E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
That question has been asked numerous times since President Obama and House Speaker John Boehner tried, unsuccessfully, to reach a "grand bargain" last July that would have raised the debt ceiling, reduced the deficit, and raised revenues.
The White House and Democrats point their finger at Boehner, saying he was unable to deliver Republican votes on a compromise where both sides would have to swallow something uncomfortable (tax hikes for Republicans, entitlement cuts for Democrats).
By contrast, House Republicans counter that Obama and the White House moved the goal posts, which forced them to break off the talks.
Earlier this month, the Washington Post advanced the moving-the-goal-post argument by noting that Obama and Boehner had agreed -- in principle -- on raising $800 billion in additional revenue. But the White House upped the ante after the bipartisan "Gang of Six" produced their outline, which contained significantly more revenue.
Inside the White House, the offer reflected the new political reality shaped by the Gang of Six. In light of that farther-reaching proposal, White House officials worried that the deal under discussion with Boehner would meet resistance, particularly among Obama’s Democratic supporters. Higher taxes explicitly targeted toward the wealthy offered an element of fairness, in the White House view, and a way to sweeten any deal for the Democratic base.
So in that telling, Boehner walked away from his talks with Obama -- on Friday, July 22 -- because he could no longer trust the White House.
But in a just-published article, Matt Bai of the New York Times Magazine adds some additional details. One, Boehner continued to stay at the negotiating table for two days after Obama "moved the goal posts."
It’s a clean story of a man standing by his conservative principles. And yet the additional revenue wasn’t, strictly speaking, a nonstarter. After all, Boehner wanted a deal badly enough to stay at the table for 48 hours after Obama “moved the goal posts,” which casts doubt on his claim that this breach of trust was an obvious dealbreaker. And at some point that Thursday, Boehner and his most senior aides at least entertained what would have been an astounding counteroffer to the president.
And two, Boehner only decided to walk away from the negotiations after House Majority Leader Eric Cantor rejected that counteroffer.
What happened, instead, based on extensive reporting, was this: Boehner raised the possibility of his counteroffer with Cantor on that Thursday afternoon, and Cantor dismissed the suggestion out of hand. He had always warned that the White House couldn’t be trusted and would come back for more, and Obama’s reversal on the revenue number had vindicated that view. Cantor made it clear he wasn’t going to support any more counteroffers. He was pretty sure the caucus wouldn’t either. No longer was Cantor content to be the skeptic in the room. He was now certain that the grand bargain was a practical impossibility.
Bai goes on to make this conclusion in his piece: All throughout the negotiations, Obama had demonstrated his ability to get Democrats (like Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi) to accept the "grand bargain," albeit reluctantly. But Boehner couldn't.
And yet, in the end, while both leaders had profound reservations about a grand bargain that would threaten their parties’ priorities, what’s undeniable, despite all the furious efforts to peddle a different story, is that Obama managed to persuade his closest allies to sign off on what he wanted them to do, and Boehner didn’t, or couldn't. While Democratic leaders were willing to swallow either a deal with more revenue or a deal with less, Boehner’s theoretical counteroffer, which probably reflected what he would have done if empowered to act alone, never even got a hearing from his leadership team.
Leave a Comment:
Are you aware that your black Messiah ate a dog in Indonesia, studied the Koran, smoked pot and snorted cocaine. Don't believe me read it all in Obama's words in "Dreams from my father." Disgusting.
He also smoked crack.
Well kudoes to your chicken Mcnuggets and comic books.
If you were at all educated you would know how ridiculous you sound.
Again , another misleading article by the liberal media, or should I say, Obama's writers. The Republicans had passed a bill, and the Democratics played games. Suffice to say, the whole liberal house of cards is falling down. The final chapter, Obamacare will be deemed unconstituational, and the King and Queen, will move on to " Barack's home country of Kenya"
But it was in the NY Times so it must be true.
Maybe its like a hung jury... Put them in a small room with bad coffee and food. Lets see what happens. Welcome back to reality!
This could have all been avoided if only Obuma had proposed his tax reform to congress when he had democratic control and could have gotten it passed as easily as the affordable health care act.
But it seems Obuma would rather have put this country into a debt crises and then try to blame it on the Republicans as a reelection strategy.
Gee, I wonder why he didn't? After all, Obuma made his tax reform a issue in is first campaign and now he's crying like a baby about how the Republicans are blocking his tax reform.
