Democrats want another trillion in revenue in next cliff deal

posted at 12:01 pm on January 7, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

No surprise, since most of us understood that the thirst for “more revenue” was akin to Tim Allen’s “more power” in his Home Improvement series … and about as effectual at solving problems, too.  The Hill’s Alexander Bolton rounds up comments from House and Senate Democrats on their goals in the upcoming fiscal-cliff fights, and finds them stressing “balance” between tax hikes and spending cuts.  Of course, the tax hikes of last week aren’t included in the equation:

Democrats say they want to raise as much as $1 trillion in new revenues through tax reform later this year to balance Republican demands to slash mandatory spending.

Democratic leaders have had little time to craft a new position for their party since passing a tax deal Tuesday that will raise $620 billion in revenue over the next ten years.

The emerging consensus, however, is that the next installment of deficit reduction should reach $2 trillion and about half of it should come from higher taxes.

This follows the White House talking points in advance of the next round of negotiations:

The White House also supports a 1:1 ratio of spending cuts to tax increases as Congress seeks to finish the fiscal work left unresolved by the recently completed 112th Congress.

White House officials point to last week’s fiscal-cliff agreement to “buy down” the sequester for two months. The deal delayed the implementation of automatic across-the-board spending cuts to domestic and defense programs and paid for it with $12 billion in revenues and $12 billion in spending cuts — evenly divided between defense and non-defense spending.

Administration officials view that as a template for future deficit-reduction agreements.

This is a good initial bargaining position, but not much more.  Democrats spent the last several years arguing that the deficit problem originated in the Bush tax-rate reductions for high-income earners, which they successfully reversed last week.  The first results of their victory got felt by American workers across the board in their paychecks, and at least anecdotally, they’re none too pleased by the reductions they see in their cash flow.  They won’t be especially anxious to go for another round of “balance” that doesn’t address the skyrocketing spending in Washington first.

This time, Republicans have more leverage, or at least less baggage.  The GOP is no longer in the position of having to defend the status quo for high-income earners, and now can fight without that hand tied behind their back.  They can point to the pain workers across the board felt last week and ask voters whether it should be them that has to pony up, or politicians and bureaucrats in the next two rounds.  In this case, the anecdotes of out-of-control spending work for the GOP rather than Buffettesque anecdotes working against them, at least until the specific cuts have to go on the table.

That, of course, is the key problem for both parties, and the biggest obstacle to entitlement reform.  Any plan to put those programs on a stable financial footing necessarily means cutting benefits and excluding beneficiaries, whether on a means test, age, or other basis.  If it didn’t, it wouldn’t save the money necessary to eliminate deficits and unfunded liabilities.  It’s a lot easier to pretend the problem doesn’t exist or can be solved without any personal pain at all … which is why redistributionism gets so much popularity in the first place, and why Democrats want to confiscate more capital rather than solving what is clearly a spending problem.

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

Even Erskine Bowles on the Sunday shows made the comment “it’s about spending at this point”.

The GOP should clearly not flinch and just shut down the government, it may be the only way to get their attention.

Tater Salad on January 7, 2013 at 12:04 PM

Sweet, tax everyone now instead of just the “rich”.

You wanted this, Barky voters, and you deserve it good and hard.

Bishop on January 7, 2013 at 12:07 PM

When did the word “taxes” become “revenue”.

Paul-Cincy on January 7, 2013 at 12:08 PM

Show me the cuts. Then maybe – maybe – we’ll talk about raising taxes again.

UltimateBob on January 7, 2013 at 12:08 PM

No surprise, since most of us understood that the thirst for “more revenue” was akin to Tim Allen’s “more power” in his Home Improvement series

Wow, talk about just plain not getting it Ed, their thirst for “More Revenue” isn’t akin to Tim Allen’s “more power” it’s akin to a heroin addict’s need for another fix. Allen’s “more power” fixation was never a fatal attraction, just a humorous obsession.

Jihad in America: The Grand Deception.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 12:09 PM

Cut the EPA the same week we cut federal EBT funding. That’s probably half of the $1 trillion right there.

DanMan on January 7, 2013 at 12:09 PM

When did the Feral Government start doing 10 year budget proposals for frameworks of outlines instead of doing actual annual budgets?

forest on January 7, 2013 at 12:10 PM

…paid for it with $12 billion in revenues and $12 billion in spending cuts…

Sure it did. As long as you believe that increasing taxes doesn’t dampen economic growth and that reductions in the rate of growth actually constitute spending cuts. I mean, yeah, then we’re good.

