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:
Two men of different ideals and pourpose. one want's to stop the bleeding and one wants to open a new vein. One wants a stronger country one wants a weaker country. You know who is for what. No wonder a deal could not be reached. Lets hope this november the side of right has the majority this time so something can get done.
I'd comment but then I don't want to be called a liberal or conservative heh heh. I find that would be offensive LOL
i find it odd that the congressional nitwits cant seem to pass what is largely a symbolic gesture but then literally overnight they can pass the NDAA almost unanimously that is a direct attack on the bill of rights and the 4th ammendment specifically
The spending cuts seem to vanish like smoke while the 'increased revenue' becomes set in concrete.
But in fact both sides are lying. There is talk about a 'millionaires tax' or a 'billionaires tax' and raising 30 billion here and 10 billion there. If they somehow find a way to raise 100 billion in new revenue it will not come near paying even 10% of the new deficit for this year alone.
That's not even the tip of the iceberg for thehealthcare fiasco... But I think we all know that law will be unconstitutional or illegal.
Jimmy Carter is sleeping soundly these days knowing that there is a worse president than he. Bama will always be remembered as the downgrade president. Who would ever allow that to happen on their watch. This is not Presidents Bush's fault
I'am a Democrat,not my whole life but now I am,but I must commend John Boehner and I will send him an apology because I thought he was the one that cost us our AAA credit rating.Now I know that Rep.Eric Cantor truly is the worm that I always thought he was.This is not about Republican or Democrat,left-wing or right-wing, this is about saving our country and everything that we have worked to make her.I don't care who doesn't like what I'm saying because your not worth my thoughts anyway.I care about America,bottom line is both sides need to make concessations and if you can't accept that then you need to move to another country.Compromise, if our politicians can't compromise then they need to find another profession.
My rant above is not to say that we need to eliminate one side or the other,because we need both sides to have a strong,thriving democracy.The secret is to have hardy,forceful debates and strong,hardy arguements but then after the vetting we need to come to a solution in the middle.If we don't meet in the middle then one side or the other can't be satisfied,both sides need to settle for a little less than absolute perfection.I won't let you have all that you want but I will share half of what I have ,if you have none.You have no more rights to free will than I have,and I will fight to make sure of that.But,you're supposed to be an adult and know that.
Trico 77- who committed crimes against humanity?"Dirty Dick" is the one that can't travel overseas so cut the crap.
Eliminating the Bush Tax Cuts and ending the two Bush Wars will be a good start to reducing our deficits,and getting the country back on the right or should I say left path.
The two sides have become so polarized that whatever one side comes up with the other will reject on some basis. I am an independent but it seems to me that Obama was willing to talk and conservatives said it was their way or the highway. I don't mind that if they come up with workable solutions to our problems but simply killing the programs they don't like is not a workable solution. I am tired of their crying about money and being unwilling to put forth anything positive whether it is health care, social programs or the budget. They voted in entirety to go into Iraq and Afganistan and not pay for the wars. At least they can agree on something.
Neither Bonehead or Obama killed the DEBT talks! Talk to the CORRUPT CORPORATES, they are the REAL ONES THAT KILLED THE DEBT TALK, because then they couldn't get the Etch-A-Sketch Political Puppet elected!
Now MSN, stop asking silly questions, when you ALREADY KNOW the answer!
There is no doubt who killed the debt talks. One side walked away, one didn't. It should also be noted that the side still at the table was offering one heck of a lot more than the side that walked away. Pure obstructionism. The republican calculus has for 3 years been to make Obama look bad at the cost of the American middle class in hopes to convince people he is a failure. Don't forget this massive annual deficit was inherited from W ($1.4 billion per year) and now the same folks who created it won't work to reduce it.
Cantor does not belong in Politics. He should lead a radical group of some kind... He does not deal--. If you've voted long enough you know NO BODY WINS ALL THE TIME.... IT'S MAYBE 30 FOR YOU AND 70 FOR ME.Sometimes it's actually 50/50... but this idea of IT'S MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY....AND THEN TO WALK OUT OF A MEETING ON THE DEBT WHEN AMERICANS WERE SCARED TO DEATH ABOUT PAYCHECKS AND SOCIAL SECURITY -- WHAT THE HELL !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If and I mean If he has brains she sure dosen't use them correctly...
Someone said he has dreams of being President -- I hope not in my lifetime... this boy is just N U T S . Plus one would think that being of the faith that he is he would understand that a stance like" my way or the highway" is sorta exactly what the Jewish People have been fighting since the days of the Egyptians... BEING TOLD WHAT TO DO OR PAY A PAINFUL PRICE....!!!!!only this time THEY ARE TRYING TO DO IT TO THE BALANCE OF AMERICAN'S...... He's kinda like Hitler in his own way...!!!!!!!!!!!
