GOP Bullied into a Tax Hike by President Obama and Senator Reid?

Townhall.com ^ | May 13, 2012 | Daniel J. Mitchell

[Kaslin]

Last year, as part of the fight over the debt limit, Congress created a “super-committee” that was designed to produce at least $1.2 trillion of “deficit reduction.”

The statists saw this super-committee as a vehicle to seduce Republicans into a tax hike. They knew that some GOPers are perpetually gullible and would be susceptible to the siren song of a “balanced approach” – even though that inevitably means higher taxes and never-fulfilled promises of future spending restraint.

But they also had a back-up plan. They got Republicans to agree that there would be automatic spending cuts – known as sequestration – if the super-committee failed to produce an agreement. And they convinced GOPers that half of these automatic cuts would come from the defense budget, even though military spending is only about one-fourth of total federal spending.

The left figured that the threat of a military sequester would scare some pro-defense GOPers into supporting a tax hike. Maybe not as part of the super-committee deliberations, but perhaps as we got closer to January 1, 2013, which is when the sequester was scheduled to take effect.

Well, the super-committee thankfully didn’t reach an agreement because not enough Republicans were foolish enough to support a tax hike. But now the left’s back-up plan is being implemented. Senator Harry Reid, supported by the White House, is saying that the sequester will go into effect unless GOPers surrender to a tax hike. Here’s some of what the Associated Press reported.

President Barack Obama’s top Democratic ally in the Senate said Wednesday that he won’t block much-feared automatic spending cuts to the Pentagon and Medicare providers from taking effect unless Republicans show more flexibility on cutting the budget deficit. Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said that $110 billion in automatic cuts coming due in January were designed to force both Republicans and Democrats to bargain over a “balanced approach” — including tax increases… The automatic cuts, known as a sequester, are the result of the failure of a deficit “supercommittee” to reach agreement last year. “Republicans refused to be reasonable. They refused to raise even a penny of new revenue, or ask millionaires to contribute their fair share to help reduce our deficit and our debt,” Reid said. “It is their intransigence — their refusal to compromise — that leaves us facing the threat of the sequester, and its difficult but balanced cuts.” Republicans controlling the House are seeking to undo the automatic cuts by substituting cuts to domestic programs like food aid, Obama’s health care law and social services like Meals on Wheels. …The White House proposed lifting the automatic cuts in its February budget, which called for tax increases on wealthier people and closing numerous tax breaks enjoyed by corporations. Even as Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has warned the sequester would lead to a “hollowed out” military, White House officials have taken a hard line against incremental efforts to switch off the cuts.

So we are facing a big game of chicken. Democrats are holding the defense budget hostage and telling Republicans they have to raise taxes.

GOPers should tell them to go jump in a lake. A defense sequester would not be the end of the world. Far from it.

• The defense budget will still climb by about $100 billion over the next 10 years if there is a sequester. The “cuts” are mostly just reductions in previously scheduled increases.
• The United States currently accounts for about 45 percent of global military spending, and various allies add up to about half of all remaining military spending, so there is no danger to national security.
  

  Click for larger image

• There is plenty of waste in the military budget.
• George Will has explained that the defense budget could be pruned, “In 2017, defense spending would still be more than that of the next 10 countries combined. Do Republicans think it is premature to withdraw as many as 7,000 troops from Europe two decades after the Soviet Union’s death? About 73,000 will remain, most of them in prosperous, pacific, largely unarmed and utterly unthreatened Germany. Why do so many remain?”

All that being said, I’m very sympathetic to Republicans who are seeking to replace some of the defense savings by trimming the growth of domestic programs.

After all, national defense is one of the few legitimate functions of the federal government. So even if the defense budget is bloated and the U.S. is wasting money on nation building, why not focus first on reducing and eliminating domestic programs that shouldn’t exist?

But even if you don’t care about the Constitution and enumerated powers, it certainly doesn’t seem right to make one-fourth of the budget swallow one-half of the savings. Why not make the sequester apply equally to all parts of the budget?

Those are good questions, but they’re not relevant in the hard-ball world of Washington politics. The real issue is what Republicans will do if (and when) Democrats don’t go along with the GOP plan. Will they then surrender to a tax hike?