Shump on January 7, 2013 at 12:10 PM

“The White House also supports a 1:1 ratio of spending cuts to tax increases”

The big trouble with this formula is that you will get to a 100% tax rate before you get much under 1 trillion a year in deficits. And of course, you can only tax at 100% for one year because there won’t be anything left to tax the year after that.

tommyboy on January 7, 2013 at 12:10 PM

Shut down the government…save money…

PatriotRider on January 7, 2013 at 12:10 PM

Show me Implement the cuts. Then maybe – maybe – we’ll talk about raising taxes again.

DanMan on January 7, 2013 at 12:10 PM

It is time, for the sake of our nation, for the GOP to respectfully tell Obama & the Democrats to ‘F* OFF‘ & the ONLY way they will get any debt ceiling increase ib by conceding $1 TRILLION in SPENDING CUTS – MINIMUM, a BUDGET PASSED IMMEDIATELY, & NO new taxes.

If Obama/Liberals say ‘NO’, Republicans should collectively get up, walk out, tell the Democrats to get ready for a Govt Shut-Down, & to call them (the GOP) when THEY (Liberals/Obama) want to get serious!!

Seeing how the Republicans have been unable to demonstrate any testicular fortitude in the past, I have very little confidence is seeing anything happening except, the GOP rolling over like Obama’s b!-ah-tches, Obama getting the elimination of the debt ceiling altogether, & America/Americans – especially to include the Middle Class – getting BENT OVER, being hit with AT LEAST a $1 trillion TAX INCREASE!

(Can someone please tell me where Obama’s/Liberals’ deep affection for Greece/France & their desire to become like them comes from?!)

easyt65 on January 7, 2013 at 12:10 PM

When did the word “taxes” become “revenue”.

Paul-Cincy on January 7, 2013 at 12:08 PM

The two are definitely not equivalent.

History has shown that when taxes are increased, revenues actually decrease because of the resulting slowdown of economic activity.

Just another example of the Orwellian newsspeak of the left.

UltimateBob on January 7, 2013 at 12:11 PM

When did the word “taxes” become “revenue”.

Paul-Cincy on January 7, 2013 at 12:08 PM

When “spending” became “investments.”

Nick_Angel on January 7, 2013 at 12:13 PM

If they sweeten the pot by scrapping the income tax and replacing with a fair-tax, I’d support increasing revenue to balance the budget.

House GOP seeks to abolish IRS, replace income tax with consumption tax

FloatingRock on January 7, 2013 at 12:13 PM

Talk about spending cuts all you want, they never occur.

tommer74 on January 7, 2013 at 12:13 PM

Elections have consequences….Reap what you shall sow….

sandee on January 7, 2013 at 12:13 PM

Yesh, and we never got Spaceballs 2: The Search For More Money either. Democrats need to get used to dissappointment.

BigGator5 on January 7, 2013 at 12:14 PM

Well the Twitchy threads will be hilarious.

gophergirl on January 7, 2013 at 12:16 PM

SPENDING cuts first with minimum 4:1 spending cuts… No more okeydokes like what happened to Reagan…

Khun Joe on January 7, 2013 at 12:16 PM

(Can someone please tell me where Obama’s/Liberals’ deep affection for Greece/France & their desire to become like them comes from?!)

easyt65 on January 7, 2013 at 12:10 PM

I’m guessing you haven’t figured out that Obama is a Marxist…

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 12:16 PM

The strength of the GOP position won’t matter if they don’t get out in front of this issue and start making the negotiations very, very public. Otherwise the Democrats will go to their playbook, stall on any concrete proposals or votes until the last possible second, blame Republicans for the lack of action, make a backroom deal where the Republicans get skunked, and rush a 500-page bill through both houses in less than a day before anybody gets a chance to read it, much less analyze it or gather public opinion on it.

Lucy and the football once again, and the GOP falls for it every time.

Socratease on January 7, 2013 at 12:19 PM

When did the Feral Government start doing 10 year budget proposals for frameworks of outlines instead of doing actual annual budgets?

forest on January 7, 2013 at 12:10 PM

When some bright guy figured out he could say “X hundred billion dollars” in spending cuts, conveniently omit the “over ten years”, and make it sound like it could potentially solve the problem. Of course, it would actually take over a trillion per year to solve the problem, but that’s another issue.

Fenris on January 7, 2013 at 12:20 PM

If they sweeten the pot by scrapping the income tax and replacing with a fair-tax, I’d support increasing revenue to balance the budget.

House GOP seeks to abolish IRS, replace income tax with consumption tax

FloatingRock on January 7, 2013 at 12:13 PM

OMG. No kidding? Those useless oafs actually proposed that?

If the GOP had the balls of a hamster, I’d be celebrating IRL like you wouldn’t believe. As it is I’m going to have to take this with a truckload of salt. D@mn it!!!

