Posted on 06/23/2011 7:40:40 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
Cantor Pulls Out of Biden-Led Budget By JANET HOOK And COREY BOLES
WASHINGTON—House Majority Leader Eric Cantor Thursday said he was pulling out of the bipartisan budget talks headed by Vice President Joe Biden for now because the group has reached an impasse over taxes that only President Barack Obama and Speaker John Boehner (R., Ohio) could resolve.
Mr. Cantor, in an interview after a negotiating session he described as bitterly contentious, said he would not be attending today's scheduled meeting of the bipartisan deficit-reduction leadership group because he believed it was time for the negotiations to move to a higher level.
"We've reached the point where the dynamic needs to change,'' Mr. Cantor said. "It is up to the president to come in and talk to the speaker. We've reached the end of this phase. Now is the time for these talks to go into abeyance."
Still, Mr. Cantor remained optimistic about the prospects for a deal. He said the Biden group had already made significant progress and had tentatively identified more than $2 trillion in spending cuts over the next 10 years. But he said there could be no agreement on an overall package without breaking the impasse between Republicans' refusal to accept any tax increase, and Democrats insistence that some tax hikes be part of the deal.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
I agree with you, but it will never happen. The dims would lose too many voters if they voted for that.
Future Congresses, unless restrained by criminal penalties, will ignore all future spending caps as they declare more and more things “too big to fail” or necessary under the “health and well being” or interstate commerce clauses”.
Proof of statement? Simple, look at the debt ceiling - its original purpose was to retrain Congress's spending. Every time they got close to the ceiling did they stop? NOPE - they raised the ceiling, once twice in 12 months since the first increase wasn't big enough.
When we stat jailing Congress Critters, in “hard jails” for their lack of financial discipline they will continue to make drunken sailors on shore leave look like financial hawks and first cousins to Scrooge.
Okay - I’m a poor, old, slow, dumb, country lawyer, but whatever happened to a dollar raise in the debt limit for a dollar in cuts?
In the words of a prosecutor friend of mine reacting to a plea bargain: “It looks like he (another DA) traded 5 thouroughbred horses for 2 mules.” Statement made when plea bargain was to reduce 5 strong felonies for 2 misdemeanors.
The ability to succeed in negotiations is to say “no.” Apparently, “no” has not been said early and often.
Gwjack
The left HATED the deal:
The left wing of the Democratic party was furious over the deal to extend the Bush-era tax cuts reached in December, and were also extremely unhappy with the spending deal reached to fund the federal government through the remaining months of fiscal 2011—an agreement that saw cuts to many domestic programs important to the party.
It BEGINS to turn around the huge entitlement ship even though the Dems hold both Senate and White House...it puts a stake in the heart of the DEM old "OK...you cut, we raise taxes" deals...without that the Dems become fairly impotent in negotiations.
No realistic person should expect that we get the whole enchilada overnight (because this involves winning culture wars which don't get won that quickly).
If people don't pay taxes, then they won't care what our government does.
They can automatically get $1.6 trillion over the next year alone if they simply refuse to raise the debt ceiling. It is a win-win for conservatives, but unfortunately conservatives aren't in charge.
Repeal ObamaCare first!
It depends on how you define tax hikes. Closing tax loopholes and broadening the tax base are euphemisms for tax increases. Reducing spending by 5% annually is no solution nor is it any guarantee since future Congresses will not be bound by it. Let’s see exactly how the $2 trillion over 10 years will be realized. Remember when the promised $100 billion cut became $37 billion that turned out to be $352 million?
Again...it's at least the BEGINNING of a solution. It puts these deals on a different track than they've been on in decades...we're talking about CUTTING spending rather than RAISING.
It's obvious that no deal guarantees anything the next Congress might do. But to get such a deal with a Dem Senate AND White House is a good accomplishment IMO. And if we get gains in next years elections we go further.
Amen. The amount is trivial over 10 years.
It needs to be frontloaded with 1 trillion in FY’12 and the balance in the out years with 50% in the second year declining to 1% in the year 10
Really? With inflation figured in, that's less than $200 Billion per year. I don't think it significant at all, when compared with the extremely large expenditures this administration and Congress have imposed - there have been increases for brand new initiatives that amount to much more than that on an annual basis.
So will the $2 T reduction be an actual reduction, or will it be a reduction in the planned increases, thus maybe amounting to no reduction at all?
Although at first blush this sounds kookie, after reading your follow-up sentence, I firmly agree with you. Quit allowing so many people who have incomes to avoid paying any income tax at all; and quit subsidizing so many of them from the incomes of those of us who pay so much!
If we can get this which includes a slowing or cut in Medicare that is a change in the overall mentality...more substantive cuts come IF we get the senate and/or White House next year.
The Dems are always willing to go to the brink, knowing that the Republicans always back off. It's time to force them over the brink. The Republicans have more power than they know how to use. Let the Dems have their tax increase - but on a large number of those who currently pay no taxes. I'm sick and tired of seeing those supposedly low income families have the money and the borrowing power to buy - items such as boats, large screen tvs, and other luxury items - what I can't afford to buy because I'm subsidizing them, but trying to live within my means.
“He said the Biden group had already made significant progress and had tentatively identified more than $2 trillion in spending cuts over the next 10 years.”
$200 billion a year for 10 years (and probably backend loaded at that) and that’s “significant progress”?
If we can’t get better “leadership” than these turkeys we’re cooked.
What was Cantor doing ‘in’ any Biden led anything?
You may think that is true, but it is not.
As soon as the Repubs would push their message beyond what the public will accept, you immediately have an increased number of very enthused Obama-voters.
Right now many of those voters are disillusioned with him; it's not wise to give them a reason to get excited about voting again.
>> “WOW, did someone FINALLY find thier Testicles?” <<
.
No, they went up in smoke when he ran for congress.
He just needs time to write the cave-in speech.
>> “my best guess would be the cuts would be scheduled to take effect, 9 years 11 months, and 3 weeks and 6 days from the date of the agreement” <<
.
That soon! wow.....
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.