• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Boehner abandons goal of $4 trillion debt-reduction package

BDBoop

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 17, 2010
Messages
9,800
Reaction score
2,719
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Boehner abandons goal of $4 trillion debt-reduction package - The Boston Globe

WASHINGTON - House Speaker John Boehner, Republican of Ohio, abandoned efforts last night to reach a comprehensive debt-reduction deal worth more than $4 trillion in savings, telling President Obama that a midsize package was the only politically possible alternative to avoid a first-ever default on the nation’s mounting national debt.

.................../snip

“Despite good-faith efforts to find common ground, the White House will not pursue a bigger debt reduction agreement without tax hikes. I believe the best approach may be to focus on producing a smaller measure, based on the cuts identified in the Biden-led negotiations, that still meets our call for spending reforms and cuts greater than the amount of any debt limit increase,’’ Boehner said.

Maybe? We're going to get somewhere?
 
Not if the Tea Party has any say in the matter. And why do they, one wonders?
A significant faction of the tea party movement is prepared to revolt against any GOP deal to raise the debt ceiling – even if it is “revenue neutral” and cuts trillions from federal spending, grass-roots sources tell Newsmax.

For the most part, tea party leaders have coalesced around the “cut, cap, and balance” approach to raising the debt ceiling: Trillions in real spending cuts, a cap on how much federal spending can consume as a percent of GDP, and, ultimately, a balanced budget amendment that would prevent the federal government from running up future deficits.

But the fractious tea party movement actually consists of thousands of loosely affiliated groups. They generally support constitutionally limited government, but don’t always agree on specific policies. And they are by no means united on whether the debt ceiling should be raised at all.
 
What happens if they revolt? What are they going to do? Hold their breath? Have a tantrum?
 
All of the Tea Party influence is in perception and people give them more credit than they are due.

Do they have something to add to the mix?

Yes but until they are better organized and become a real political party they are no more important than a local PTA.

I agree with the basic Idea that we as a Nation have lost our way and moved away from the values our Nation was founded on, but for now they are fragmented in a widely spread loosely connected manner that makes them less effective than than could be if they were to form a sound platform they could all get behind as a cohesive force.

I have to think for now we all have to think about tomorrow and worry about next week when we have to.
 
All of the Tea Party influence is in perception and people give them more credit than they are due.

Do they have something to add to the mix?

Yes but until they are better organized and become a real political party they are no more important than a local PTA.

I agree with the basic Idea that we as a Nation have lost our way and moved away from the values our Nation was founded on, but for now they are fragmented in a widely spread loosely connected manner that makes them less effective than than could be if they were to form a sound platform they could all get behind as a cohesive force.

I have to think for now we all have to think about tomorrow and worry about next week when we have to.

I rarely agree with the content of your posts but this is dead on perfect.

They are certainly part of the problem and not at all part of the solution.

I suspect that Boehner found out that Obama is not caving in on much of what the GOP wanted since he got a bit of backbone with high pubic support for Social Security and other programs popular with the public.
 
Last edited:
"A significant faction of the tea party movement is prepared to revolt against any GOP deal to raise the debt ceiling – even if it is “revenue neutral” and cuts trillions from federal spending, grass-roots sources tell Newsmax."

given that these Representatives already voted for such a measure, i tend to doubt this.
 
I rarely agree with the content of your posts but this is dead on perfect.

Which should be a clear signal to Councilman how dead wrong he is..........

They are certainly part of the problem and not at all part of the solution.

Only if you believe the problem ISNT a bloated out of control government spending this country into oblivion.........

.....the Tea Party wants government to cut spending.......as do a majority of Americans.....the solution to our problem doesnt entail giving Obama--Pelosi--Reid another Credit Card to max out.

I suspect that Boehner found out that Obama is not caving in on much of what the GOP wanted since he got a bit of backbone with high pubic support for Social Security and other programs popular with the public.

No doubt the Kenyan Tyrant will have to dragged along kicking and screaming.......just like BJ Clinton was...........
.
.
.
 
Back during the days of the American revolution, Massachusetts patriot Sam Adams performed the valuable role of "riding the tiger". He whipped people up into righteous indignation against the British and helped make an armed revolt possible. The skills needed to do that are a cross between a street corner preacher and a demolition expert. The problem with that type of person is that once the revolt is over and the weapons are laid down with peace made, they often find it really difficult to pick up a shovel and start planting to create a society rather than tear one down.