MelonCollie on January 7, 2013 at 12:20 PM

Spending cuts, reduced government, those are unicorns…they are a fantasy that does not exist.

Spending cuts is “reduced spending” which is a future budget increase that has been reduced…so a 14% increase in next year spending, is “cut” to 10%, that’s a 4% reduction in spending. Or, a government program is “cut”, but actually the money is shifted to another program that is created to incorporate the eliminated program, with a new or existing one and that budget is increased, by not only the eliminated program, but additional money to make the transition.

That is why “spending” cuts are so difficult to monitor, even when passed, they don’t exist, they just have to spend time and money shifting departments and committees around.

right2bright on January 7, 2013 at 12:21 PM

Hmmm… Wonder where the democrats plan to get the next trillion? All those people who were so happy to stick it to the filthy rich are going to be in for a shock, I think.

Night Owl on January 7, 2013 at 12:25 PM

Democrats want another trillion in revenue in next cliff deal

The Weeping Boner will drive a hard bargain and hold the Dems down to $993 billion in new taxes. In return, the Weeper will manage to squeeze $73 million in future spending growth reductions for fiscal 2185. Then the Weeper will cry like a baby and crow about what a great negotiator he is.

This nation has been so screwed it isn’t even funny. It’s just fatal.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on January 7, 2013 at 12:26 PM

The ‘Great Debt Commission’ suggests a pleathora of actions & cuts to make….Obama ignores them…

The Democrats have not passed a budget, which is required BY LAW annually…..

Obama has set deficit-spending records for ‘most amount in 1 month’, ‘most amount in a year’, and ‘total deficit-spending amount’…and then broke his own records…

His Secretary of the Treasury was a TAX CHEAT who was also implicated in a Currency Manipulation scheme perpetrated years ago…

His 1st bill signed was a nearly $1 TRILLION ‘stimulus’ bill that contained nearly 9,000 pieces of pork…

Despite on the verge of getting ANOTHER credit-rating down grade & JUST passing a TAX bill that ADDS $3.8 trillion to the national debt, INCREASES deficit-spending, & ‘concedes’ $15 BILLION in spending cuts OVER THE NEXT 10 YEARS, Senate Democrats send a ‘Hurricane Sandy Bill to the House that contains so much pork that the cost of the pork out-weighs the money going to Sandy Victims by almost a 2:1 ratio….

Despite promising ‘Jobs’ were his top priority he pushed unwanted Obamacare through into law, taking $500 BILLION from Medicare just to get the cost down to a $-TRILLION, jacking up health care costs & costing Americans the health coverage they already had AND many their jobs…

Despite promising NOT to raise taxes on the Middle class, he does, compiles Obamacare hidden taxes (largest tax increase in US history) – that DOES tax the Middle Class…

Then promises to raise $1.6 trillion in new revenue over 10 years to lower the debt (while adding $1.7 TRILLION in NEW DEBT…EVERY YEAR — only to turn out to be a bill that adds #3.8 TRILLION in new debt, INCREASES deficit-spending, & raises taxes on 77% of all Americans – to include the Middle Class….

& NOW declares they would like the ELIMINATION of the Debt Ceiling, an intent to increase spending EEN MORE, NO – ZERO – spending cuts whatsoever, & now $1 TRILLION IN NEW TAX INCREASES….

WH@T THE H#LL?! At what point do the American people – even the MOR0NS who voted him back in office – REALIZE THE MAN IS EITHER INSANE OR DETERMINED TO BRING DOWN THE NATION? WHEN DO THEY STAND UP & INSTEAD OF PLACATING HIM OR REBUFFING HIM LEAD HIM OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE EITHER IN HANDCUFFS OR A STRAIGHT JACKET?

easyt65 on January 7, 2013 at 12:27 PM

(Can someone please tell me where Obama’s/Liberals’ deep affection for Greece/France & their desire to become like them comes from?!)

easyt65 on January 7, 2013 at 12:10 PM
I’m guessing you haven’t figured out that Obama is a Marxist…

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 12:16 PM

I was just hoping someone could come up with an answer that was other than the most obvious…to everyone except the morons who voted him back in office….

easyt65 on January 7, 2013 at 12:29 PM

Anytime this is brought up by a Dem or one of their allies in the press the GOP should just laugh at them; nothing more needs to be said, just laugh.

Tater Salad on January 7, 2013 at 12:31 PM

How about the start of a new campaign to counteract all this stupidity?

We could call it “JUST SAY NO…….TO DEMOCRATS!”

pilamaye on January 7, 2013 at 12:32 PM

Letting the payroll tax cut expire hurt me personally (to the tune of $1K a year) but I am glad that it happened, because even the 47% have to pay that, even out of their welfare checks.

