E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSAfter a weekend that generated skepticism about a possible deal to avert the 'fiscal cliff,' House Republicans presented a plan that includes $800 billion in new taxes, which is half of what the White House asked for. NBC's Chuck Todd reports.
Updated 4:50 p.m. ET -- Republicans offered up their own proposal to avert the impending “fiscal cliff” on Monday amid Democratic demands that the GOP match the Obama administration’s plan with one of their own.
In a letter to President Barack Obama, House Republican leaders outlined the contours of a deal they said would achieve a net savings of $2.2 trillion. The plan, which is based on fiscal commission Democratic co-chairman Erskine Bowles’s proposal to the super committee, would achieve these savings through revenue from tax reforms, health savings and discretionary spending cuts.
Recommended: Income tax rates just one piece of Obama proposal
"Going over the cliff will hurt our economy and hurt job creation in our country. It’s one of the reasons the day after the election I offered a concession to try and speed this process up. Unfortunately, the White House responded with their ‘La-La-Land’ offer that couldn't pass the House or Senate and was basically the president’s budget from last February," House Speaker John Boehner told reporters on Capitol Hill at a briefing detailing the plan.
Alex Wong / Getty Images
Speaker John Boehner speaks during a news conference, Nov. 30, 2012, on Capitol Hill.
"We could have responded in kind, but we decided not to do that. What we’re putting forth is a credible plan that deserves serious consideration by the White House and I would hope that they would respond in a timely and responsible way," the Ohio Republican added.
Dan Pfeiffer, the White House communications director, said the plan "does not meet the test of balance."
"Their plan includes nothing new and provides no details on which deductions they would eliminate, which loopholes they will close or which Medicare savings they would achieve," he said. "While the president is willing to compromise to get a significant, balanced deal and believes that compromise is readily available to Congress, he is not willing to compromise on the principles of fairness and balance that include asking the wealthiest to pay higher rates ... Until the Republicans in Congress are willing to get serious about asking the wealthiest to pay slightly higher tax rates, we won't be able to achieve a significant, balanced approach to reduce our deficit our nation needs."
The counter-offer coincides with Democratic demands that Republicans produce their own proposal to match the deal offered last week by the administration. That plan, presented to Republicans by Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, called for $1.6 trillion in new revenues, savings from entitlement programs and new spending on unemployment insurance and investment projects. GOP leaders rejected the plan out-of-hand.
Still, the GOP proposal on Monday appears to move no further toward compromise on Obama’s central demand that tax rates be allowed to increase on the wealthiest Americans. While Republicans have agreed in principle that richer Americans can shoulder a greater share of the tax burden, they insist this must be achieved through ending loopholes and deductions, rather than raising rates.
The Republican plan, which is also backed by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., achieves its $2.2 trillion in several steps.
rep. Sander Levin, D-Mich., talks about the key points in President Barack Obama's fiscal cliff negotiation that are making Republicans wary.
As Republicans put it, they would raise $800 billion in new revenue through tax reform, $600 billion in health savings, $200 billion from changes to the Consumer Price Index, $300 billion in discretionary spending cuts, and another $300 billion in savings in mandatory spending. Many of the health savings track closely with the changes to Medicare first proposed in Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan’s budgets.
Republicans say the plan, using the Obama administration’s math, would achieve $4.6 trillion in savings.
It’s unclear, though, whether the Republican plan would move toward ending the stalemate around the fiscal cliff negotiations, with less than a month remaining until the automatic tax hikes and spending cuts are scheduled to snap into place on Jan. 1.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., pummeled his GOP colleagues earlier Monday afternoon, arguing that their failure to produce a counter-offer would only exacerbate the situation.
The new GOP plan reflects the posturing that has come to characterize these negotiations, separated just a month from an election which awarded Obama a second term and which kept Republicans in control of the House and Democrats in control of the Senate.
Also on Monday, the president continued his messaging offensive on Monday with a glossy campaign-style video highlighting the cost to families if the 2001 Bush-era tax cuts were allowed to expire at the end of this month. (Obama has argued they should be extended for all but the wealthiest 2 percent of U.S. households.)
Benjamin Myers / Reuters
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner arrives at Capitol Building before a meeting with House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi in Washington, D.C., Nov. 29, 2012.