That is the tea party today. They used their anger and petulance to lead a political revolt last fall and they were wildly successful at co-opting the Republican Party to do their bidding in the hopes it would propel them into sets of power. And it did. The only reason John Boehner is Speaker today is because of that anger.

Now Boehner has to be part of the rebuilding and he is falling terribly short of the mark. It is obvious that any $4 trillion dollar deal had to involve tax increases - either in rate adjustments or in ending corporate loopholes - and Boehner has made a decision that to do so would risk the ire of the right and he just will not risk his nice new office with the bigger staff and Sunday morning appearances on the news shows.

His act is one of political cowardice and he should be ashamed of himself.

There are people in this country who are not only watching America race on a roller coaster to hell - they are actively greasing the tracks so the cart picks up speed and hastens the arrival of our national demise. And the ones with the biggest grease gun ahead on that curve are the tea party and their political sycophants who mistakenly believe they are using them to gain power when it is they who are being controlled.
 
What we have is Obama (and the Dems) exploding spending since 2007. Now he wants to ride in as a knight in shining armor to claim credit for cutting half the projected deficits over the next 10 years that his budgets have created. Beohner and the Reps need to make this as painful as possible for the president. Especially given the fact that Obama has ignored his own deficit comittee recommendations. This is kubaki theater at its finest.
 
This outcome is not surprising. The negotiating approach undertaken was a bad one from the start. Each side started with its maximum position, both of which were irreconcilable, and exhausted a lot of time trying to work toward a midground that didn't exist. IMO, a lot of this time could have been saved had each party proceeded under ground rules where they would make an offer that met their core needs and also was likely to be acceptable to the other side. That way, the gaps would have been smaller and hard bargaining could have been almost immediate. Of course, the downside of that negotiating approach would be that each side would have to make a sincere effort to accommodate what the other side could accept, something that is difficult to achieve in the face of sharp partisan differences.
 
This outcome is not surprising. The negotiating approach undertaken was a bad one from the start. Each side started with its maximum position, both of which were irreconcilable, and exhausted a lot of time trying to work toward a midground that didn't exist. IMO, a lot of this time could have been saved had each party proceeded under ground rules where they would make an offer that met their core needs and also was likely to be acceptable to the other side. That way, the gaps would have been smaller and hard bargaining could have been almost immediate. Of course, the downside of that negotiating approach would be that each side would have to make a sincere effort to accommodate what the other side could accept, something that is difficult to achieve in the face of sharp partisan differences.

the 2010 elections were about something relatively simple. Stop The Expansion. Stop The Spending.

Have Taxes Increase To Match Higher Spending wasn't it.


good for Boehner.
 
His act is one of political cowardice and he should be ashamed of himself.

it's been 804 days since the party in power in upper parliament passed a budget---in times like these

courage, anyone?

obama is THE PRESIDENT
 
Thats not accurate donsutherland1.

In the beginning, Obama wanted a "clean" debt ceiling hike. As in no spending cuts or tax increases. Clearly that was a nonstarter given the seriousness of the deficits his budgets will create over the next ten years. And it was against the recommendations of his own deficit comittee.

The Reps went after $4 trillion in spending cuts. Then Obama went back on his "clean" approach asking for $1 trillion in additional tax revenue. So, Beohner backed out thinking he can get a smaller deal through with no tax hikes. The smaller deal was being championed by Biden. Obama has said he will veto a smaller deal. Well see. If a smaller deal gets through the house and the senate, then an Obama veto would risk default - the very think the media has been pounding the Reps on for risking.

Obama must lay in the bed he created and this needs to be made as painful as possible for him.
 
This outcome is not surprising. The negotiating approach undertaken was a bad one from the start. Each side started with its maximum position, both of which were irreconcilable, and exhausted a lot of time trying to work toward a midground that didn't exist. IMO, a lot of this time could have been saved had each party proceeded under ground rules where they would make an offer that met their core needs and also was likely to be acceptable to the other side. That way, the gaps would have been smaller and hard bargaining could have been almost immediate. Of course, the downside of that negotiating approach would be that each side would have to make a sincere effort to accommodate what the other side could accept, something that is difficult to achieve in the face of sharp partisan differences.