Forgive my error in post #65: the inherited annual deficit was $1.4 TRILLION, not billion.
A reminder of what is driving this massive annual deficit:
1. The BUSH tax cuts, unfunded and supported whole-heartedly by republicans to this very day.
2. Unfunded wars, supported whole-heartedly by republicans.
3. Medicare part D, unfunded and conveniently, the reason W got re-elected (that and the swift boating).
All enacted during the last administration, which started with a balanced budget.
Stop, I can't stand it anymore..the hypocrisy...we all know that there will have to be some combinaiton of spending cuts and revenue gains to actually balance the budget...anyone who has done a household or business budget gets it...
The hypocrisy runs rampant on boith sides...if enough politicians had the guts they would start by decreasing spending by 3% and increase revenue by the same amount. Tthe budget would be in balance in less than 10 years which is sure better than the tripe both sides have been trying peddle as budgets...
Even Paul Ryans boongoddle og a budget increase the debt by trillions...hardly a profile in courage...I don't think the demohacks have produced a budget in 5 years so they have no guts or glory either
Rick-546746:
I agree with your analysis. Until 2000 wasn't what you described occurring? The change of culture began occurring in the GW Bush and his "brain" Rove with talk of a Republican controlled political system for as far as the eye could see. During the economic collapse it was the republican congress that balked at the republican devised bail out plan. There is a civil war in the republican party and nothing is getting accomplished until we can return to a non ideological battle.
The teapugs ruined the opportunity for a bi partisan compromise. What a shock!
nevermind
Cut Spending. Cut back on handouts to anyone not physically or mentally capable of providing for themselves. Ben Franklin said that if you make poverty a hard life, far less would live in poverty. So called "Progressives" has put us in this hole. Only 50% of workers even Federal taxes anymore. It was 14% in 1984. Families earning $55,000, pay Fed. Inc. Tax and there are fare more at that end of the spectrum than those at $250,000+.
Not true, "50% don't pay federal taxes anymore". I've heard just on this post everything from 25% to 47%, to now 50%. Is this the same people who said the keystone pipeline would create 20K, then 30K then 50k then, 100k jobs? No matter what your income level is you pay federal taxes of about 10% to Social Security and Medicare. What you mean to say is some % don't pay the federal income tax either because of low wages or the earned income tax credit or some sort of tax credit.
Sorry, you did write Fed Inc. Tax the second time round. Whatever, the 50% is not a true. and what does it matter if it were true when the top 20% garner 80% of the income?
http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/story/2011-10-06/income-tax-nonpayment/50676912/1
Read it and weep. The actual American taxpayer does!
pretty easy to blame everything on the working class and the poor, when the mega-rich can pay elected official to cover up all the welfare going to the rich.
George W. Bush stopped the talks, right before he made gas prices shoot through the roof and had Peyton Manning traded to the Broncos.
Sound right Dems??
Obama is a disaster. Spent 2.5 years passing a law the "Majority" of Americans didnt want, which on a side will be proven unconstitutional. I don't know anybody in the private sector that could perform so horribly and last this long.
ryan-74- your side loves to chastise Obama as the worse President since Jimmy Carter.
Where would you rank G.W.Bush- comes into office with a non deficit creating budget, despite being warned by Clinton and R. Clark re Al Quada we have a domestic foreign terrorist event, deficits no longer matter, capped by two unfunded wars, and the economic meltdown.
Ryan-74 facts are pesky things arent they?
This is just a History lesson. I am sending it to all regardless of party .
I bet I know who wouldn't read it -- those afraid of the truth. It is history and nothing can change it.
The day the Democrats took over was not January 22nd 2009, it was actually January 3rd 2007,
the day the Democrats took over the House of Representatives and the Senate, at the very start
of the 110th Congress.
The Democratic Party controlled a majority in both chambers for the first time since the end of the
103rd Congress in 1995.
For those who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy that
everything is "Bush's Fault", think about this:
January 3rd, 2007, the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the House:
The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77
The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5%
The Unemployment rate was 4.6%
George Bush's Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of JOB CREATION!
Remember that day...
January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House
Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee.
The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy?
BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES!
THANK YOU DEMOCRATS (especially Barney ) for taking us from 13,000 DOW, 3.5 GDP and
4.6% Unemployment...to this CRISIS by (among MANY other things) dumping 5-6 TRILLION Dollars
of toxic loans on the economy from YOUR Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac FIASCOES!
(BTW: Bush asked Congress 17 TIMES to stop Fannie & Freddie -starting in 2001 because it was
financially risky for the US economy). Barney blocked it and called it a "Chicken Little Philosophy"
(and the sky did fall!)
And who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae AND Freddie Mac? OBAMA
And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie?
OBAMA and the Democrat Congress,
especially BARNEY!!!!