The president also took to Twitter to make the case for his own plan, answering questioners who used the informal 140-character medium to ask about the fiscal cliff negotiations.
Asked by one participant why he insists on increasing rates on the top 2 percent of earners rather than limiting deductions in order to raise revenues, the president replied that capping deductions alone would not raise adequate revenue.
"Not enough revenue, unless you end charitable deductions, etc. [L]ess revenue=more cuts in education," he wrote.
The president also dismissed the GOP notion that lower taxes for the very wealthy have a trickle-down effect in terms of new hires and a larger tax pool. "High end tax cuts do least for economic growth & cost almost $1T," he wrote. "Extending middle class cuts boosts consumer demand & growth"
Obama also argued that his administration cut spending by $1 trillion last year and that he is open to further "smart cuts" as long as they don't affect education or job growth.
NBC's Frank Thorp contributed to this report.
Leave a Comment:
Obama won the election, the people have spoken, Tax the 2%, leave SS, Medicare , Medicaid & Obamacare alone! Try cutting Defense
Going over the cliff will increase taxes on everybody but most to the 1%. It automatically cuts the deficit but most come from defense. The majority voted for big government, the cliff will allow you to pay for it.
Defense cuts are automatic if we go over the cliff. It just needs to happen and people need to stop getting so worked up over it.
Don't give in to the 2% demand, leave defense alone, and gut medicare, medicaid, and social security.
1. We're going over the fiscal cliff.
2. Doing so will give the GOP cover on the Norquist pledge (they just have to do the HELL NO YOU CAN'T dance until January).
3. There will be a bi-partisan agreement to give new tax breaks to the middle class and lower income households (or the GOP will lose seats in 2014)
4. Everyone needs to calm the f-u-c-k down and stop worrying about the "fiscal cliff".
The GOP says, "this is a serious matter" and "we are not interested in playing rope-a-dope", again just offering rhetoric to hide behind instead of any real answers or any sincere departure from their stubborn concentration on protecting "the money's" interests, their strong supporters and masters. Yes, it "is a serious matter" and their continually offering only subterfuge to con the people and to rationalize justification for their arrogant refusal to make any real bipartisan efforts, sticking to no tax increases for the 1% but possibly allowing cutting deductions for everyone, which can then hurt the 98% more than the 1%, is really "playing rope-a-dope" with the Republicans considering the "dope" to be the majority. The Republicans have to prove they can offer more than rhetoric that just disguises "more of the same"
This isn't just with the "fiscal cliff" and tax negotiations, regrettably the Republicans have become cocky confident in their ability to force the Democrats to cave-in, recent history clearly shows it with the power, influence and mega-funds behind them, as they are owned and controlled by "the money", and as they use the constant joint efforts to con the people, considering them only "pawns" to be used and abused, and to manipulate public opinion. It really is neither Republican philosophies versus Democratic nor "conservative" versus "liberal", as that is just part of the subterfuge. No matter what anyone's loyalty, when they can be objective and rational long enough to evaluate reality, there can be no denying that the Republicans irresponsibly concentrate totally on their political ambitions and on serving only "the money" and they don't really negotiate but rather try to dictate, without regard for the costs to the people. They simply play games with offering their rhetoric, trying only to gain political advantage while not conceding even an inch.
As just one current example look at the antics of McCain and Graham as they take a legitimate issue but go drastically overboard with it for their political purposes. Not only wasn't Benghazi the first occurrence, with even more loss of life in the past, but McCain and Graham were totally silent in those past instances. They fault what likely was innocent misinformation but never faulted GWBush's constant misinformation rendered to manipulate public opinion, which was stubbornly supported by the full Republican party, even when the Bush administration falsely justified attacking Iraq; in everything Bush constantly lied and Condi Rice repeatedly swore to it - and McCain and Graham were quiet. Their use of rhetoric to dupe and use the people is obvious and very costly in its aim to serve only the few.