I am all for raising taxes to the point that they can fund nearly $4 TRILLION a year in spending (which is what we’ve spent every year under our messianic half-black President).

Why?

Because it’s IMPOSSIBLE. The US Economy is barely worth that a year, and to tax it at rates approaching (and exceeding) 100% would cause complete collapse and rebellion LONG before any of it would ever be collected. Nothing better proves the problem is SPENDING than the utter IMPOSSIBILITY of raising enough revenue by any means to fund it.

Jar-Jar Jugears agenda has nothing to do with balancing the budget. It has everything to do with bankrupting everyone not already part of the liberal establishment and rendering dependent the last hardy souls who still “make it on their own”.

Obama WANTS everyone on food stamps and government checks. He wants EVERYONE to depend on his “graciousness” for our very survival. This is why everyone with an individualist mindset is a threat to the State (see how they view preppers as terrorists). He wants to make every election for everyone about “vote for the democrat or my kids will starve” because that is the democrat’s path to perpetual power.

That is until the whole thing collapses. Which is closer than most believe (including the President). The private sector can only take so much burden and it’s at the breaking point now.

Every dollar government spends equals government power. If you, as I do, believe in smaller government that is less powerful, then slashing the amount of money it has to spend is the ONLY way you will ever see it grow less powerful and smaller.

wildcat72 on January 7, 2013 at 12:32 PM

If the GOP had the balls of a hamster, I’d be celebrating IRL like you wouldn’t believe. As it is I’m going to have to take this with a truckload of salt. D@mn it!!!

MelonCollie on January 7, 2013 at 12:20 PM

And what we will end up with is higher income taxes AND a consumption (VAT) Tax. It’s an idea that is stupidity cubed.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 12:32 PM

Just to get the Left’s attention, some of the newer Congressmen or Senators need to start calling Obama a “liar” and a “crook”.

It will make their heads explode.

Tater Salad on January 7, 2013 at 12:34 PM

The Harlots on the Dole are the People.

May all the fools go to Hades.

Schadenfreude on January 7, 2013 at 12:35 PM

Hmmm… Wonder where the democrats plan to get the next trillion? All those people who were so happy to stick it to the filthy rich are going to be in for a shock, I think.

Night Owl on January 7, 2013 at 12:25 PM

It’s already started with the hit paychecks took with the expiration of the payroll tax “holiday.” Not that many Obama supporters get paychecks. But as the Obamacare taxes, new tax rates, and additional “revenue makers” kick in people are going to find just how less far their money goes what with all the free stuff for the parasites of society. My prediction is a backlash by 2014 if the GOP effectively messages this loss of personal wealth and opportunity by constantly pointing out the moochers and reminding the public that they have to pay more to the government because some slut didn’t want to by her own birthcontrol, some moron thinks that an Obamaphone is a right, or some rat-eared Kenyan socialist thinks that government can do a better job than the private sector in managing healthcare.

Happy Nomad on January 7, 2013 at 12:35 PM

“Democrats want…”

I want Democrats to GFT.

Do I get what I want for a change?

Resist We Much on January 7, 2013 at 12:35 PM

Just to get the Left’s attention, some of the newer Congressmen or Senators need to start calling Obama a “liar” and a “crook”.

It will make their heads explode.

Tater Salad on January 7, 2013 at 12:34 PM

Too mild.

Mr. Arrogant on January 7, 2013 at 12:36 PM

The emerging consensus, however, is that the next installment of deficit reduction should reach $2 trillion and about half of it should come from higher taxes.

Just so everyone understands … this $2T is over the next 10 years.

$200B spending reductions and/or tax increases per year still means the $16T debt becomes $26T, or more, by 2022.

Nothing, absolutely nothing, in this conversation saves the country from default and self-destruction.

Carnac on January 7, 2013 at 12:36 PM

O.K., I just perused Drudge….can someone verify if the
“thing” standing behind Pelosi is a Woman??

ToddPA on January 7, 2013 at 12:36 PM

Obama and the Democrats are setting the stage for a bitter, ugly fight in about 10 years. In about that time, the country will meet a day of reckoning when there won’t be enough money or borrowing capacity to keep paying for entitlements and welfare.

And when that day comes, you’ll have two groups pitted against each other. The first is the retired, 80-85% white, Baby Boom generation taking Social Security & Medicare. The second is the younger, less wealthy, and 45% minority/immigrant generations taking welfare and other benefits. The latter folks will not be willing to give up their Obama phones and student loan programs to support old white people in their retirement.

What angers me here is that the Republicans are enabling this self-destructive strategy through their perpetual can-kicking. Gingrich is right: shut the government down and force some austerity now while there is still time to save the country.

