After 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.


And once again the republicans show they want to reduce deficit on the backs of the poor to protect those at the top, not surprising. 600 billion in health savings+ 300 in discretionary spending= cutting social programs.
If the Federal Government had to account for programs the way corporations
are required to fund programs, the U.S. government would have to put in $31
TRILLION TODAY - yes twice the national debt - to fund the gap in revenue vs
spending over the next 75 yrs for Medicare. Can you absorb that in your
mind?
The GOP talks of trying to address that issue and get ridiculed. To push this
issue further forward to our grandchildren and future generations without action
is IMMORAL!
why do people vote republican anyway? What's the point? They are only trying to steal money, from the poor or middle class preferably to give it to the rich 1% cuz they can barely get by with their billions.
The Ryan budget could not pass the Senate. The Ryan-Romney budget was soundly rejected by the American voter. So what does the GOP do as a proposal? You guessed it, the Ryan budget. What is the definition of insanity?
The article said they framed the proposal after the Bowles-Simpson Commission report. That sounds pretty good to me.
Well insanity+ stupidity to be accurate.
Where do you get this stuff? 53 - 51 million is pretty close my friend. That means nearly half agreed with Romney-Ryan.
Is that the same Commission that the GOP rejected? "Many of the health savings track closely with the changes to Medicare first proposed in Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan’s budgets." Same schitt, different day.
Looks like one side is trying, huh?
After 2 years and constant whining like babies...they finally have one plan to present to the American people. These people are a freakin JOKE!!!!
reality check
After 4 years of Obama and the Democrats what is their plan? Please be specific. What taxes are raised. What Dept.s are cut? Will they be cut in 2013 or in 2014? How much will be cut?
The plan is recovery from your peoples actions but your people keep deliberately getting in the way because of their hatred for one man. See Occams Razor for proof. Well, maybe not for you, it has to do with science.
still didn't answer the question.
The election answered it. You just don't accept reality and come here to vent your frustration. And if you want the answers, try googling them. They are there for you if you want to learn. I don't have the time or inclination to give you an education in common sense.
So what are the loopholes they will close on the rich? Any details? Is this just cutting Medicare and SS? These are not entitlement programs in the sense that Americans feel they should get them for nothing, we paid into them! Why do we need to protect the rich so much? They can afford to pay more and they are making more money than ever! My salary has barely gone up in 5 years. I got an education and I am working hard every day. I will never be able to afford the lifestyle my parents had and by the time I retire, there will be no safety net left.
Okay so GOP will agree to raise taxes on the rich if Obama agrees on cutting down spending. The problem is, Obama doenst want to stop spending. He doesnt think spending is the problem here. Obama is a fool.
The GOP needs to stop wasting time. Obama is pushing down on the accelerator to drive the country over the cliff. Republicans should be working, with exception of SS and medicare to de-fund government so we end up with a government that is responsible to the people and a government we can afford.
The GOP spent the last 4 years trying to stop an economic recovery. Now they are on auto-pilot and don't know how to stop screwing Middle Class America!
House Speaker John Boehner is the perfect poster child for birth control/use of condoms. Where did this babooze come from, so full of himself, a legend in his own mind.
Cuts to Medicare and Social Security. Continued low tax rates for the wealthy. Continued capital gains rates for the ubra wealthy. Increases in defense spending and unspecified tax reforms to be negotiated later. And they say that the GOP learned from the election.
I wish americans could start a vote on there own without waiting for yearly elections to do it. Maybe the americans could then vote Boner and mich out of their seats immediately and something could get done. They operate on their priciples instead of working for the american people. Why doesn't anyone see this. They need to have a boot shoved up there a$$ and told you "Work for the people" knock it off with your dam principles. "Do something" GOP is just Useless, this just pisses me off.
Oh well maybe this is a start. However, we the public need to see more details like which loopholes and what specific cuts.
I rather don't believe a deal will get done without an increase in the marginal tax rate for the over $250K crowd.
The Republicans don't really have a strong hand to play.