Is this what we pay these idiots exhorbitant salaries to produce. The scum from the right fall just as far short as the scum from the left. Over the next ten years, we will produce, according to CBO, some $11 Trillion in deficits and they want to cut perhaps $2 Trillion?? And that's $2 Trillion more than the President wants to cut. I might agree to allow Iran a nuke on condition that they drop it on Washington DC but it has to be with all politicans in town. During last year's debt debacle, 1 Rep congressman and 1 Dem offered their solutions. The Dem of course wanted more revenue by a consumption tax of 1% on everything. Said the debt would go away in 10 years. The Rep of course wanted to cut spending: 1% per year (not a cut in the rate of growth but a REAL cut) for the next 6 years. Also said that would eliminate the debt in 10 years. Lets do both! Retire the debt and use the extra $$ to restore infrastructure.
If you retire the debt, there is no money for infrastructure, or for Medicare, or for unenployment insurance, or for FEMA, or for defense, or for most other government programs.
The GOP "proposal" was a three page letter referring to the house-passed budget, aka "The Ryan Plan". What is the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results?
No it is based on Simpson-Bowles that was Obama's bi-partison commission.
Simpson Bowles starts with a return to Clinton era tax rates. Guess the Reps didn't bother reading that far.
Obama thinks because he won the election that he can propose laughable solutions to the problems at hand. Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security are going broke but Obama just wants to ignore that problem and instead raise taxes on anybody that makes more than $200,000 a year (small business and above), and create more government programs to waste our taxes. Obama doesn't want to fix the problem. He just want to make sure he doesn't lose any future votes. Obamacare added 8 more government agencies and did nothing to bring down the cost of Healthcare. More government is not the answer but unfortunately a lot of those that voted for Obama voted for more government. I from the government and I am here to help you-Ronald Reagan. Anyone that thinks more government is better isn't paying attention-What do you think has got Europe into so much trouble? I want more government to take care of me and at what cost?
I"ll remind you how much you hate "Big Government" next time there is a hurrican or flood in your region.
Your boy Ronnie hated government so much that HE DOUBLED THE SIZE OF IT.
What about the agencies that George W. created which not only consumed great amounts of money but also took away much of our freedom more then any other President since Lincoln with his occuring during a state of rebellion.
He doesn't have to fix the problem...It fixes itself January 1st. Obama has all the leverage in this case. If you believe "Government IS the problem" the House Republicans are welcome to resign to help make it smaller. ; )
The problem with big government with respect to hurricanes and floods is the government comes in and allows people to rebuild in places where they shouldn't have been allowed to build in the first place or the building standards are too lax and the buildings aren't built to withstand the hurricane. I am all for help to those that need it but the government doesn't seem to fix the root problem most of the time. They just continue to through more money at it instead of fixing it. We all pay for this.
Hey Ozzie.
Talk to the people on Stanten Island,New Jersey or Rockaway how well FEMA is doing.
Obama needs not worry about future votes. He cannot run again. At first I thought he was an idiot because the decisions he'd been making was indicative that he was out of his depth and not knowing what he was doing. As his second term begins and the developments in the Middle East are unfolding, I see the genius in it. Obama knows EXACTLY what he's doing. The only problem is it works against the interests of The United States, to the point of being treasonous.
As the Arab Spring unfolded and nation after nation revolted their respective governments, the opportunity to end (or at least contain) militant Islamic Terrorism, and striking a fatal blow to al-qaida and other enemies of the United States was within our grasp. But that didn't happen. Instead, the United States assisted in the ousting of the leaders of 3 of America's allies; Lybia, Egypt and Yemen and in front of the whole world, creating distance between The United States and Israel, the ONLY democracy in the region.
What kind of message does that send to our friends? Wait... never mind that. What message does that send to our enemies? It tells them, "Do as you wish... attack our embassies, threaten our allies, you no longer have anything to fear from the United States." It is only a matter of time before an alliance is forged between Egypt, Iran & Syria (3 nations that have vowed to destroy Israel). When that happens, they won't hesitate to make their long awaited move against Tel Aviv.
By crippling the US economy (Obama basically has to sit there & do ABSOLUTELY nothing.... the way he handled Benghazi), he takes away (through across-the-board cuts in military spending) any option the United States would have in coming to the assistance of Israel. (Because no hostile nation in their right mind would attack Israel if American backing were still part of the equasion). Israel would be on her own & I do not believe she will go quietly.
