Posted on 11/04/2011 6:36:15 PM PDT by mnehring
I’m a day late on this but it’s too intriguing not to blog. You can read the actual letter, which is exceedingly tame, on Mike Simpson’s website. Among the signatories: …Ron Paul.
The bad news? If this happens, some people might be paying a little more. The good news? We’ll never have to read another “time for a grand bargain” column from Tom Friedman again. Dude, I think we should take the deal.
A group of 40 House Republicans for the first time Wednesday encouraged Congress’s deficit reduction committee to explore new revenue as part of a broad deal that would make a major dent in the nation’s debt, joining 60 Democrats in a rare bipartisan effort to urge the “supercommittee” to reach a big deal that could also include entitlement cuts…
Among those who signed were several dozen Republicans who had previously signed a pledge promising they would not support a net tax increase. Among the Democratic signers were some of the House’s most liberal members who have opposed entitlement cuts…
Rep. Steven C. LaTourette (R-Ohio) said if he had a nickel for every one of the Republicans who said they supported the letter’s goal but feared how [Americans for Tax Reform President Grover] Norquist would react, “I’d be rich and retired, and we’d have 200 signatures on the letter.”…
[S]everal Republicans who signed the letter were careful to note they were not endorsing a net tax increase — but rather a broad rewrite of the tax code that might close loopholes and lower rates, while still producing more government revenue.
Even more intriguingly, Boehner himself came out today and said “I think there is room for revenues” in the Super Committee’s work while emphasizing that the GOP will only tolerate so much. When his staff was asked where, pray tell, these new revenues would be coming from, an aide suggested “increasing government fees, selling government assets and raising co-payments in government healthcare programs.” I.e. no tax hikes. So that’s that, right?
Six members of a congressional “super committee” have struck out on their own in a new effort to come up with a plan to slash America’s huge deficits before a November 23 deadline…
Aides stressed that the six lawmakers are still in talks with the full super committee and have not splintered off. Instead, they are making an internal effort to try to broker a bipartisan deal.
Significantly, at least two Republican members of the smaller group are willing to consider revenue increases as part of a deficit-reduction plan, one of the congressional aides and a source with direct knowledge of the talks said.
Remember, the Super Committee only needs seven votes to approve a plan; there are six Democrats and six Republicans participating, so either one of those two unnamed GOPers who are open to new revenues could trigger some sort of “grand bargain” proposal involving entitlement reform. And if you’ve got six Democrats agreeing to entitlement reform, they’re going to want something more than “increasing government fees” in return. James Clyburn, one of the Democrats on the Committee, is talking about getting rid of some deductions, but whether that would pass muster with the GOP is unclear. Thirty-three Republican senators sent a letter of their own to the Super Committee today warning them away from trying to raise revenues. Whether they can get the rest of the caucus to go along and join a filibuster might depend on what Boehner and the House GOP do if/when a “grand bargain” makes it to the floor. As it is, Time magazine quotes a Senate source who puts the odds of the Super Committee deadlocking at 75 percent, up from 70 just two weeks ago. Watch this clip of Pat Toomey, another Committee member, talking about the current stalemate and you’ll think that estimate is too low.
Here’s Boehner today doing his “Grover who?” shtick after being asked about revenues. Exit question: It’s probably not a good sign for fiscal conservatives that members of Congress are already working to undo the automatic spending cuts that’ll be triggered if the Committee deadlocks, huh?
40 RINOs out to increase government 'revenues' (ie taxes)
He thinks he can retire on 200 X .05? That's $10. No wonder we are bankrupt.
Not necessarily the same thing.
No one ever said an election or two would clean all the multi-partied vermin out of DC..
We got a long way to go..
I wonder how many are RMSPers?
http://www.republicanmainstreet.org/members/
If only by "new revenue" they meant selling mining, drilling and timber rights on public land and off shore. Alas, we know they mean taxes.
John Carter, R-TX
Ron Paul, R (?)-TX
Peter King, R-NY
Get real. In this day and age, a compromise is the only way the two sides will be able to reach an agreement.
In government language it is. “Revenue” is either taxes or fees. The government is not in the business of producing goods or services to create revenues. They can only tax or fee it in to existence.
(I guess they could sell land and buildings but that would probably account for about 5 minutes worth of debt).
“Get real. In this day and age, a compromise is the only way the two sides will be able to reach an agreement.”
I don’t want the two sides to reach an agreement. I want every leftist driven out of public life. I want the democrat party prosecuted as an ongoing criminal enterprise.
This was a done deal, agreed to by the Establishment Republicans and Democrats, and tax increases coupled with minimal spending reductions (reductions in FUTURE SPENDING) which will NOT undo any of the Democrats previous debt-increasing handouts whatsoever.
We need to cut at least 50% of the Federal employees, replace the RINO's and Democrats with Conservatives, and get back to allowing ONLY what the Constitution specifically and literally provides for (Limited Federal Government)....but then, the Liberal Courts will block it, if attempted.
The Nation needs a do-over, badly, right now.
But what about the whole idea of the Laffer curve and increasing revenue by reducing tax rates as well as the idea of improving the job climate and therefore creating more taxpayers and therefore more revenue?
“I want every leftist driven out of public life. I want the democrat party prosecuted as an ongoing criminal enterprise”
There are some good Dems am sure, just don’t know their names. There has to be some balance.
Among the signatories: ...Ron Paul.
The “entitlements” cuts have already started. We retired military have already got notice of huge increases on everything we have to now pay back to the government out of our retired checks to fund items that were promised us before we began our service. Now some stupid congressman says that they have to honor the promises made to the “active” military because we promised them. Yet, it is okay to cut our throats after the fact when we are too damned old to do a damned thing about it.
Hey! We past, present and future SAHMs are NOT supposed to be THINKING in those terms, let alone UNDERSTAND these issues! Stupid breeders...gettin’ kinda UPPITY ain’t we?
To the Reeducation Camp with YOU, Missy, LOL!
yeah cause “balance” has produced such wonderful things like the current 14.5 trillion National Debt. The 1st credit downgrade in US Hisotry, 20% unemployed/underemployed etc etc etc
Balance is not leadership. We need LEADERSHIP not mindless adoration of “balance”
This doesn’t surprise me about the 40 or the Speaker, leftists all.
Ok....
Give me all your money.
I want 1000, you offer 100... I settled for 500..
I still robbed you.
How bout this.
Republicans want departments eliminated. 10 of them (pick any 10) the dems don’t want any eliminated. They settled for 5. That is compromise I can believe in.
Why is “compromise” always in the DEMOCRATS favor?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.