Congressional aides: Maybe Boehner will bypass the tea-party freshmen and make a deal with Dems on the payroll tax

posted at 9:34 pm on January 13, 2012 by Allahpundit

Two words: “Speaker Cantor.”

Seriously, though, I’m skeptical that he’d do this.

House Speaker John Boehner, hoping to spare fellow Republicans a second embarrassing defeat over payroll tax cuts, is prepared to navigate around rebellious Tea Party-aligned lawmakers to get a deal, according to congressional aides…

Boehner’s office would not comment on possible divisions among Republicans in the upcoming debate over the payroll tax cut or tactics to get a bill passed. But one House Republican leadership aide told Reuters: “I think Boehner will seek a more accommodating approach to get a good percentage of Democrats to vote for it – even if it costs him a lot of House Republican freshmen.”…

Some Tea Party lawmakers, however, see round two of the payroll tax cut negotiations as another opportunity to press their demands for cuts to unemployment benefits and some federal healthcare programs and a freeze on federal workers’ pay. Those are unlikely to be accepted by Democrats who feel they have the political upper hand…

A senior Senate Republican aide said December’s drama might have even strengthened Boehner’s hand. Given that a conservative groundswell in late December to block the two-month payroll tax cut, against Boehner’s advice, “backfired in a big way,” some of those conservatives might now conclude that “Boehner knows what he’s doing” and fall into line with him.

Remember back on January 3 when a “senior White House official” floated this very idea — that Boehner should do an end-around tea partiers by making a deal with Democrats and passing the bill with help from Republican moderates? Quote: “Abandoning such a stance, members on both sides have said, would almost certainly prompt a challenge to his leadership from conservatives who make up the bulk of the lower chamber GOP, a challenge the speaker is likely to lose.” Boehner’s own press secretary called the proposal “remarkably stupid” when asked about it. To have a Republican speaker cut his own caucus loose at the start of an election year to make a deal with The One would play straight into the Democrats’ hands in their messaging about a “do-nothing Congress” (“Republicans are so obstructionist that even John Boehner won’t deal with them anymore!”), so yeah, a leadership challenge really might follow. Which means the only way Boehner would consider doing this, I take it, is if he had some votes more or less already lined up within the freshmen class for a deal with the Democrats so that he could point to them as proof that “tea partiers are split” or whatever.

Either that or Republican leaders are so worried about a decline in the tea party’s brand that Boehner’s willing to risk putting a little distance between the party’s leadership and GOP freshmen. (Especially on a budget deal; remember, according to that recent Rasmussen poll, 45 percent of unaffiliateds said the tea party’s impact on the budget debate had made things worse versus 25 percent who said it made things better.) Maybe Boehner expects that, precisely because it is an election year, the caucus would think twice about ousting him and feeding the media a million headlines like “GOP in disarray!!” and “Tea-party coup!!!” He could even try to sell the right on the maneuver by framing it as an election pep talk. E.g., “I hate having to deal with a Democratic Senate but we need to move on from this penny ante issue to more important spending debates. The way to solve this problem next year is to take back the Senate so that no one has to make these awful compromises.” Exit question: Think it’ll work? (Me neither.)


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Boehner’s a good guy.
Tea Party types are often clueless at politics.
This issue is killing us.
Let’s give in on this & fix it next year under President Romney.
If we don’t give in, there may not be a President Romney.

itsnotaboutme on January 14, 2012 at 6:28 AM

What lala land are you inhabiting? SS is already coming from the general revenue fund, where it has been dumped, and SS is filled with a bunch of paper IOU bonds.
 
onlineanalyst on January 13, 2012 at 10:07 PM

 
Yep. And for 80 years, it’s worked well. If the IOUs are good enough for the Chinese they’re fine for my retirement.
 
urban elitist on January 13, 2012 at 10:12 PM

 
That’s odd. I almost remember you saying you had children, and no parent I know thinks that way.
 
But I’m rural, too.

rogerb on January 14, 2012 at 6:29 AM

You know this entire ‘only those who have been around the House long enough to start the petrification process need to be our leaders’ deal isn’t working out so well. During periods of rapid change it isn’t so good to be led by the dinosaurs, yet that is the system we currently have.

ajacksonian on January 14, 2012 at 7:22 AM

Will he cry a river when republican voters demand he be removed as speaker?

jdflorida on January 14, 2012 at 7:35 AM

Bo(eh)ned again.