Outlander on January 7, 2013 at 12:36 PM

The first results of their victory got felt by American workers across the board in their paychecks

Ed, this point needs to be clarified lest the Republicans take it in the chin for Obysmal’s cynical ploy re the payroll tax. Obysmal offered the sweetener to cut the employee’s portion of the payroll tax over a year ago in order to play the shell game that he was “giving” wage earners a tax cut. The cut was temporary. The reinstitution of the employee’s portion was built into the scam he played on taxpayers not paying attention. The Republicans did not cause the increase.

onlineanalyst on January 7, 2013 at 12:36 PM

Sweet, tax everyone now instead of just the “rich”.

You wanted this, Barky voters, and you deserve it good and hard.

Bishop on January 7, 2013 at 12:07 PM

The biggest Liar in the world fooled the middle class. He hates you, idiots.

Schadenfreude on January 7, 2013 at 12:37 PM

Anytime this is brought up by a Dem or one of their allies in the press the GOP should just laugh at them; nothing more needs to be said, just laugh.

Tater Salad on January 7, 2013 at 12:31 PM

The problem is that the RINOS take everything silly that democrats want as serious. Of course, RINO=democrat, they don’t want cuts to spending (which really means cuts to their own power) any more than Barry Hussein Soetoro does.

The democrats are highly likely to get their huge tax increase, more so than we wish it. As we saw in the “cliff” deal, Weepy Boner will take a dive, give Obama what he wants, then cry about the heat conservatives will give him, as though we are the enemy, not Obama.

Today’s Republican establishment fails because it sees conservatives as the enemy, not democrats or Obama.

wildcat72 on January 7, 2013 at 12:37 PM

Cut the EPA and DOT = instant economic growth. Both are bloated nightmares.

MechanicalBill on January 7, 2013 at 12:39 PM

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 12:32 PM

Before a fair tax is instituted they must float a new constitutional amendment to repeal the 16th. The day that amendment is approved by the 37th state the consumption tax goes into effect. Otherwise I am with you that we will end up with both.

chemman on January 7, 2013 at 12:39 PM

Happy Nomad on January 7, 2013 at 12:35 PM

You forgot unemployment is an economic stimulus, we can balance the budget by making the rich pay “just a little bit more”, and “So, if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can. It’s just that it’ll bankrupt them” (oh wait, he’s making that one come true).

Fenris on January 7, 2013 at 12:41 PM

Are they trying to outdo Dr. Evil? The poor sod didn’t even know what “trillion” is.

Archivarix on January 7, 2013 at 12:41 PM

The way to crush the bourgeoisie is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation. — Vladimir Lenin

Carnac on January 7, 2013 at 12:41 PM

O.K., I just perused Drudge….can someone verify if the
“thing” standing behind Pelosi is a Woman??

ToddPA on January 7, 2013 at 12:36 PM

That “thing” is Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro, who is married to Clinton pollster, Stanley Greenberg. Isn’t her “get-up” in this pic cute? That’s her in the back on the left.

Resist We Much on January 7, 2013 at 12:42 PM

Happy Nomad on January 7, 2013 at 12:35 PM

I wish I could believe that but the 1936, 1940 and 2012 elections tend to make me believe otherwise.

chemman on January 7, 2013 at 12:42 PM

Oh cmon, trillions are so 2009. Demand a quadrillion!!11!

Valkyriepundit on January 7, 2013 at 12:42 PM

Just to get the Left’s attention, some of the newer Congressmen or Senators need to start calling Obama a “liar” and a “crook”.

It will make their heads explode.

Tater Salad on January 7, 2013 at 12:34 PM

Oh! I think the entire GOP and the rest of us should be calling the rat-eared wonder a liar and crook. Same names should be applied to the rest of his filthy party as well. I want John Boehner to get up on the floor of the House, look over at Pelosi, and say something along the lines of Nancy, you ignorant slut. I want the opening question to Hillary Clinton about Benghazi to ask her why she lied her ass off about the circumstances and why she’s been faking medical problems to avoid having to testify. I want Congress to cut off the White House travel budget so that the rat-eared wonder, Mooch, and the spoiled brats don’t spend millions on worthless vacations at a time when ordinary Americans are hurting economically in the Obama depression. I even want a journalist to stand up at a press conference and ask the rat-eared wonder why he doesn’t do something about the 22% unemployment rate among young black males instead of pretending that their only problem is their ability to get a 12-round magazine.

In short, I’m not interested in having a civil four years of this crap. If we are going down the drain, we do not have to go quietly or politely.