So when someone tries to blame Bush...
REMEMBER JANUARY 3rd, 2007.... THE DAY THE DEMOCRATS TOOK OVER!"
Bush may have
been in the car but the Democrats were in charge of the gas pedal and steering wheel they were
driving the economy into the ditch.
Budgets do not come from the White House. They come from
Congress and the party that controlled Congress since January 2007 is the Democratic Party.
Furthermore, the Democrats controlled the budget process for 2008 & 2009 as well as 2010 & 2011.
In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused them to compromise on
spending, when Bush somewhat belatedly got tough on spending increases.
For 2009 though, Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid bypassed George Bush entirely, passing continuing
resolutions to keep government running until Barack Obama could take office. At that time, they
passed a massive omnibus spending bill to complete the 2009 budget.
And where was Barack Obama during this time?
He was a member of that very Congress that passed all of these massive spending bills, and he
signed the omnibus bill as President to complete 2009. Let's remember what the deficits looked
like during that period:
If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the 2007 deficit, the last of the
Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit
spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama,
who voted for the budgets.
If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself. ! ! !
In a nutshell, what Obama is saying is "I inherited a deficit that I voted for, and then I voted to expand
that deficit four-fold since January 20th."
There is no way this will be widely publicized, unless each of us sends this information on!
"The problems we face today exist because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those
who vote for a living."
So everything the President said he was going to do, and didn't, is not because he is in way over his head and just very foolish for saying it in the first place, And since his word is worthless, we should all believe him now?
Sounds great, a beautifully written and logical piece of propaganda. Who wrote it? Too bad you give it away with the first sentence and 3rd from the last sentence. This is a chain e-mail to pass on to all your friends so they too can spin history to suit their needs.
Senate was split 55-45 in 2007. Where were the infamous filibusters? Where was George Bushes Veto pen? Blaming Frank and Dodd for the banking and housing catastrophes, get real. I bet they had no idea they were that powerful. Bush had a 52 months of job creation. So what? His job growth rarely hit the break even point where enough jobs were being created to keep up with the growing population. Of course the unemployment rate does not include college and high school graduates not being part of those figures because they were not collecting unemployment.
Point after point is a bastardization of the truth. Sounds like this came straight from Fox News hitting most of the RNC and Aisles talking points.
Again, will you tell us who wrote this?
The very ink with which history is written is merely fluid prejudice.
Mark Twain
So, why bring this up now??? We all know what happened. The GOP walked away. I kinda knew he would in the end. The result?? No DEAL! More bickering to come. And a credit rating drop! Why is anyone surprised?? The story hasnt chaged!
Obama also upped the ante for politics since his people did not like the compromise.
I want the Repubs to win so they can take even more money from the middle class......this will cause upheaval and reform. At some point the American people will start taking control of their government, instead of vica versa
The middle class problems are much more complex than a simple tax issue. Bush gave the middle class big tax breaks and Obama added a lot to them and things are still bad. With middle class jobs going obsolete due to technology advances and foreign competition driving down prices, I don't see this is a tax problem and Democrats will not be fixing it.
Republicans have not raised taxes on middle class as you claimed.
Fred, I agree with everything you've written. It is far too complicated. Nobody has even touched on the fact that Clinton allowed the(Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act) in 1999 to gut the Glass Steagle act of 1933. It allowed investment banks, commercial banks, and insurance companies to consolidate. How about Clinton's and the Republican Congress's free trade agreements? Not to be outdone the long-standing Chinese intellectual property theft, and indecipherable corporate ownership laws and tariff structures.
The Pubs and Dems have much on their plate to address but are too concerned with winning and the power it brings to actually be concerned about the American people.
The debt debate ended when the corporatists figured out they were as much or more to blame as the party of the people. Corporatists told the RNC who told Roger Aisles and Rush to drop it. Besides, they said, we have all our BS websites up and running now.
Who cares!!! It is an election year. And no candidate likes to talk about real problems.
the credit downgrade by ratings agencies (first in American history) was a direct result of the soaring national debt and no plan to reduce it and no reasonable expectation that there would ever be a plan. PERIOD. The national debt has been on the rise over many presidencies. However we have reached a catastrophe in the making. As a nation we are now in debt an equal amount to our GDP per year ($15 trillion +). We are going deeper in debt at a $1 trillion + per year. Italy, has just implemented higher taxes across the board to their already enormous taxes because they are 120% to GDP in debt. They have an income tax rate that starts at 23% for the lowest earners, a 21% national sales tax on everything they purchase, and gasoline taxes that result in $10 a gallon gasoline. This action is forcing them back into recession and thousands of small businesses in Italy are closing up. I'm sure the socialist minded politicians in Italy will want to raise taxes further to make up for the lost revenue as a result of closed businesses and fired workers.