As any democrat on here that supports Obuma why Obuma didn't propose his tax reform to Congress when he had democratic control of Congress and they remain silent with their thumps up their butts without an answer.
The answer is so simple. Obuma doesn't want his tax reform passed.
Or maybe it was because the Pubs filibustered more than any other Senate since the beginning of the US. You just wait until he won't do a damn thing to let them expire if the economy is getting better and then we will see who's house of cards comes tumbling down.
Typical Republican tactic, create a big effing mess, blame it on the Democrats, and at the same time, prevent Dems from fixing the problem.
If it wasn't so important, it would be laughable.
crazy after all these years
I can see by your post you are another uneducated Obuma fool.
If the Pubs did so much filibustering, how did the Affordable Health Care Act get passed? After all, the Pubs announced they were going to filibuster it.
The Democrats used procedural rules to prevent a filibuster on the Affordable Health Care Act to pass it. In fact, they could and can use procedural rules to prevent filibuster on any of their Bills they wanted or want to be pass. If the Pubs used filibuster to prevent a democratic Bill from getting passed, its because the democratic allowed it to happen. After all, they could of used procedural rules to prevent the filibuster.
Its truly amazing how many Obuma supporter lack even a basic knowledge of Obuma and his democratic lap dogs actions and just take their rhetoric hook line and sinker into the frying pan of ignorance.
Would you like to explain how the Dems could prevent a filibuster without 60 votes to override?
Did you not read his entire post, Crazy.....just wondering?
Yes I did, tell me procedural rules are you talking about?
Here are the steps:
And of course it can be prevented by the party in control.
You may have me on this one. Two questions "A Dem appeals the decision" what decision is the Dem appealing? Depending on what the Dem is appealing, why would the Repub move to table?
Did some research, I think you are not being truthful with your procedural argument. The procedural rules are in the House. Truth being this: A party must have either 60 votes in the Senate, not having this, they must also control the House to send it too reconciliation which only requires a majority vote. For all of you that want to numb your brain read how the Healthcare bill was passed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_Care_and_Education_Reconciliation_Act_of_2010
Of course I'm sure the right wingers won't believe it because obviously Wikipedia is part of the Lame Stream media. So keep on believing your rightwing websites and Fox News and don't worry about the truth.
crazy
Thank you for telling everyone you are an uneducated Obuma supporter. Apparenting you didn't follow the debate or actions that were being reported in the news daily before the Affordable Health Care Act was pass and how it got passed with the Pubs, as you call them, making so much noise about defeating it.
Speaking of defeating it, the Pubs vowed to filibuster the Affordable Health Care Act and since not one Pub voted for it, tell us then how it got passed without a filibuster?
Shame your not intelligent enough to know that Obama and his lap dogs use the excuse of a Pub filibuster as their excuse for their failure.
Crazy FYI; Wikipedia is not a reliable source for information because of its format where anyone can write anything they want about a subject without it having any validity. Find a better source for your information, a more reliable source.
I'm so happy for Obama now that Pravda has endorsed him and his party. \
and the blame game continues...
What is the big deal ??? says obumas a liar we all know that ..... they had a deal and obuma changed it trying to make himself look good again ... never deal with a obuma .... also tell harry to bring to a vote the 20 or so bills in the senate the repubs passed ....
Congratulations Mr. Murray. You took the truth as reported and added your spin to portray the conservatives in a negative light. It could have just as easily been the other way around with Obama not being able to gain support from Harry and Nancy and in fact more likely the other way around since Obama moved the goal posts. But in reality Mr. Murray, you do not need to portray the conservatives in a negative light with this audience as most of the PMS-NBC croud will not open their minds to rational thought or reading further into any subject and would prefer accepting anybody's opinion as long as it villainizes the conservative and/or Tea Party.
Obama offered $4 Frickin Trillion of cuts
And Boehner walked away.
Yeah, right.. in real terms? I seriously doubt it. in progressive land - painting the moon purple with marshmellows and cutting back on the number of marshmellows is a budget cut. Never mind that painting the moon purple was a dumb idea to begin with. that is why we have a governemnt spending a trillion more than a reasonable tax rate takes in.
Jolly joker @!$%# head
That is a fact. Obama put his cards down and Boehner walked.
Maybe this will be easier to understand. Obama offered 10 dollars of spending cuts to every dollar of tax increase and the Repubs would not go for it because of there insane pledge to Nordquist.