Happy Nomad on January 7, 2013 at 12:43 PM

The White House also supports a 1:1 ratio of spending cuts to tax increases as Congress seeks to finish the fiscal work left unresolved by the recently completed 112th Congress.

How ’bout a ‘balanced’ ratio of $41 in cuts for every $1 in taxes? Wait, what’s that you say? Such a ratio isn’t “balanced” at all? Hmm, go figure – seemed to work quite recently from the libs’ perspective, didn’t it?

Midas on January 7, 2013 at 12:43 PM

The biggest Liar in the world fooled the middle class. He hates you, idiots.
Schadenfreude on January 7, 2013 at 12:37 PM

No, the middle class is safe. Obama is just going after those greedy rich making $50K or more a year who aren’t paying their fair share.

tommyboy on January 7, 2013 at 12:44 PM

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 12:32 PM

Before a fair tax is instituted they must float a new constitutional amendment to repeal the 16th. The day that amendment is approved by the 37th state the consumption tax goes into effect. Otherwise I am with you that we will end up with both.

chemman on January 7, 2013 at 12:39 PM

I agree. What we need to do is get the ratification started on an amendment that both repeals the 16th and replaces it with a flat income tax or flat consumption tax with the additional requirement that the budget be balanced every year except in times of DECLARED (Constitutional) war.

Furthermore, I’d include a clause that reduces salaries of Congress, the President, the Supreme Court and every other politically appointed Federal employee to ZERO during times of deficit, including ZERO contributions to their retirements.

Nothing else will ever shrink government because to tax the population to the rate of current spending cannot happen without rebellion.

wildcat72 on January 7, 2013 at 12:44 PM

“The White House also supports a 1:1 ratio of spending cuts to tax increases”

Hopefully the Republicans won’t start there. They should also begin negotiations with some absurd ratio, like 10:1. Work their way down to 5 or 4 to 1. Unless, the next round will be the new hill not to die on. Yeah… that’ll probably be it. Hill No.32.

Dongemaharu on January 7, 2013 at 12:49 PM

Today’s Republican establishment fails because it sees conservatives as the enemy, not democrats or Obama.

wildcat72 on January 7, 2013 at 12:37 PM

100% agree. The reason why Republicans can’t gain any traction in these budget negotiations is that their leadership has no ideas or principles. In lieu of ideas or principles, they rely solely on meekly parroting “no new taxes” slogans and think that’s an economic policy. When they inevitably prove unable to overcome Obama’s class warfare rhetoric with that weak tea, these so-called leaders abandon their “principles” and whine about the Tea Party monsters standing in the way of their “deal.”

Seems to me someone on the Republican side better come up with an entitlement plan and a long term debt reduction plan and start building public support for it. That’s the only way to counter Obama. As Margaret Thatcher said, “first, win the argument, then you win the election.”

Outlander on January 7, 2013 at 12:50 PM

That “thing” is Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro, who is married to Clinton pollster, Stanley Greenberg. Isn’t her “get-up” in this pic cute? That’s her in the back on the left.

Resist We Much on January 7, 2013 at 12:42 PM

Merciful Teapot!! That “woman” is married??

I figured she lived with 30 cats…

I guess there’s hope for everyone…..

ToddPA on January 7, 2013 at 12:50 PM

chemman on January 7, 2013 at 12:39 PM

I agree. What we need to do is get the ratification started on an amendment that both repeals the 16th and replaces it with a flat income tax or flat consumption tax with the additional requirement that the budget be balanced every year except in times of DECLARED (Constitutional) war.

Furthermore, I’d include a clause that reduces salaries of Congress, the President, the Supreme Court and every other politically appointed Federal employee to ZERO during times of deficit, including ZERO contributions to their retirements.

Nothing else will ever shrink government because to tax the population to the rate of current spending cannot happen without rebellion.

wildcat72 on January 7, 2013 at 12:44 PM

No, we need to avoid a “Fair” or consumption tax at all cost because no matter what we do, the Democrats will make sure that we end up with both a income tax and a consumption tax if a “Fair” or consumption tax is even allowed to be discussed. Yes they really are that corrupt and evil.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 12:51 PM

We the unwilling, led by the unknowing have been doing the difficult with so little for so long that we are now ready to tackle the impossible with nothing. –

Liberals are happy as a dead pig in the sunshine and the Sun don’t shine on the same dog’s tail all the time!

Liberals ain’t got the sense God promised a billy goat on a good day!

Scrumpy on January 7, 2013 at 12:53 PM

Liberals ain’t got the sense God promised a billy goat on a good day!

Scrumpy on January 7, 2013 at 12:53 PM

Aint that the truth…

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 12:54 PM

Merciful Teapot!! That “woman” is married??