SS and medicare are not entitlement programs, they are earned retirement programs. Medicaid exists to provide medical care for those whom health insurance companies will not insure at a reasonable price or at all. Exactly how is it that these programs deserve to be cut at all? Do you honestly believe that 100% of the people using these programs are "takers" as the republicans would have you believe? If health insurance companies would insure everyone, instead of insuring only those who can afford to pay their unjustly inflated premiums, there would be no need for medicaid or medicare.
Morlack
SS and Medicare are ENTITLEMENT programs. You pay for them thus you are ENTITLED to their benefits. Thus they are ENTITLEMENTS. SEE HOW THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE WORKS?
Welfare on the other hand is NOT an entitlement. You don't pay into Welfare thus you are not entitled to it's benefits. You are GIVEN the benefits of Welfare you do not EARN those benefits they are GIVEN. SEE THE DIFFERENCE?
The reason they need to be cut Morlack is right now you get 3 times the benefit that you put in. Because of the rising cost of healthcare you will get $3 for every $1 you put in. If this is true I think anyone can see that is not sustainable. They have to figure out a way to control healthcare costs. I will admit, being and independent you can really take your own side on things. I am all for taxing the rich more. They won't miss it but I also side on the Republicans and the latest proposal. From what I read their cost saving for Medicare and SS is going to comes from means testing which just really is more taxes. We need cuts in spending, not just raising of more revenue. And one thing that is absolutely unacceptable it the proposal to raise the debt ceiling without needed approval. That just gives politicians a blank check which they will use to get elected.
This stupid, artificial construct called the fiscal cliff is not the precipice on which we are perched (remember Congress created it when they could not decide how to divide up the bounty of our tax dollars and the unlimited press of the US Treasury). Rather we are on the edge of determining whether the experiment of American democracy can succeed.
When the common man must wake each morning worrying what the Federal Government will do to change his life forever, we are no longer free but simple wards of the state. When the federal government works to break our ties to family and community we are not free but simple wards of the state. When business places more emphasis on lobbying than on product and service innovation we no longer have capitalism but a corrupt economy driven by the state. In short we have totalitarianism.
That anyone believes elections have provided a mandate for federal government action is a farce. Elections are about electing people, most of which were chosen as the lesser of only bad options. In earlier times when we did silly things and our country deviated off track, there was a common morality—the Bible and God—to which we could appeal and the themes there would eventually resonate. Those days are no longer. And while we need to find a new morale authority on which we can collectively appeal, it must not stop us from making some changes to our predicament. The course of our country still only changes because its citizens say “Enough!”
Against such totalitarianism we have only one tool, ourselves. In many respects we have forgotten it in this country but we have been able to see its success around the world against corrupt, dictatorial regimes. We must stand up individually and shout “Enough” and march collectively to change the course of American history. In to the streets, in to the fields, in to the interstate highways, we must march. Peaceful but persistent, energized and enduring.
The patriots and martyrs in this battle will be those individuals that forgo the streams of government money to make a stand on principle placing progeny above their own needs and wants. Having found their way to be successful “legally” in this corrupt system they instead will cut the cord with their only safety net being family, friends and community. They may be individuals, they may be companies heretofore bloated on cronyism. Let the statues be erected to them! Let them be our inspiration!
The fight will be hard and it will be long but there are 3 immediate tangible goals:
Of course much more work will need to be done to restore the balance in favor of the individual in this country. Much will be required to dissolve the federal government back to its core functions of national defense and maintaining a level playing field for interstate commerce. Much will be required to bolster our local governments and state governments. Much will be required to teach us personal responsibility and accountability.
But in this winter of our discontent, these 3 goals are achievable and can lead to our American Spring in which the foundations of our American Democracy are restored and the hard work ahead begins. Peaceful but Persistent, Energized and Enduring.
It starts by shouting ENOUGH! Now RISE!
A proposal is there, lets see how the negotiations go. By the way, part of Obama's plan was no congressional approval would be required to raise the debt ceiling, sounds like free spending without accountability. There are three branches of Government for a reason, checks and balances of power. This should also apply to spending.
