The spin coming out of the White House is that President Obama cut short his annual Hawaii vacation to head back to Washington to help nudge Congress towards a deal that would prevent the nation from heading over the fiscal cliff. If so, this act of sacrifice will allow the president to show his leadership skills and craft a compromise tax and spending bill that will pass both houses of Congress. But with only a few days left before a massive across-the-board tax increase is imposed on the American people while devastating cuts in defense are put into effect, it’s much more likely that the president’s gesture is just for show.
If the president really wanted to avoid the fiscal cliff, he might have spent the weeks before his family headed to Oahu for Christmas making a good faith effort to make a deal with Congressional Republicans rather than digging in his heels on his own plan to raise taxes while refusing to substantially address the real issue at the heart of the fiscal crisis: entitlement spending. Most Republicans rightly suspect that he’s quite content to see the deadline expire. So why come home?
The answer is simple. The optics of more days of presidential golf while the country heads closer to an economic disaster would damage Obama’s image and make it clear that he views the impact of the fiscal cliff as being more to his liking than a reasonable compromise.
Throughout the negotiations over the budget, the president has always acted as if a continuation of the standoff served his interests. After all, if the deadline does expire without a deal he’ll get a good deal of what he’s wanted all along: big tax increases to give the government more money to spend and large cuts in defense spending without forcing the government to think seriously about how to reform entitlements. And if the polls are right, the Republicans will be blamed for the whole mess.
Last week’s debacle for House Speaker John Boehner in which a substantial number of House Republicans refused to back his Plan B compromise bill which would have only raised taxes on millionaires reinforced the president’s confidence that he can only win by prolonging the impasse. And by showing up in DC this week he can preserve the pretense that he wants a solution even while continuing to do nothing to advance one.
But these careful calculations may not turn out to be as well considered as the president thinks.
If the Democrat-controlled Senate fails to pass a budget proposal this week — something it has failed to do for the last three years — then it will be as much their fault as the House Republicans that a deal wasn’t made before we all go over the fiscal cliff. That means it is up to the leader of their party to ensure that some kind of bill that can pass both houses of Congress gets to his desk in the next few days. Should, as seems increasingly likely, that not happen, the consequences would be incalculable for Obama, his party and the Congress.
The assumption that only Republicans will bear the burden of why there was no deal only holds true if the president and the Democrats send a bill to the House of Representatives before next week’s deadline. Any bill that stops the tax increases and sequestration cuts is likely to get some Republican votes even if it is a short-term solution on the president’s terms. If that doesn’t happen, the economic downturn that will likely follow is going to hurt Obama far more than a Republican party that is already out of power. If so, the president may have reason to regret that his curtailed vacation wasn’t more a matter of a real effort to avoid the cliff than playacting for the media.
Obama does not want "big tax increases to give the government more money to spend…" Obama wants tax cuts for the 98%, and to borrow the shortfall. n nIf we go over the Cliff, Obama gets defense cuts, entitlement immunity, and the opportunity to give tax relief to the 98%. A perfect political hat trick presented to Obama courtesy of the Stupid Party.
I don't see how people are suddenly going to be blaming the Senate, which hasn't passed a budget in years and no one seems to care. Boehner's debacle has sucked all the press, and it's very clear that this will be spun as being the fault of extremists within the Republican House. It's not like a weak economy has hurt Obama in the past, either, now instead of blaming Bush, he can blame the House.
You don't even have to spin it, blue. The fact is that Boehner brought the House HIS compromise plan, which returns millionaires to pre-Bush tax rates, and the House wouldn't budge. The GOPers have pledged their loyalty to Grover Norquist; the rest of the country can go to hell.
The Senate has passed a tax cut for families earning under $250,000, about 98% of tax filers. Let the House simply pass it.
I don't think a majority of American citizens even understand what the hell the Senate and/or House DO anymore, let alone being able to assign blame to them. Remember, the Democrat-controlled Congress passed a health care "reform" bill in 2009 that a majority of voters STILL dislike (and wasted time on it instead of trying to help the economy to boot) and despite this, the Democrats retained control of the Senate in 2010 and the Presidency (as well as strengthening their hold on the Senate) in 2012. r nr nThe GOP is in an unenviable position: if the Democrats propose something destructive and the House rejects it, they will be "obstructionist" and responsible for the ensuing debacle. If they ratify it, they will share (more likely receive ALL) the blame for the mess that ensues. r nr nPerhaps the only course left for the GOP is to just go out of business and let the Democrats run the country into oblivion. Coincidentally, that apparently is what they seem intent on doing.
Why? Please tell me why? Why do so many intelligent responsible people do things that are not rational, contrary to clear evidence, and that ignore history? n nWhy do people fight so hard to increase taxes, when we all know from clear historical evidence, that increasing taxes decreases government revenue? Why did New York put a 100% tax on welfare recipients who earned extra income, only to later eliminate this nonsense? n nWhy to we fight so hard for gun-free zones and such, when evidence is clear that most gun killings are in gun-free zones? n nWhy do people on television speak in ways preventing clear thinking and rational analysis? If someone does not agree with an opinion, he or she will get very emotional, sometimes cutting off another speaker. We all know that rational thinking requires calm discussion. Why do we tolerate emotional rationality? Why? n nWhy do so many people, here and abroad, struggle to get more government control of businesses, when we all know, from logic and evidence, that more government control means poor business results and suffering to society? Why? n nWhy do we emphasize the will of the majority when America is not a democracy? In our country the majority cannot do as they wish if this interferes with minority rights. We are a republic. Why does the majority clamor for higher taxes when this interferes with the rights of the minority to keep their private money? Taxes that are not fair, such as taxes on money that has already been taxed, is a violation of minority rights. Why do we Americans accept this? n nWhy are Americans not aware of dangers to our country? In the early 19th century, people were angry at slave owners who sold men to one group, and the wives to other groups, breaking up families. People became very, very angry at this evil. The result was the horrible Civil War and terrible Reconstruction. Today, people are very angry at the government spending money it does not have. People are very, very angry at this evil, even though they voted for representatives who support this evil. Why are we not afraid of another outburst as happened in the 19th century? n nDon't we understand what type of people we Americans are, who will try to live with evil until they realize they must fight the evil? 19th century Americans failed to learn from the experience of the Revolutionary War, that we cannot tolerate evil. This failure lead to the Civil War, with the result of millions dead and injured, and widespread poverty. This is how we Americans are. n nWhy cannot we 21st century Americans learn from our history, that if our institutions fail us, we will fight? We will fight for the rights of our minorities, such as Americans who pay taxes who wish to keep their property. Why can't we learn from the experience of Americans who refused to pay tribute to the Arabs in Tripoli, with the result of the Barbary War? Why cannot we see that we Americans will fight not to pay tribute to the federal government in order to continue growing our country?