I figured she lived with 30 cats…

I guess there’s hope for everyone…..

ToddPA on January 7, 2013 at 12:50 PM

Only if you consider James Carville’s partner “hope.”

Resist We Much on January 7, 2013 at 12:55 PM

Time to “just say no.”

Dear Democrats: here’s the deal: cut spending or we don’t raise the debt limit. Try an end run around the debt limit and we shut down the government altogether (no budget, no continuing resolution).

For every dollar increase in the debt limit, you must provide a dollar of spending cuts from the current budget. When you’ve done that, we’ll talk. Until you’ve done that, have a nice day.

Greg Q on January 7, 2013 at 12:56 PM

It always astonishes me at how unproductive Washington DC is – would drive me crazy to live there and try to get anything accomplished.

WTF is the big deal about raising the retirement age for SS and Medicare by one or two months each year for the next 10-15 years?

Would this not solve 50% of the entitlement spending problem?

What ignorant and lazy people.

matthew8787 on January 7, 2013 at 12:56 PM

ToddPA on January 7, 2013 at 12:50 PM

Only if you consider James Carville’s partner “hope.”

Resist We Much on January 7, 2013 at 12:55 PM

Oh come on RWM, that’s not fair, James Carville is married to Mary Matalin, who is, despite being married to Jame a good solid conservative.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 12:59 PM

We will soon be entering a time of Taxflation…

Taxflation: a situation where every dollar earned is taxed at a higher level than the dollar earned before it. Caused by tax and spend politicians at all levels of government raising taxes to cover ever increasing BIG.GOV appetite for power and control.

Then comes…

Hyper-Taxflation: the point at which simple Taxflation has increased so far that every dollar is taxed at a rate of more than 100%. It then requires that part of the next dollar which is yet to be earned is already owed to pay the taxes due on the previously earned dollar. This rapidly increases to a situation where-in 100% of the next dollar is owed in past-due taxes… and a geometric progression of increasingly higher and higher owed and due taxes… which can never be paid down.

Also see Hyper-Borrowing in which the amount borrowed each and every day is more than the daily payment due and this continues until an infinite amount would need to be borrowed just to cover the vig.

RalphyBoy on January 7, 2013 at 1:02 PM

Nothing else will ever shrink government because to tax the population to the rate of current spending cannot happen without rebellion.
wildcat72 on January 7, 2013 at 12:44

Which is why we are desined to go over the cliff. The political class does not have the will to reduce the current rate of spending. Spending will continue to rise up until the day the entire bottom falls out. Bank on it.

tommyboy on January 7, 2013 at 1:03 PM

Hopefully the Republicans won’t start there. They should also begin negotiations with some absurd ratio, like 10:1. Work their way down to 5 or 4 to 1. Unless, the next round will be the new hill not to die on. Yeah… that’ll probably be it. Hill No.32.

Dongemaharu on January 7, 2013 at 12:49 PM

What’s absurd about 10:1? Stick some actual numbers on it, and it’s probably not nearly enough cuts, and there shouldn’t be any tax raises at all.

Oh you meant, absurd that it might actually happen. I’m with you there.

Fenris on January 7, 2013 at 1:03 PM

Kiss the Defense Department and your paycheck goodbye. That’s their idea of cuts and revenue.

Philly on January 7, 2013 at 1:04 PM

why just a trillion? why have the democrats gone center right? the rich can easily afford to cough up another three trillion to build the country that the plurality voted for in 2012.

give Obama the means to get perfect us or die you scrooging wing nuts!

tom daschle concerned on January 7, 2013 at 1:05 PM

DECLARED (Constitutional) war.

wildcat72 on January 7, 2013 at 12:44 PM

There is no constitutional requirement that Congress issue a “Declaration of War.” An authorisation to use military force is constitutionally proper. See the minutes of the Constitutional Convention from 17 August 1789.

If a Declaration of War was required, then Congress would or should have impeached Thomas Jefferson (1st Barbary War), James Madison, who wrote the COTUS (2nd Barbary War), every president from Zachary Taylor to Grover Cleveland (The Apache Wars, whose shortest respite was never more than 90 days), and William McKinley and Theodore Roosevelt (Philippine-American War). And, those just get us to the turn of the 20th century. Ron Paul is wrong and so is the Left, who screamed that Bush waged “illegal wars.” I was against the Iraq War and the Afghan ground war, but neither was illegal. The AUMFs were constitutionally sufficient. Don’t listen to them.

Resist We Much on January 7, 2013 at 1:05 PM

Oh come on RWM, that’s not fair, James Carville is married to Mary Matalin, who is, despite being married to Jame a good solid conservative.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 12:59 PM

Yeah, but I don’t consider Stanley Greenberg to be “hope.”