Thats not accurate donsutherland1.

I don't think I've ever seen that statement before.

Obama must lay in the bed he created and this needs to be made as painful as possible for him.

And there's that "cutting off one's nose to spite one's face" attitude that's going to send us all down the ****ter. Well played. Well played, indeed.
 
i'm dissapointed that the republicans don't want to work towards a 4 trillion deal, as in the longterm, this is what we need as a starter...2 trill is a good start, 4 would have been much better..

True. But anything that trumps the August 2nd deadline is what we have to work with.
 
And there's that "cutting off one's nose to spite one's face" attitude that's going to send us all down the ****ter. Well played. Well played, indeed.

What? You think there shouldnt be retribution for Obamacare (and the ensuing waivers) being stuffed down our throats?

Hero worship only goes so far. And in the case of Obama, its led to a leaderless country in the midst of an economic and social calamity.
 
*Yawn*

Call me when a written deal exists. Until then, I am holding to my theory that Republicans are going to stall until the 2nd of August, regardless of what happens.
 
there's a price for the bigger deal, or the shorter deal, depending on how you're looking at it, depending on who's paying

there's a flip side to this negotiation that's not being recognized here

the bigger the cuts, the higher the lift

a 2 trillion dollar deal will deliver a lower ceiling

one of the president's priorities is to get that limit to his credit card hi enough to GET HIM THRU THE NEXT ELECTION

he and his party certainly do NOT want to be HERE next summer, for instance

people like me, for example---i would be very unhappy to see the ceiling lifted 2.4 trillion additional dollars without fundamental reform of all three entitlements

the president's natural position is to prefer a lift sufficient to get him thru---will he pay the price?

stay tuned
 
I don't think I've ever seen that statement before.



And there's that "cutting off one's nose to spite one's face" attitude that's going to send us all down the ****ter. Well played. Well played, indeed.

You are closer than you think. This is not really about honest negotiations. It is about Republicans slicing the throat of America for nothing more than political purposes. This is about Republicans, looking towards 2012, and willing to do anything, no matter how much it hurts the nation, to try and gain an advantage. Don't forget that, while Bush was in office, the debt ceiling was raised 7 times by Republicans, without any questions whatsoever. But a rubber stamp under Bush is now a demand for absolutely everything they want, with absolutely no room for negotiation whatsoever, under Obama. It can be summed up in a single word - Sabotage.
 
I think the biggest news here is going sort of unnoticed: Obama favored a debt reduction package bigger than what Boehner wants. Where is the tea party outrage at the guy they just put in charge?
 
You are closer than you think. This is not really about honest negotiations. It is about Republicans slicing the throat of America for nothing more than political purposes. This is about Republicans, looking towards 2012, and willing to do anything, no matter how much it hurts the nation, to try and gain an advantage. Don't forget that, while Bush was in office, the debt ceiling was raised 7 times by Republicans, without any questions whatsoever. But a rubber stamp under Bush is now a demand for absolutely everything they want, with absolutely no room for negotiation whatsoever, under Obama. It can be summed up in a single word - Sabotage.

Quoted for Mother Fletcher (what?! It's SUNDAY!) Truth.

Dems dig in: GOP trying to sabotage economy on purpose - The Plum Line - The Washington Post
 
*Yawn*

Call me when a written deal exists. Until then, I am holding to my theory that Republicans are going to stall until the 2nd of August, regardless of what happens.

that has the potential to cause a significantly bad wall street reaction.

it might impress parts of the Republican base, but those same parts are going to be angry even if there's a compromise at the last possible moment.

they probably have until about July 20th to extend the ceiling with minimal consequences. it should have been done already.
 
that has the potential to cause a significantly bad wall street reaction.

it might impress parts of the Republican base, but those same parts are going to be angry even if there's a compromise at the last possible moment.

they probably have until about July 20th to extend the ceiling with minimal consequences. it should have been done already.

Am I missing something. Is it only one side holding up any deal? Can we use the democratic proposed budget as a startpoint. Oh wait there has been no budget passed by the senate in nearly 3 years.
 
Back
Top Bottom