That would be an unmitigated disaster. If the left knows that Republicans can be bullied into tax hikes by holding the defense budget hostage, then a tax hike today would simply be a down payment. Every time the statists want more money to feed a bloated welfare state, they’ll simply tell GOPers that the only alternative is “deep defense cuts.”

Republicans have a reputation for being the “stupid party.” I guess we’ll find out for sure if they allow themselves to get maneuvered into a tax hike. The first of many, by the way.

[Sacajaweau]

The super committe ended with “0” result.

[Timber Rattler]

Plan “B” and the “Super Committee” was Mitch McConnell’s brainchild. He was trying to find a way to short circuit the TEA Party freshmen who were gumming up Boehner’s best efforts at surrender, and went into cohoots with his good friend Reid to implement this scheme. The GOP got nothing and Reid and Pelosi got everything.

[Savage Beast]

If Republicans are stupid and weak enough to be seduced they should be kicked out of office pronto!

[trebb]

Plan “B” and the “Super Committee” was Mitch McConnell’s brainchild. He was trying to find a way to short circuit the TEA Party freshmen who were gumming up Boehner’s best efforts at surrender, and went into cohoots with his good friend Reid to implement this scheme. The GOP got nothing and Reid and Pelosi got everything.

Yep - the GOP has learned nothing from Neville Chamberlain...

[jmax]

We can always trust the GOP on this. Why, I can remember when George H. W. Bush looked out for us and said READ MY LIPS....NO NEW TAXES ! And, sure enough there were no new taxes. hu...what....er...ugh...oh, he did? Well, er, ugh...at least it made us feel good for a while.

And, no doubt Boehner and McConnell will make us feel real good....we can trust them.

BARF

[Kaslin]

You know damn well that President Bush 41 was forced by the rats to go against his word, so stop it, and as if your third party could achieve what you want them to against the rats

[Conservative Vermont Vet]

To: Timber Rattler

Plan “B” and the “Super Committee” was Mitch McConnell’s brainchild. He was trying to find a way to short circuit the TEA Party freshmen who were gumming up Boehner’s best efforts at surrender, and went into cohoots with his good friend Reid to implement this scheme. The GOP got nothing and Reid and Pelosi got everything.

Yep - the GOP has learned nothing from Neville Chamberlain...

But, but, but, hold your horses, all you Republi-tard bashers.

To hear you tell, it almost appears y'all think that the Pubes in Congress are inclined to "Cave" at the 1st sign of pressure?

Can't possibly be!

Don't believe me?

Simply tune in to the rabid, demented, delusional, postings of the Hate-Romeny/Mormons rants by some Freepers of late and you will be AMAZED to learn that....wait for it....

ALL WE HAVE TO DO, is stay home or write in some other candidates name (BASED ON 'PRINCIPLES' cuz Romney is the devil incarnate and WORST than Dear Leader ever thought of being or will be) and then......

....work to retain the House and retake the Senate and then (SHAZAM) "they" will block any and all of O'Bummer's attempt to DESTROY our Republic....donthca know?

After all, have they NOT all shown their willingness to oppose the Community Agitator's Socialist/Commie agenda and hold his feet to the fire during his 1st term?

DO I NEED TO ADD A /sarc tag?

All it takes for .....

.....EVIL....

..... to triumph is for good men to do nothing.......!"

....you know, like staying home or writing in someone's name which is the same thing as affirmatively, voting for the closest most of us will ever come to WITNESSING PURE EVIL while still alive...Barack, Barry, Hussein, Soetoro, Obama.

"Oh yeah, we'll stand on 'PRINCIPLES' and show them what's what, then in 2016, we will really, REALLY, work to elect a true Conservative....."

Yeah, right, provided there is still a United States of America left as we used to know it.

THEM: Oh, don't worry, we will keep the House and take the Senate and that way, we will keep Dear Leader in check.

Oh course you will with the Weeper of the House (Bone-er) and wuss, RINO extraodinaire and he who is afraid of his own shadow, Mitch McConnell leading the charge.

Mmm, mmm, mmm!

[JohnG45]

If Republicans are stupid and weak enough to be seduced they should be kicked out of office pronto!

If!? If!?

You are still asking yourself this question?

[JRandomFreeper]

Your screed has not convinced me to vote for an anti-gun, pro-abortion, socialized medicine, big government liberal.

I will never vote for Romney.

/johnny

[stephenjohnbanker]

PING

[jmax]

Oh....gee.....stupid me.