Steve Eggleston on January 14, 2012 at 8:05 AM

What the unintended consequence of a lengthy payroll tax cut?

batterup on January 13, 2012 at 9:38 PM

A bigger deficit forever, an inability to ever again raise the payroll tax because it would be a “tax on the middle class,” and much sooner-rather-than-later fiscal collapse due to unsustainable entitlement programmes….

Resist We Much on January 13, 2012 at 10:15 PM

Unintended? UNINTENDED?

There’s also the cementing of the Moochers being over half the populace and the completion of the decoupling of SocSecurity benefits from SocSecurity payments (which has always been but a piece of fiction).

Steve Eggleston on January 14, 2012 at 8:11 AM

Let’s give in on this & fix it next year under President Romney.
If we don’t give in, there may not be a President Romney.

itsnotaboutme on January 14, 2012 at 6:28 AM

So we ignore our professed values of fiscal responsibility “this year” in order to help Democrats take billions from our collapsing social security system to try to buy votes with it and better appeal to fiscally conservative voters…

This is the reason tens of millions like me no longer vote Republican.

elfman on January 14, 2012 at 8:23 AM

Boehner’s a good guy.
Tea Party types are often clueless at politics.
This issue is killing us.
Let’s give in on this & fix it next year under President Romney.
If we don’t give in, there may not be a President Romney.

Exactly backwards, but a nearly perfect distillation of Republican philosophy–all policy positions are means to one end, Republican power.

james23 on January 14, 2012 at 8:27 AM

Boehner looks surprisingly reasonable sometimes.

But, in an election year, let’s have the Republican Party make raising taxes on every single individual who pays social security taxes a part of their program, even as they argue for further cuts for the extremely well off.

urban elitist on January 13, 2012 at 9:40 PM

Get up to speed, Boehner already agreed to at $4T tax hike on those making $250k or more; you just had to be paying attention, like so many other former Republican voters.

elfman on January 14, 2012 at 8:33 AM

Republican leaders are so worried about a decline in the tea party’s brand that Boehner’s willing to risk putting a little distance between the party’s leadership and GOP freshmen. -Ap

HoHoHo!
An over-polled and non-representative group of liberals
aka the indies are now defining T-party “decline”?
The trail from the voting-booth is littered with
the corpses of both party’s failed candidates-
those cocky 62 who refused to recognize the
electoral storm bearing down on them
from the right side of history!

“Let’s Roll”

On Watch on January 14, 2012 at 8:36 AM

House Speaker John Boehner, hoping to spare fellow Republicans a second embarrassing defeat over payroll tax cuts, is prepared to navigate around rebellious Tea Party-aligned lawmakers to get a deal, according to congressional aides…

Sure, he’d fall on his own sword to “spare fellow Republicans.” Because politicians are so altruistic like that.

cynccook on January 13, 2012 at 9:41 PM

You don’t know how much I needed that chuckle.

elfman on January 14, 2012 at 8:38 AM

Fund it out of general revenue.
The Social Security System is, in fact, in pretty good shape for the next 50 years, with very modest tweaking.

urban elitist on January 13, 2012 at 10:04 PM

For the last 50 years, the Social Security System has been injecting billions/year into general revenue (indirectly through government securities). Now it is withdrawing tens of billions/year from general revenue (again indirectly from “the trust fund”). Even without extensions of these temporary tax cuts and a more stagnant economy than projected, Social Security was expected to cost over $100B/year within 10 years. Modest tweaking?

elfman on January 14, 2012 at 9:11 AM

I’ve said it before, I’m afraid the Dems want SS is to be a traditional entitlement program that the ‘poor’ get for free and demand the ‘rich’ to pay for.

Everlasting_Knowitall on January 13, 2012 at 10:15 PM

Oh, that’s a given. It’s too late to turn around on that road. The only question now is who pays for it and gets it.

elfman on January 14, 2012 at 9:17 AM

Boehner’s a good guy.
Tea Party types are often clueless at politics.
This issue is killing us.
Let’s give in on this & fix it next year under President Romney.
If we don’t give in, there may not be a President Romney.

itsnotaboutme on January 14, 2012 at 6:28 AM

The second part of your comment illustrates why Tea Party types, assuming you are one, are often clueless at politics.

So to stop the RINO Speaker Boehner, we should elect the liberal RINO Romney as President?