Resist We Much on January 7, 2013 at 1:06 PM

The White House also supports a 1:1 ratio of spending cuts to tax increases as Congress seeks to finish the fiscal work left unresolved by the recently completed 112th Congress.

So, nothing changes.

Tenwheeler on January 7, 2013 at 1:08 PM

O.K., I just perused Drudge….can someone verify if the
“thing” standing behind Pelosi is a Woman??

ToddPA on January 7, 2013 at 12:36 PM

Keith Richards

Tenwheeler on January 7, 2013 at 1:09 PM

When did the Feral Government start doing 10 year budget proposals for frameworks of outlines instead of doing actual annual budgets?

[forest on January 7, 2013 at 12:10 PM]

Well, there were a lot of steps and quite a bit of time in between those two points, but each step was taken when a majority of our leaders realized it was too clear to the majority of the public that we couldn’t or shouldn’t support increased spending.

They are what can be called loopholes to good government, first as a way of avoiding, and then as a way of evading the penalties of forced retirement and the loss of power and wealth.

Dusty on January 7, 2013 at 1:13 PM

O.K., I just perused Drudge….can someone verify if the
“thing” standing behind Pelosi is a Woman??

ToddPA on January 7, 2013 at 12:36 PM

Keith Richards

Tenwheeler on January 7, 2013 at 1:09 PM

THREAD WINNER!

ToddPA on January 7, 2013 at 1:18 PM

Keith Richards

Tenwheeler on January 7, 2013 at 1:09 PM

Spocks grandmother?

darwin on January 7, 2013 at 1:20 PM

Or two. Or three. Or four. Or …

-
Or two. Or four. Or eight. Or…
FI

RalphyBoy on January 7, 2013 at 1:21 PM

When do we start tarring and feathering the Marxicrats?

rayra on January 7, 2013 at 1:24 PM

I advocate a massive “revenue enhancement”. A forced tithing of all income earned in blue states. Charitable studies have shown (again and again) that blue states contribute a miniscule amount to charities, while they adore the bloated public sector. Let our blue state skinflints, so many feeding off the public trough, contribute their fair share.

wraithby on January 7, 2013 at 1:25 PM

[Resist We Much on January 7, 2013 at 1:05 PM]

I agree with your observation about the problem inherent in the waiver that would/should be included in a BBA, but I also agree in essence with wildcat72 on the subject of having a BBA. Do you?

It seems to me, wildcat72, that your concern for the subject of a BBA isn’t so much on forcing the government to only declare wars in a manner which you see fit, but that the waiver isn’t used deceptively and maliciously to avoid the budgeting/spending/taxing balancing subject which the BBA would otherwise require. Is that correct?

If so for both, can we find agreement by revising the waiver to set forth that any waiver due to a finding of war would still require a balanced budget, each year, but would allow the passage of a supplemental budget with the authorization for spending only by the Department of Defense for the prosecution of the war and can only be disbursed by the Department of Defense? What say you?

Dusty on January 7, 2013 at 1:39 PM

These liberal cretins just never learn. The Republicans must hold out for a government shutdown and stop listening to the screwy left.

rplat on January 7, 2013 at 1:56 PM

We need to raise taxes on imaginary things like:
- imported natural gas
- wind generated electrical power (I seem to have many taxes on my nuclear generated power)
- high end bicycle sales
- electric cars
and use the greenies most extreme forecasts to calculate projected taxes.

Meanwhile cutting spending on salaries like all bankrupt companies do 40% for those over $150k in the federal govt, including the military.

KenInIL on January 7, 2013 at 2:43 PM

These liberal cretins just never learn. The Republicans must hold out for a government shutdown and stop listening to the screwy left.

rplat on January 7, 2013 at 1:56 PM

At this point that would be their mouths writing checks their bodies couldn’t cash. They have all the leverage of a first-grader on a teeter-totter with a 300-lb. football player.

MelonCollie on January 7, 2013 at 2:52 PM

Damn if I didn’t call it – M0AR!!!!1!!1!1EleVentY!@!~@

For those of you following the math at home, the $1,615 billion in taxes versus extending 2012 tax policy and patching the AMT the ‘Rats want in total ($615 billion in Le Petite Compromise, $1,000 billion in the next one) is GREATER than Obama’s top demand of $1,600 billion.

Steve Eggleston on January 7, 2013 at 5:27 PM

Cut the EPA and DOT = instant economic growth. Both are bloated nightmares.

MechanicalBill on January 7, 2013 at 12:39 PM

While we’re at it, how about DoE, the other DoE, HHS…

affenhauer on January 7, 2013 at 5:28 PM