Skip to comments.It's Not Just Taxes: Benefit Cuts Divide Democrats (No cuts, no deal!)
Posted on 11/28/2012 2:42:21 PM PST by tobyhill
It's not just about taxes. There's another big obstacle to overcome as Congress and President Barack Obama work to skirt the fiscal cliff: deep divisions among Senate Democrats over whether to consider cuts to popular benefit programs like Medicare and Medicaid.
Much of the focus during negotiations seeking an alternative to $671 billion in automatic tax increases and spending cuts beginning in January has centered on whether Republicans would agree to raising taxes on the wealthy. Obama insists that tax increases on the wealthy must be part of any deal, even as White House officials concede that government benefit programs will have to be in the package too.
But even if GOP lawmakers agree to raise taxes, there is no guarantee Democrats can come up with enough votes in the Senate to cut benefit programs as Republicans are demanding.
"We cannot come up with the solution for Medicare in the next two or three weeks," said Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate. "It's too important, it's too serious, when it comes to this fiscal cliff debate."
Durbin has long said Democrats must be willing to discuss cuts to benefit programs in exchange for tax increases on the wealthy. But, he said Wednesday, the issue is too complicated to address in a short postelection session of Congress.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Nobody ever proposes cutting welfare benefits or limiting it to legal citizens and legal residents.
Plus any “cuts” will be reductions in rates of growth or promised cuts in the distant future that will never happen.
“Two weeks”? How many years have they been fiddle-fasrting around with this stuff. Surely the dems can use the plan they devised to support the budgets they have submitted each year.
I keep hearing the dems go on and on about “Clinton Era Tax Rates.”
The pubbies need to say, “OK, you want Clinton are tax rates? Fine. We will go along with that, as long as spending goes back to the Clinton era spending as well.”
To hear them talk, you'd think that the regime of the Impeached Rapist was some kind of "Golden Era". I suspect some of this talk is part of a "rehabilitation strategy" for slick willie's legacy, but I'm not buying it. I will admit it WAS better than the kenyan's communist approach.
The Won has suggested that tax increases go into effect immediately and cuts be worked out next year. NO! NO! NO! Reagan bought that, GHWB bought that and THE DEMS NEVER ACTUALLY CUT ANYTHING!!! Don’t be stupid. Real cuts or no deal!
he came in with the economy coming out of recession..
the ratholes took both houses and the presidency...
they tried to ram federal health care down our throats...luckily, we had a bunch of stubborn pubs who stood up to them...
the pubs took the house two years later, and passed welfare reform among other things....the PUBS were the ones responsible for any good economic news back then...
however, if you were a mere wage earner, your wages did not go up that much...and state and county taxes went up very very much....
the little guy actually got creamed...
sure, if you were heavy in stocks in the early 90's you made out....but if you were a wage earner paying for kids and college and mortgage..forget it...
Obama keeps saying “balanced approach”, so, here’s balance: You may not spend ONE DIME more than is received, and nothing is off-budget.
Never-ending taxation on the all mighty dollar doesn’t work that way. If it is taxed less than 10 times it isn’t working.
The House had better hold the line!
To He// with the media and the demonic-rats.