No, this is going to get really REALLY bad, really REALLY fast. And by the time Americans realize what an INCREDIBLE mistake they made in RE-electing Barack Obama, it will be to late. I used to think Barack Obama was stupid, if not foolish, but now I realize he's very intelligent; frighteningly so. Before the end of Obama's 2nd term, the Middle East, which had sat so delicately on a shelf of peace for 60 years, will rip apart in a war, involving every country in the region. Those that have nukes will probably use them. Those that don't, will probably get them.
This isn't happening because of an unusual series of events. No, this is all happening by design. The Middle East, as we know it will tear itself apart. It will not be the result of Barack Obama's ineptitude; It will be the result of Barack Obama's sabotage.
Jesus Christ was a progressive.
How dare you begin to assume that He had any views politically when none were stated. I take offense to how you casually regard how Jesus may or may not have felt about issues with which there is no record. (They didn't exactly hold votes over who was in charge at the time)
There is a New Testament of his views which alwars presents him as supporting the poor. When he divided the fish he did not tell the people to go out and get a job.
Yes, supporting the poor through free will and being a good samaritan... not forced down the throats of the many. If people want to suck and not care about the poor, that is their choice. Jesus showed a much nicer alternative... still doesn't show where his gov't views came into play. It just shows he was more of a man than any of us.
Oh for Pete's sake!!!!!
Both the Republicans AND the Democrats sound like a bunch of High School Seniors. They've had ALL year to prepare for this. Now, they're faced with having to take their final and are forced to cram for exams. They better come up with something soon because from what we've seen from our newly re-elected President, I fear that Obama's just going to let the wildfires burn.
Obama will do nothing to lose future votes. Obama thinks government can fix all problems. Obama is a socialist and we are headed for failure like most of Europe if we continue down the path of more government.
CNN is reporting 3rd quarter corporate profits are now the highest % of gdp ever and wages are the lowest. That Obama is a really lousy socialist.
Can you say, VAGUE! Just a pretense, with no specifics, closing loop holes????? Just the same ole Pub misdirection, "see we gave specifics". These are the same "bull" that Lyin' Ryan has in his budget, that went nowhere in the Senate, and got he and Myth Romnesia the NOT-President, and NOT-Vice President of the United States! Two losers, pitching a loser proposal, that still gives low taxes to the rich and shifts costs to the old and poor.
When will they learn? We said no on November 6th, and we say NO, now! NEXT, we are watching GOP and you will be blamed for this failure. I'd call it leadership, but I see none from the GOP faction of the T'bagger party!
The Democrat offer nothing to solve the entitlement issue! The Democrats want the President to have the authority to raise the debt ceiling instead of dealing with the problem. The Democrats have said to the Republicans-you show us what to cut because we Democrats won't because we don't want to make our voters mad. Just because Obama got relected doesn't mean he can spend and tax at will and do nothing to make government responsible. Obama's plans are laughable! Obama is clueless when it comes to economics. No suprise here-Socialists are clueless with respect to economics-look at Europe.
Wasn't Obama's proposed tax increase,cuts and spending "VAGUE"?
The Republican proposals will not solve the problem; we need tax increases,as well asloop-hole closings, speinding cuts in the military as well as entitlement programs. (Actually. if we transferred substantial military spending to infra-structure improvements and educatiom, we would be using the money a lot more efficiently). Prior to Reagan, who first gave us $Trillion deficits, we had marginal tax rates of 70%. We have been going down-hill ever since his tax cuts. Clinton balanced the budget when he increased taxes to the rates that Obama wants to reinstate. Estate taxes, which hit those who have fortunes in unsold stock which has never been taxed, should start at least at $5M. There can be special provisions for family businesses and farms. No one needs to have so much money that they can buy $3,500.00 tote bags and build houses designed to match Versaille. As to closing loop holes, if all dividends are taxed at ordinary income rates, peopel will still buy stocks; they will offer a better yield than corporate bonds or bank accounts, which are taxed as ordinary income. We can cap the mortage interest deduction to exclude the interest attributable to that part of a mortgage over $1M, limit the mortage credit to only one house per couple,cut the credit for baby sitting in stages beginning with incoves over $250K, and tax profits resulting from shipping jobs overseas. The Republican arguments are those of the selfish rich whose only god is is represented by the symbol"$".
I like it, throw Obama's own plan from his debt commission back at him., that he previously ignored. Need anymore proof that Obama's destroying America is not an accident?
