda
How a so-called 'news' channel becomes a organ of state policy
By David ZurawikThe Baltimore Sun
11:21 a.m. EST, February 25, 2013
Let's hope Bernie Sanders filibusters anything the president puts on the table as a "Peace offering" to these Misguided Republican terrorists who seem determined to destroy the country.
Maybe Obama has forgotten who won the damn election!
allenoh: please remove head from ass before commenting. thank you.
The (admittedly dwindling) rational part of the Republican party doesn't "want changes to social-insurance programs like Medicare and Social Security" because they know that these programs are popular and cutting them would lose votes. So they are not going to trade tax increases for cuts. They make noises about cuts to placate the big donors and (few) Tea-Party types who do actually want cuts, and of course they would love it if Obama and Democrats propose cuts. What the Tea-Partiers want is cuts to programs which they think go to people of different color, which include food stamps, Medicaid and Obamacare.
I think the T in T-Party stands for terrorist.
So...GOP SOP is to accept no concessions whatsoever. New GOP offer is mere possibility of maybe the chance of a slight concession in return for mandatory large concession - "true cuts" as defined by Republicans - on entitlements from Democrats.
Even the guys who used to do three-card monte in Times Square wouldn't use such a blatant hustle. You're being played.
There is little point in Obama trying to discuss anything with Republicans because they want the president to propose a plan so they can move the goalposts as usual. When Republicans say they want significant reform, they mean abolish or privatize. Any proposals by Republicans will include repealing Obamacare and they will use it as an excuse to not compromise. Any proposals by the Dems are going to be used against them in the next elections. Any further spending cuts must be met with dollar for dollar revenue increases because anything less than that should be unacceptable to the Dems. If Republicans are serious about negotiating, then let them make some gestures toward that end. They can start with ending filibusters and letting Obama's nominees get to a vote. It is time for Republicans to take the first steps toward compromise. Obama keeps bidding against himself and this time he is not going to go down that road.
I'm with Dragoon...
"But if I were a betting man, I'd say the smart money is on "never going to happen." All of the GOP leadership and most of their rank-and-file members not only refuse to consider a compromise, but consider the very idea of meeting the White House half-way to be ridiculous."
Off to Vegas with you, collect winnings.
All Obama "concessions" off the table, since it's all nothing but STALL TACTICS!!!!.
I don't think anything is "on the table" when only one side has proposed a "compromise".
Obama knows they won't compromise. That's why he's offering up entitlements. They won't take the offer as long as taxes go up. Meanwhile, Obama looks like the reasonable one and if they come back later and want to deal he can say "sorry, you refused when I offered and now it's off the table" like he did with the last "grand bargain" when he offered to only raise taxes on people with more than $1 million income. Give it time and let it play out. The man is not stupid.
Jane Shaner,
I had thought of that, as well. Let's hope that's the president's motive.
The president is clearly not stupid, but I fear he may be cow-towed by the GOP at times.....
or something....
Completely left aside in the constant speculation of whether a Grand Bargain is possible is the question of whether a bargain of any sort is even necessary. As Paul Ryan and John Boehner admitted yesterday, the immediate debt crisis the GOP is always yammering about doesn't actually exist. So why are Democrats even discussing economy-killing ways to bring down the debt? Can't they just tell the GOP to take their austerity measures for a long walk on a short pier?
Dems should be talking about jobs which is the number one issue. No one will hear the shrill cries about the deficit when Dems refuse to discuss it anymore and keep hammering the jobs issue. Republicans will drown in their irrelevance to the political discourse.
It's that "both sides do it" and "bipartisan" memes that Obama is chasing. Can't say I blame him because now may not be the time to declare your own positions and policies are the end-all. When the country is polarized and most folks support your side, it's not a great time to declare compromise is impossible, even if it is...
Sandy Shrew,
We know the debt crisis isn't real, but Democrats live in an evidence based world. The House of Repression lives in Alice's rabbit hole.
Sound does not travel there.
Reason does not travel there.
They only get Fox "news" down there.
What then must we do? To quote Tolstoy.