No one will be able to do anything until the presidency, the house, the senate and the court is conservative. But, nonetheless, the country is still going down. (as in final.)
Or liberal, the problem is that the t-baggers act like 2 year olds. If I don't get 100% of what I want I'm going to take my ball and go home. WAAAAH What a bunch of childish clowns. Would you send this group of selfish little twerps a dictionary and write down the word "compromise" for them.
You mean like the democrats did with the health care law, crazy?????? You know, our way or the highway......so they resorted to closed door sessions, underhanded deals etc to get it passed.
Obama, wants single payer, wasn't going to get it. He then reverted back to a Republican idea from the Heritage Foundation and implemented by Romney. He invited everyone from the AMA to the insurance carriers to work out a deal, got one. Then Cantor walks out.
Like that. Who's not willing to compromise again?
You mean Obama....that is Senator Obama who was first against the health mandate before he was for it after becoming President. But that does not surprise me because this is the same guy who said as a Senator that raising the debt limit was a sign of failed leadership and after he became President he was all for it. You mean you are talking about that guy, ole' major flip-flopper?
Obama wanted a single payer system. What part of that don't you understand?
Folks we're dealing with politicians here. What makes anyone believe anything stated by them is factual? Reporters have a "story" to tell and ads to sell for their respective media outlet.
no one understands that obama want's the issue to play class warfare. He is not interested in making the country move. That is why boehner never had a chance. He was going to move the goal post regardless of how much he compromised. You see, in progressive land, a 99 percent tax rate is unacceptable - there has to be a downtrodden class.
Why are the left wing zealots worried about the debt? Harry Reid has always tabled any chance for for a budget. Followed by obama's whining about he needed control. Now they have it, the record spending continues and the Party of No Ideas is now worried that something bad might happen.
They are not worried about the debt. Just the debt ceiling. If it isn't raised, then they can't spend any more money and they are forced to budget.
When Cantor speaks, Karl Rove is the puppet master. Do anything to obstruct, fail the POTUS, and the hell with the USA. Cantor is so one dimensional that he cannot see the forest because of the trees, and continues to obstruct, obstruct and obstruct. Nothing new here, the POTUS was at the table and approaching the gathering storm with options, ideas and creativity. The GOPers and their backers, small as they are, loud and arrogant as they are, could not muster the courage to act on behalf of our country's interest. Shame on them, the GOPers for running the USA through the financial, economic and emotional gauntlet - to serve their only agenda and that is remove the black man from the Oval Office. Pathetic bunch of short sighted fools, most of whom are from wealth and fear losing that wealth and its strings to power.
They, the GOPers are the most scared pack of SOB's in the room.
SOB are better than the AHs in the room.
harry reid already said he isnt going to let any budget pass. the blame game is stupid.
gopjobs.gov
Harry Reid is my third favorite Mormon.
Are you guys really playing the blame game with information gathered from the media? Not sure if you noticed, they tend to make everything look how they want, whether it's omitting certain details, or making assumptions and claims based on their OPINIONS. These debates are pointless, especially when several of the deciding members have already openly stated that they'll go against anything Obama tries to pass regardless of what the content is.
I do gotta say though, when they started doing scripture readings on the news trying to label Obama as the literal Anti-Christ I about busted a nut. I mean c'mon, that goes a little beyond a joy boner :)
Here is one item I haven't heard from the media. The lack of a budget is meaningless. A budget is merely a forward looking guess or plan. Where the tire hits the road is current revenues and spending. If the t-baggers had any balls at all, they would have cut the actual spending instead of complaining about something as abstract and meaningless as a debt ceiling. The House holds the purse strings but are two damned afraid to pull the drawstring on the purse. Cowards.
The debt ceiling is abstract and meaningless???????????????????The debt ceiling is tied directly to spending.
Exactly my point, instead of curtailing the spending on specific programs, they took the easy way out by putting all spending on the line which includes interest on the debt. Again the t-baggers are cowards for not mentioning what they want to cut.
It does not matter who killed the debt talks. Without preconditions the President promised that the 2012 federal deficit will not exceed 229.27 billion dollars. His promise does not depend on any act of congress. He made the promise therefore it is a done deal because he in the President of the United States of America.
Obama wanted a single payer system. What part of that don't you understand?
He didn't when he was Senator but he flip-flopped after becoming President. What part of that don't you understand.