You do know that Mitch McConnell propsed just that, letting the President set the debt ceiling, in 2011?
I also would be interested in a link to support your statement. Perhaps the discussion was for the President to set a debt ceiling for 2011 with approval of Congress,but not to be able to have the freedom to raise the debt ceiling without Congressional approval.
The GOP had no problems raising the debt ceiling during Bush's administration.
The Simpson-Bowles commission the GOP are now quoting admitted that even cutting ALL deductions, including those used most by the middle class, e.g., mortgage interest deduction, would not affect the deficit that much. Tax rates need to go back to the Clinton rate for those that benefited most from the Bush cut. The GOP would like to see everyone's tax rate go up and then cut deductions for those that need those deductions the most.
Lets get government spending back where it was under Clinton.
woodbutcher
Can you post a link to backup your statement?
Common Man, under Clinton we didn't have two wars to pay for.
We aren't paying for the two wars now. The GOP wants lower taxes on the wealthy while borrowing the needed war money from Japan and China by continuing to sell T-Bills.
I have no doubt that taxes are going up...the fiscal cliff is the CUTS.
CUT FOREIGN AID before you cut any aid to the American people.
Let it go Bankrupt.
same old story from -grand old people cut social security and medicare and protect the top 1% who we now know the trinkel down idea never worked--40% of the wealth of the middle class has gone to the top 1%
Obama and the Democrats CUT funding for SS and Medicare. That CUTS SS AND MEDICARE PAYMENTS!!
Wrong ! The Dems keep SS and Medicare benefits and propose that tax subsidies for oil and pharmaceutical companies be eliminated but the GOP refuses to allow this to pass the house or even be debated in the Senate.
The GOP voted down Dem efforts to end oil company subsidies and now claim they will end "loopholes" and "deductions" while "putting revenue on the table". Yeah.....right......
Is the GOP plan like that of the Dems. 1.6-2.2 trillion saved in a 10 year period. If so, HTF is that going to help with the spend, spend mentality of this liberal White House and Senate.
The budget defict for 2013 is the smallest since the record Bush budget deficit of 2009.
woodbutch
There was NOT a Bush 2009 Budget. There were Continuing Resolutions. The last one signed by Bush ended in Mar.2009. Obama singed the Continuing Resolution to fund the Govt for the rest of FY 2009 in Mar. 2009. So OBAMA OWNS at least half of the 2009 Deficit.
Republican show daily that have no clue when it comes to governing or negotiating. All they do is flounder, waste time and taxpayer money, and never offer anything new, ever.
Oregon, you are wrong in this case i side with the Republicans (for this week at least) The proposal Obama made was weak and all it really was is more taxes. The money being saved from medicare and SS was mostly from means testing. Which is really just another tax. You have to cut allot with raising the taxes. To be honest right now. I think the Republicans are doing the responsible thing and not the popular one. That doesn't solve the problem.
When repubs agree to eliminate tax subsidies for oil and pharmaceutical companies, agree to eliminate deductions that benefit primarily the wealthy, agree to regulate banks and investment companies to prevent another recession and raidse the maximum tax level on SS taxes.........I will begin to think that they might be serious.
let go over the so called cliff
I
am sure the wealthy 2% that live in this country are more than willing to pay
their fair share of taxes. Can you imagine the guilty they must feel every time
it’s time to pay their taxes?
obama doubled what bush spent so stop blaming bush.The dems won't go for this plan because it saves money not spend it in a wild way.The only ones that won't like it are the lazy freelosders that voted for their pres.
the amount of debt under Obama was directly impacted by the recession. If a Republican would have won 4 years ago I predict almost the exact same thing would have happened. It is a simple calculation debt is the difference between income and spending. When you have less income and even if you spend the exact same amount the debt will increase. Oh and don't kid yourself Obama might have added to the issue but Bush stated it. He raised the debt limt 7 of the 8 years while he was in office, and a number of those year the economy was fueled by false wealth. When things are going really good, that is the last time you should be loading up on debt. That is when you pay it off. It is simple economics