Well,.... my least favourite troll. Putting you on ignore, Hopey.
@India LeCarre
Don't you just love the ignore function. I have all of our favorite trolls on ignore so I don't even see their posts. Everyone should try it.
Mike/India, I agree. The ignore button also makes for less back and forth name calling too. It's something all comment sections should have.
I'm really happy the Maddow Blog decided to stay with the old format, since I haven't figured out to ignore someone on the new format.
I am really tired of having my SS put out as a bargaining chip to get more revenue. Why should my cost of living raise (about $25.00 a month) be eliminated so that some hedge fund speculator can save a few hundred thousand in taxes?
Shady Shrew,
We'd better hope no grand bargain is possible with the Republicans. Their idea of a grand bargain is highway robbery and lower taxes on the richest Americans.
They are drooling so much at the thought of a grand bargain that someone needs to get them a lobster bib!
A lobster bib is the only thing Obama should hand them.
India: If they are drooling for a deal, they sure don't move that forward with lines in the sand about revenue. I say it's all kabuki theater, nobody wants a deal because nobody wants their own base trampeling on them...
Lewbowsky Dude, #16.1
Exactly, the only problem with the GOP House of Repression is that they are afraid of Wayne La Pierre, and Grover Norquist, and fear a primary from the right.
As for that fear of the right, Hitler is dead.
You could also call it the theatre of the absurd. What a cast in that circus!
Even the guy with the dead chipmunk on his head is back in the act!
Watching from a distance, Canada, I think the Dems start making their list of who is naughty,who is nice, and who can be defeated in 2014. It seems clear that your society needs a new house of Representatives and fewer Reublicans in order to have an adult conversation and move your country forward. The current Republicans do not care about gays,women, and minorities in general. The tokens they use should wake up and demand policy changes. That will actually allow for new messages. But trying to dress up their old policies is like the Klan going from white to off white for the colour of their robes and masks.
Steve: In our midterm elections, the minorities do not show up to vote the way they do in a presidential year. Thats the key, getting the people out for all elections. The conservatives show up better than we do, it's time to end that forever...
Steve from WPG,
Come on dooowwnnn........... help us rout them out!
We are lost down here....!! The GOP has us by the short hairs!
Medicaid and Medicare do need to be reformated though. The thing that slays me is the claim that more and more doctors are going to refuse payments from either because those are the only programs with the power to really set their own prices for service. Sure, health care providers do like to milk people for all they can, are in a position to hold peoples' health hostage to do so, and those programs don't let them do it as much, but the reality is that with more and more people on the program there is likely to be more that need to see patients in either system in order to pay their bills. Several parts of the ACA was designed to strengthen the negotiating power of not only these programs but large private insurance companies as well. The only thing missing is working on ways to enable health care providers to lower their costs as well.
It isn't Medicare that needs reforming. It isn't even Medicaid. It is the health insurance companies that have driven up the cost of ALL health care in this country.
The corruption is unreal. Medicare is actually efficient as programs go. It is the greedy drug companies and insurance companies that are the problem.
Drug companies don't make as much money as you might think. It costs a veritable fortune to develop new drugs, test them for efficacy, test them for safety, and develop production protocols. Generic drug manufacturers benefit from developer companies doing the hard and expensive part (most drugs in development don't actually get final approval, so a lot of work and investment could go into developing a drug that you never get to sell). They have to charge a lot for proprietary drugs or they would draw no profits at all. Granted, as drug development software improves technology will make this much cheaper in the future, but we are not quite there yet.
Furthermore, health insurance companies currently don't have a lot of control over health care costs. Large companies have some negotiating power, but not that much. The real people controlling health care costs are the providers. That is not to say that insurance companies are not corrupt, because many are, but we cannot address the issues if we do not correctly assess where our attention needs to be.
BTW, this is not to say that your doctor is trying to screw you over. Oftentimes they have little to no control over what they charge you and they have unreal costs to cover with what they do charge you. This is why I said we need to figure out how to lower the costs for providers in order to begin to address this situation. Medicare has the negotiating power to start, but the whole system needs an overhaul.