Sure…*WTF*

TheRightMan on January 14, 2012 at 9:39 AM

This is just another reason not to support Romney next Fall. 1.2 trillion, another payroll tax holiday increase, and no jobs. LMAO

jjnco73 on January 14, 2012 at 9:48 AM

How many times did Nancy Pelosi come across the aisle to get things done. Beohner is not a leader, he’s a typical RINO. He’s waving the white flag before the battle begins.

savage24 on January 14, 2012 at 9:51 AM

Yep. And for 80 years, it’s worked well. If the IOUs are good enough for the Chinese they’re fine for my retirement.

urban elitist on January 13, 2012 at 10:12 PM

Um, no. The Chinese can sell their Treasuries. By law, intra-governmental debt CANNOT be sold; hence, the Social Security Administration may NOT sell the IOUs in its “Trust Fund” to raise revenue. The IOUs it holds are only worth the money the US Treasury is able to raise through taxes, borrowing, and printing.

You probably didn’t read this when I posted it early, but I strongly suggest that you do:

“Lies” About Social Security and Medicare Pandering Politicians Never Told You

I have fully sourced the piece and it should prove to you once and for all why Social Security IOUs should not be considered “fine for your retirement” unless you are over 55. If you are, don’t worry the rest of us will pay for you, but we will never see a penny … not that most of us that consider ourselves to be true “urban elitists” would want Social Security for our tretirements…trop peu d’argent et seulement pour le “hoi polloi,” n’est-ce pas?

Resist We Much on January 14, 2012 at 9:55 AM

get a deal, according to congressional aides…

But one House Republican leadership aide told Reuters:…

Some Tea Party lawmakers…

unlikely to be accepted by Democrats who feel…

A senior Senate Republican aide said…

some of those conservatives might now conclude…

Yesterday there was 8 pages of comments on a non-story from CNBC and today I see this. This is why the National Inquirer has more credibility than Reuters and everybody appears to be biting again.

DanMan on January 14, 2012 at 10:00 AM

I’ve said it before, I’m afraid the Dems want SS is to be a traditional entitlement program that the ‘poor’ get for free and demand the ‘rich’ to pay for.

Everlasting_Knowitall on January 13, 2012 at 10:15 PM

That’s absolutely a given and almost the way it works in Europe. You might have paid in a fortune to their version of SS and your neighbor might have paid in $100 over 40 years. You get the same check each month.

Comrades, it’s called ‘fairness’.

CorporatePiggy on January 14, 2012 at 10:04 AM

Boehner’s a good guy.
Tea Party types are often clueless at politics.
This issue is killing us.
Let’s give in on this & fix it next year under President Romney.
If we don’t give in, there may not be a President Romney.

itsnotaboutme on January 14, 2012 at 6:28 AM

Feeling a little elists I see and talking down on millions of Americans and your solution is Romney to Bonhner’s ineptitude?

If you represent mainline GOP thinking, I predict an Obama reelection if Romney is the nominee and a fracture in the GOP.

Egfrow on January 14, 2012 at 10:09 AM

If you represent mainline GOP thinking, I predict an Obama reelection if Romney is the nominee and a fracture in the GOP.

Egfrow on January 14, 2012 at 10:09 AM

Unfortunately he does, he will be and there already is.

elfman on January 14, 2012 at 10:21 AM

The Stupid Party.

ConservativeLA on January 14, 2012 at 10:36 AM

If Boehner and the GOP have decided that the TP is no longer of use I guess we can only wait and see how the next election cycle turns out. If the Conservatives/TP voters keep accepting the idea that it’s better to get shafted by fellow Republicans vice Dems perhaps they will support the GOP candidates who disdain them.

katiejane on January 14, 2012 at 10:55 AM

Two words: “Speaker Cantor.”

How about Speaker West!

ChuckTX on January 14, 2012 at 10:55 AM

Everyday people run their lives based on not spending more than they earn, having a cushion for emergencies and taking care of what they own. That is what the Tea Party thinks the government should do. The vast majority of the inhabitants of D.C. believe the spending and debt are a form of control and power. It makes sense that they would want to marginalize the economics of the masses, especially since the masses are providing the capital. Add to the fact that they are watching it crumble all around them and still think they are immune should scare everyone. Both parties are the same.

Cindy Munford on January 14, 2012 at 11:26 AM

T-H-R-O-W

T-H-E-M

A-L-L

O-U-T. !!!!

Crybaby Boehner

Squishy Cantor

Hensarling

Hottie Dakota Kristie Noem

They are Bush big government “pale pastel” Republicans.