He didn't happen to be in a campaign at the time was he? Which I may add doesn't come close to the all time flip-flopper Mitt Romney.
Both parties have talked almost everything, except to pass one thing: raise the tax for the wealthy people to save uncle Sam.
Millionairs: "the U.S. had 3.1 million millionaires in 2010." http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2011/06/22/u-s-has-record-number-of-millionaires/
Billionairs: 403 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_the_number_of_US_dollar_billionaires#North_America
What are the Congress waiting for?
Raise the tax for the wealthy. We the poor pay 30% income tax.
billie billie billie...you need to do some homework and work on your math. First, the top 5% (ONLY 5%) pay nearly 50% of ALL fed income tax. 23% PAY 0% of fed income taxes. Raising taxes and the wealthy wouldn't even cover the stinkin' interest payments on the $15TRILLION nat'l debt. And we can thank obozo and his stooges like reid and pelosi for tacking on another $4.7TRILLION in just his first 3yrs. That's mroe than EVERY PRESIDENT BEFORE HIM COMBINED!
Slide 6: None of figures you stated support your statement that "raising taxes on the top 5% won't even pay for interest on the debt". Top 5% pay 50% of the taxes relate to covering a hard number such as "interest on the debt" exactly how?
Here are some firm figures for you to ponder: GDP is 15,000 billion, interest on the debt is 450 billion, top 20% earns 3,000 billion at 35% top tax rate is 1,050 billion. So raising the top rate on the top 20% to 52% pays the interest on the debt.
If you want to talk politics, only 2 presidents since WW2 increased the national debt. Reagan tripled the debt and GW Bush doubled it. Gw Bush being unique in the fact he managed to do it with a good economy and started with an annual surplus. BOTH OF THESE PRESIDENTS RAISED THE DEBT MORE THAN ALL OTHER PREVIOUS PRESIDENTS COMBINED.
The top 20% are not paying their historical share. Leaving the income inequality problem off the table. Reagan lowered the top tax rate from 70% to 50%. GW lowered it down to 35%. The very well off don't even pay this rate. They pay a long term capital gains rate of 15% down from 28% around 10 years ago. Almost all of the income of the super rich is taxed at the 15% rate.
Albeit a more fuzzy number, it has been stated that 60% of the recent annual deficits are due to the lack of economic activity. No jobs, no tax revenue. No economic activity no tax revenue.
Slide 6, I know what point you were trying to make. I think you are absolutely wrong. This is the argument for the "fairer and flatter" tax rates. What do you think, the 23% who don't pay federal income tax should be taxed more and in so doing will cover the interest on the debt? Not likely. We need to raise the tax rates on the the top 20% in a graduated system where the rates go up in relation to the income earned. In other words, can I say it, a PROGRESSIVE tax structure.
So Billy you are much closer to the essence of the problem than Slide 6.
Anyone watch enough television to see that advertisement about a video from the guy who predicted the economic fall?
The essence of the message in the video is that if the American dollar is no longer the global currency, we are officially dead meat. And China, Russia, and others are beginning to grumble about the American Government playing with the value of the dollar.
We are surviving because the government is printing money. That won't work when no one will accept it.
You are negotiating for a used car and you and the salesman shake hands on a price of $8,000. You come back to sign the paperwork and the price has been changed to $12,000. The salesman says "take it or leave it!" What do you do?
And that's exactly what Boehner did.
And now the salesman accuses you of walking out on a "fair deal."
Meanwhile, this news on Obama's budget:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2012/mar/28/obama-budget-defeated-414-0/
Not one dem vote. Not one. You won't read news like this on MessNBC. Ever.
You mean the budget that's 800 billion in the red with no direct war funding so say a
"nice even trillion"???
No, for those capable of reading, it's Obama's budget. Zero support from his comrades.
Wow, the "Barry" and "muslim" and "Kenya" FOX schills are out in force this morning.
Hannity a repeat???
Obama did change the rules of the game mid stream. I don't blame the Republicans for not trusting him. Unfortunately, we still need some kind of compromise. The only way this country will get back on track is to elect moderates. At this point all we have done is elect people whose viewpoints are diametrically opposed. It is our fault as voters for putting them in place. And don't say that Obama is a moderate. He is about as moderate as Pelosi or Gingrich.
How would you explain the fact that liberals are upset with him also. If both sides are upset, almost by definition, you are a moderate.