The GOP rejected the Commission plan because it had tax hikes. Nothing was ever presented to the Pres. That is why we have the sequester. Can't keep up? Take notes.
But we do know what they proposed even if the commission voted against it. They had good ideas. Even the Democrats liked it. Most of the Democrats on the commission voted for it.
The only one speaking from LA,LA land is the boner man him self. Still trying to please the rich, and steal from the poor. Will he ever say somthing that remotly sounds smart. other wise shut his f@#$%^ mouth and do what is needed. The is not a pagent, so try to look smart, insted of stupid Bonehead!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
Please everyone... let us continue to blame the opposite party for our woes! We wouldn't want to think that our own side might have ruined it for us? This is worse than being a dedicated fan to a sports team! At least the NFL, NBA, or MLB doesn't have a political opinion or we would be up in arms over that!
If you're a Dem or a Rep or of any party, I would ask that you take a good hard look at what your party stands for and what they have achieved with their stated goals. You might be surprised to see that they aren't matched up that well. Of course you would then argue that it's the "other guys" fault over why those goals weren't achieved. Useless excuses only seek to prevent any attainable goals.
Quit touting how awesome your people are and actually LOOK at what they have done and what they are doing! People of real caliber and leadership look for the fault in themselves, not in others.
It's not about the wealthy paying more, it's about how when you give Washington more money they always spend it on new programs and never reduce the debt. It will start with those 250,000 and above then will trickle down to every US taxpayer. It's time to stop spending. If you don't have the cash you must slash.
Too bad you didn't have religion during Bush's 8 years and his pissing away several TRILLION DOLLARS on his unnecessary wars.
Not enough specific details available. If all we have to go on is the recent past history of the Republican-led House and Paul Ryan's previous budget bills that the Republican-led House have recently passed then it will be another proposal that will seriously harm over 90% of Americans and may destroy the USA.
Recent past proposals by the House have included:
Huge cuts to Medicaid, the food stamp and other programs for the poor, severely harming countless poor infants, children, handicapped people and seniors, America's most vulnerable citizens.
Raising taxes for lower income individuals while NOT raising taxes for the wealthiest who can afford it most. The wealthy have benefited the most from capitalism and our government. The wealthiest got the largest tax cut of any group under the Bush tax cuts, and 10-plus years later they are still sending many jobs overseas to take advantage of the EXTREMELY low wages and benefits they can pay in these poor third-world and communist countries that would not come close to covering the costs of the most basic essentials to maintain life in the inflated economy of the USA. Ten-plus years after the Bush tax cuts we have very high unemployment. It is time to end the tax cuts for the wealthiest because the US has acquired many trillions of dollars more in debt over the past 10-plus years from nearly doubled-military spending in addition to two wars that have cost over $2 trillion and the war on terrorism, and THIS REQUIRES AN ACTUAL TAX INCREASE, especially on the wealthiest.
The Republicans (especially in Paul Ryan's budget bills) have recently proposed to essentially end Medicare for future seniors born after 1957 by privatizing it where the private insurance companies would again price most seniors out of the market as they did before Medicare was started, leaving future seniors broke and unable to pay for healthcare.
The Republicans would raise the Medicare age to 67. Humans have not evolved into a superior longer-lived species since Medicare was begun, they are just living longer, more productive lives and many are working longer because of Medicare and access to healthcare that allows them to maintain productive lifestyles longer. Taking away access to affordable healthcare for people ages 65 to 67, will only cause the early demise of countless many and countless many more will become totally handicapped before age 67 and unable to do much of anything. The Medicare payroll tax needs to be increased some along with other restrictions for this vital program, at least to cover the Republican Medicare D program which the Republicans never did fund.
The Republicans want to seriously cut back on Social Security benefits to pay their war/military debts and other debts. This is totally amoral. They are planning on literally robbing millions of people the necessary safety net they have paid 15% of their incomes into for over 35 years of hard work. This amounts to just plain robbery, and would lead to millions of homeless, handicapped, destitute seniors in the future and, as a result, much, much, much higher property taxes for younger working families as most seniors would no longer be able to pay any proper taxes, thus harming the education system.