Just checked my post and all I see is about MY "third party".

Checked my 'about page' and all I see is pictures of MY "third party candidates".

Checked my REPUBLICAN-registered state ID Card and written all over the front and back is 'third Party'.

Just checked my memory, which is fantastic, and as I remember GHWB DIDN'T suck up to the Democrats and buy the tax hike and the Democrats DIDN'T, on the night it was signed into law, go on every news show on TV and the printed media and scream..."we told you so, Bush said "no new taxes" and look what he just did to you poor overtaxed citizens.....he's responsible for you having to now pay more new taxes." The Dem's DIDN'T use his words every day during the Bush/Clinton campaign fight to eat his lunch.

Yeppers....oh stupid me. I have 'third party' written all over me. I've got to have it, because YOU said I did.

[jmax]

state ID Card = state Voters Registration Card.

[snowsislander]

There’s probably no bit of fiscal insanity any more plainly, obstinately stupid than raising taxes when the economy is weak.

[rawhide]

Sen Mitch McConnell is the most to be blamed. What a worthless leader!

[sickoflibs]

RE :”The statists saw this super-committee as a vehicle to seduce Republicans into a tax hike. They knew that some GOPers are perpetually gullible and would be susceptible to the siren song of a “balanced approach” – even though that inevitably means higher taxes and never-fulfilled promises of future spending restraint.
But they also had a back-up plan. They got Republicans to agree that there would be automatic spending cuts – known as sequestration – if the super-committee failed to produce an agreement. And they convinced GOPers that half of these automatic cuts would come from the defense budget, even though military spending is only about one-fourth of total federal spending.
The left figured that the threat of a military sequester would scare some pro-defense GOPers into supporting a tax hike. Maybe not as part of the super-committee deliberations, but perhaps as we got closer to January 1, 2013, which is when the sequester was scheduled to take effect.
Well, the super-committee thankfully didn’t reach an agreement because not enough Republicans were foolish enough to support a tax hike. But now the left’s back-up plan is being implemented. Senator Harry Reid, supported by the White House, is saying that the sequester will go into effect unless GOPers surrender to a tax hike. Here’s some of what the Associated Press reported.”

This was this Republican House session's signature (and only) achievement. And like the automatic defense cuts the tax increases are automatic. Paul Ryan voted with Pelosi for this and he got on camera praising it.

Now Obama is saying he would veto any attempts to undo the cuts without ‘deficit reduction ‘(ie tax increases) with Leon Panetta at the same time saying it will destroy our military.

Now Ryan and Co are campaigning on undoing their signature (and only) achievement. This is pathetic. “Just put Republicans in charge and great things will happen” we were told over and over. They demanded this bill, this was their deal. It also took all spending cuts off the table till the election as well as authorizing $3T in debt to get Obama through the election.

By the way, ordinary spending bills signed into law undo the 'automatic' spending cuts.

[sickoflibs]

Vote for Republicans in 2012 so they can undo their own signature achievement. YAAA.

[DNME]

Here’s another way to look at this.

Yes, there is waste in the defense budget. And while the sequestration cuts would be painful, I don’t think they would be fatal. Bring home 90 percent of the troops in Germany, Italy, Britain and Japan, mothball a carrier group or two, delay a few procurement programs ... we could survive the cuts. Enough of the military would remain to provide for our defense, and we could always boost our strength back up again rather quickly if the need arose.

The part that interests me, however, is the OTHER HALF of the sequestration equation. The White House and Whorehouse Harry Reid have FEROCIOUSLY fought ANY cuts to ANY other government spending. Everything is sacred to them and none of it can EVER be cut, or so they say.

So if they wanna play chicken — bring it on. We know the military can survive the cuts. But will Obummer and Harry Reid accept the cuts coming down on THEIR side of the ledger, and the bad publicity that goes with them?

[sickoflibs]

Correction. Many said just replace Pelosi to stop her from passing anything, and that’s all the plan we need, much like the argument for Romney.

I don’t even like to think about the future regardless of who wins.

[trebb]

Nice rant, I guess.

Still trying to figure out why it was directed my way - I won't attack Romney even though it distresses me that he is our candidate. The Neville Camberlain dig of mine was aimed at the idiocy of negotiating with an enemy that has no honor and who will not deliver its side of the bargain.

Anyway, hope you feel better.