PappyD61 on January 14, 2012 at 11:40 AM

It was the Tea Party that gave the Republicans a majority in the House, and I suspect it will be the Tea Party voters that would also be responsible for turning the Senate. Be careful what you wish for, you can’t have it both ways.

lea on January 14, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Gingrich is the only person in the race that has ever pulled congress to the right. He paid for it in 1990′s by having the republicans in the house back Democrat trumped up baseless ethics charges. The republicans were so full of hatred for Gingrich having removed power from their hands, they helped the enemy string him up. He is the only person in the race that I see has any shot of turning the direction of this nation for the better.

Vote for Romney, I will be backing Newt.

Well said.

lea on January 14, 2012 at 11:47 AM

“Listening to Democrats and Republicans argue about the “payroll tax” is like listening to to two drunks arguing about a bar tab on the Titanic. “

CrazyGene on January 14, 2012 at 12:36 PM

“Listening to Democrats and Republicans argue about the “payroll tax” is like listening to to two drunks arguing about a bar tab on the Titanic. “

CrazyGene on January 14, 2012 at 12:36 PM

’nuff sed.

fitzfong on January 14, 2012 at 12:44 PM

…as they argue for further cuts for the extremely well off.

urban elitist on January 13, 2012 at 9:40 PM

Get this through your head. It’s. Not. The. Government’s. Money. Or yours by government fiat. The federal government has specific projects to spend money on, read Article I, Section 8. They don’t include taking money to put into a “trust fund”, or to provide “health insurance”, which are nothing but slush funds to pay off the 47% or so that don’t pay income taxes. Money has to be created or earned, it can’t be put into a pile and spread around.

celtnik on January 14, 2012 at 1:22 PM

This is Boehner, the big deal-making man. Do I think he’d bypass the Tea Party Republicans? Sure I do. The Republican leadership hates the Tea Party because we want them to cut back on their big-spending ways. Boehner and McConnell will roll over and give Obama what he wants because he is the first black president, and can’t be beaten. What is good for the little guy doesn’t matter. We’re just the stupid peasantry who should accept what our betters tell us without argument.

Primary both of them.

hachiban on January 14, 2012 at 1:30 PM

I have been hearing this argument from the GOP for 40 years. The only small changes have been to the growth of the government. The GOP has never actually cut government since Coolidge.

Maybe if you say it enough you will really believe it. But for me I will actually have to see it happen. Considering that my Brute Force electron microscope hasn’t found the GOP’s spine yet it isn’t likely that they will make those series of small changes that actually cut government.

chemman on January 14, 2012 at 1:00 AM

Oh, it’s quite clear they’ve been trying this past year, but democrats have been politicizing every step of the process. That makes it EXTREMELY difficult, since it means you’re negotiating with somebody who is more worried about scoring propaganda points, rather that achieving real solutions.

All I’m saying is that until we have reinforcements, we should be trying to score a half dozen little victories every month. I mean, if we passed six bills that cut three billion dollars in spending per year, every month for twelve straight months, that’d be 216-dollars in cuts.

That’s not enough by a long shot, we’d only be taking out roughly two months worth of the debt we accumulate per year. Regardless, that would be MORE real cuts then we’d ever seen before, and ideally we could start cutting more after we control the senate.

What it comes down to, is, this debt wasn’t created overnight, the culture that created it didn’t appear overnight either. We’re NOT going to fix the problem over night either. So rather than trying to fix the problem abruptly, the important thing is to get the government trending in the right direction.

I mean, heck, if we passed a budget that merely stopped GROWING the debt, I’d be ECSTATIC! Even that will be extremely tough to do in this climate however.

WolvenOne on January 14, 2012 at 1:52 PM

I totally Support Boehner on this anyways. I am for taking away every penny possible from social security and medicare. The sooner they fail, the happier I will be and the sooner America can get back to 6% and higher growth. There is no reason we cannot have growth that is slightly faster than our population growth, none at all.

astonerii on January 14, 2012 at 1:53 PM

If we don’t give in, there may not be a President Romney.

itsnotaboutme on January 14, 2012 at 6:28 AM

Best reason I’ve heard not to give in.

they lie on January 14, 2012 at 1:55 PM

I say we as conservatives and tparty members and supporters need to show Boehner, Romney,McConnel, and all of the Pubs. just how important we are. Since they do not think we are important, let’s all sit the next election out. Period. Then they will see just how dam important we are. It’s time we stood up to these closet socialists.

they lie on January 14, 2012 at 2:01 PM

Connie Mack for Speaker!

carolt2 on January 14, 2012 at 6:58 PM

Comment pages: 1 2