The GOP Fiscal Cliff Counter Offer Is Brilliant—And It's Actually A Really Good Sign

Business Insider ^ | 12/03/2012 | Grace Wyler

[SeekAndFind]

Republican House Speaker John Boehner offered the GOP's first counter-proposal in the fiscal cliff negotiations Monday, sending a letter to the White House that demands both parties negotiate from a middle ground.

The letter is actually a savvy tactical maneuver by Boehner, and underscores just how angered Republican leaders were by the White House's initial offer on the fiscal cliff.

That plan, presented to House Republicans by the Obama administration last week, called for $1.6 trillion in increased revenues, and closely mirrors the president's "Plan for Economic Growth and Deficit Reduction," which was submitted in September 2011.

In the letter Monday, Boehner blasts the Obama administration for failing to try to find common ground. Here's the key line:

"We cannot in good conscience agree to this approach, which is neither balanced nor realistic If we were to take your Administration's proposal at face value, then we would counter with the House-passed Budget Resolution [Paul Ryan's budget plan]."

Instead, Boehner doesn't counter with the Ryan budget, but proposes that the two parties use a neutral framework for negotiations: a plan outlined by former Clinton chief of staff Erskine Bowles during a November 2011 testimony before the supercommittee. That plan proposes increasing revenues by $800 billion by cutting loopholes and deductions for the wealthiest Americans, and cutting spending by a combined $1.2 trillion.

[Lurker]

Let it happen. We are about as ready as we can be. If we live through it, fine. If we don’t we will go down with the bolts locked back.

[muawiyah]

The question is why not ~ and the answer is ~ 'because it's very dangerous to PO people who can be responsible for spending millions of dollars.

The salaries of all the federal workforce aren't a drop in the bucket compared to grants ~ go for the soft targets ~ the people who get grants from the government.

They are in no position to spend more.

[jwalsh07]

Deficit spending is escalating and will soon approach 1.5 trillion per year. The “spending cuts” here are a joke.
Instead of 1.5 trillion deficits we will have 1.3 trillion deficits as far as the eye can see. Forget it, it’s over.

[csmusaret]

Cutting 20% would leave us with an $800 Billion annual deficit.

[Travis McGee]

Yep. Hot brass, etc.

[EQAndyBuzz]

“Cutting 20% would leave us with an $800 Billion annual deficit.”

Ok, good start. Now get rid of Obamacare in it’s entirety. Where are we at?

[csmusaret]

$660 Billion

[icwhatudo]

800 billion in new taxes...The GOP are so brave!

/s

[annieokie]

but Zero has been watching Hardcore Pawn, where they come in there wid their trash, "youse gonna gib me da money, I wants da cash". But sir "it ain't real".

Obama "gib me da monies". "I wants da money, or else".

[plain talk]

I sort of see what Boehner was trying to do but he needs to watch Pawn Stars and learn how to negotiate. Maybe take Simpson/Bowles, increase spending, reduce taxes and use that as a starting place if he wants to play that game.

whatever they do they need to shift the focus away from taxes towards spending. Obama and Dem Senate WILL win on taxes. The best the pubs can get is to extend the Bush cuts for the 98%. That’s the best case. The dems are using this as a distraction to split the pubs and avoid talking about their problem - their out of control spending.

The pubs need to start with a significant reduction in spending - not this namby/pamby stuff being thrown out now. Obama said he would balance the budget in 4 years. Let’s give him 8 years (that’s twice as long as Obama promised & no way he could say that is not reasonable).

$10T in add’l debt over 10 years (at current rate using rough numbers). allow 4 years of ramp-down to get to balanced budget. This means we have to cut at least $6T to get to balance. There will be $1T or so in increased taxes on the 2%. However we should not count any of it because it will not be achieved because the 2% will adapt, hide, make changes and the increased taxes will reduce economic growth and reduce overall revenues anyway. so we make the case that NONE of the increased taxes can be counted towards the deficit.

So Pubs need to propose $6T in spending cuts. But since I watch Pawn Stars - perhaps start with $8T and negotiate down to $6T.

[Crusher138]

So you want to get rid of the charitable donation deduction?

[plain talk]

IOUs. THAT is even better!

[GeronL]

This is nuts

How is any of this a good sign?

[cableguymn]

I know it’s not a winning arguement. But someone needs to make it. If the rich are not paying their “fair share” how in gods great earth is someone who is paying zero paying their “fair share”??

I heard CA only has 37% of it’s population paying state income taxes.

No wonder they have the problems they do.

[cableguymn]

Someone needs to remind Bonehead that Obama can huff and puff but spending and taxation bills start in the HOUSE. Something, while he might not realize it, Bonehead controls.

[cableguymn]

watch more Pawn Stars...

They have told people the real value of something and paid more than asking. (being honest but still)

They have also bought junk.

I would not send them in to work out a deal for me.

[John 3_19-21]

If it truly is a good and strategic counter offer the DNCMedia will make sure as few low-information voters as posible ever hear about it.

Those that they do allow to hear about it will hear how cruel it is and how it only helps the rich.

[Sergio]

bkmk