Republicans want to end the ACA. The ACA, while it has many flaws that need repair, is a huge positive step in the right direction to curb the massive inflation of healthcare costs in the US by ending most of the billions and billions of unpaid medical bills by very sick, uninsured people, many of whom are older and broke and will never be able to pay any if much of their medical bills. These unpaid bills are mostly passed on to paying healthcare consumers through price increases across the board, and this is currently massively impacting the costs of Medicare that are spiraling rapidly out of control and adding billions and billions to the federal deficit every year and to the national debt. There are so many people over age 50 currently who have worked hard and steadily for over 30 or 40 years but cannot access affordable, adequate healthcare for their illnesses and other conditions of aging, etc. The ACA must be retained and its defects repaired.
By not allowing the necessary tax increases, especially on those able to pay them most, the Republicans will bankrupt and ruin this country. Wars require taxes and tax increases, and the last two very costly Republican wars, along with all the other increased military spending and Medicare spending and other spending that has never been adequately funded, will destroy the USA.
Do I understand it correctly, the republicans got all upset over a recycled policy proposal so they answered it with another recycled policy proposal? Well its good to see that politicians haven't grown as people.
they are something else they talk about diductions that still hurts the middle class because they can't take deductions either. they just won't talk about raising taxes they all are afraid of norquist who to me is a nobody probably with a lot of money
To quote a song from the Depression era...."and the rich get rich and the poor get poorer, in the morning, in the evening, ain't we got fun!"....or something like that.
I am 65 years old, have worked since I was 14 except for the years I was raising my children, I only worked part-time then. I worked 2 jobs for the past 9 years to help my children pay for college, but they both are still in heavy debt (both went to state schools)....and my doctor told me I had to quit the 2nd job. I won't make it if my taxes go up another $2000. I want to retire, but can't afford to....
and please....entitlement spending isn't what has put us in this hole...it is unfunded wars, and tax cuts....and that hasn't stimulated jobs has it? $2,000 to someone making $250,00 or more doesn't mean much, but to us folks in the middle making $50,000 less, this is huge....
The entitlements are unfunded also....that's what unfunded liabilities are.
So here we go, The democrates and Republicans are about as far apart as the west and east coast of our great country. In the end they'll probably come up with some kind of compromise that nobody will understand (as in what their really cutting and adding to get to a certain figure).
A plea that will fall on deaf ears, Think about our great country and put aside your differences. Work together to achieve what is nescessary and good for our nations future.
we need to get rid of the GOP or the represenetives of the top 5% and get a party interested in the peaple !!!!!
You don't have a plan, you are a non-entity now. The republican party is finished. Get used to be nothing.
Who honestly believes that if the rich are taxed more prices will NOT go up? The people and corporations who own all the business will just raise prices and who does that hurt the most proportionately? Food, rent, utilities, etc. your precious smart phones will all increase and the 98-99% will still be in the toilet. The only way out of this mess is to reduce entitlements to able-bodied people and provide private-sector jobs.
Stop, stop, you're making sense.
I'm sorry, I'll say it in advance, "My bad". House Leader John BONER, yea, that's you, putz. Try to pronounce your name so it doesn't sound like something from a 70's porn movie. But, a Boehner is a Boner, no matter how you pronounce it.
And you 2 "Coke" brothers.... yea, keep convincing yourselves that your heritage is NOT Jewish.
Yes, the Reblicans screwed the pooch on this one. They should have taken their plan, left it unsigned, and sent ot to the Oval Office with either Nancy Pelosi's or Harry Reid's return address on the envelope. It would have been hailed as a the greatest budget reduction package in history. Remember, we don't have to READ it anyway.
Until the wealthy pay at least the same percentage of tax rates as the middle class including their deductions there is going to be no agreement. As far as fairness goes, the wealthy have been getting the silver spoon side of everything. They do not send their children to war, it is the middle class who watch the sons and daughters, moms and dads fight the war to protect the elite, we pay with blood and they can't even pick up their bartab.
The idea of a multimillionaire paying an effective 12 or 13 percent while the middle class employee that works for them pays a much higher rate is ludicrous.
To suggest that these people are the job creators is a lot of bunk, they should look at the people they are willing to screw as the revenue makers for their business unless they are simply investors who do hardly any work, they have their capital that works for them.
Close all the loopholes for the wealthy, they do not need them and will not suffer for losing them.
Republicans are going to find out how doomed their party is, wait and see the results starting 2014 and 2016, I am looking forward to the show.