E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
PUBLISHED 2:29 p.m. ET -- President Barack Obama told his House Democratic colleagues that he would continue to challenge Republicans on how to best replace the impending sweeping spending cuts known as the "sequester."
Speaking at the House Democratic Issues Conference in Leesburg, Va., Obama said he wants to create an alternative to the sequester that includes some entitlement reforms but also more revenue through ending loopholes and deductions for the wealthiest earners, a point of disagreement with GOP lawmakers.
“I am prepared, eager and anxious to do a big deal, a big package that ends this governance by crisis,” he told the crowd.
Obama decried Republicans, who, he said, recognize “that the sequester is a bad idea, but what they've suggested is that the only way to replace it now is for us to cut Social Security, cut Medicare and not close a single loophole, not raise any additional revenue from the wealthiest Americans or corporations who have a lot of lawyers and accounts.”
While the president seemed to lament the lack of communication between himself and House Republicans, neither side has indicated that they negotiating in public or private. Earlier Thursday, White House press secretary Jay Carney lambasted House Speaker John Boehner’s reported offer, which includes cuts to Medicare premiums and federal pension programs, as “terrible.”
At the issues conference, Obama said he was steeling himself for another philosophical fight over cuts with the Republicans.
“I have to tell you, if that's an argument that they want to have before the court of public opinion, that is an argument I'm more than willing to engage in,” he said to applause.
But disagreements might not just be limited to the Republican side, the president added, saying he’s prepared to clash with fellow Democrats on key issues like immigration and gun safety.
“There will be times where you guys are mad at me, and I'll occasionally read about it,” he said.
Despite any such intra-party bickering, the president said he still believed Democrats would be in a good position in 2014 to retake the House of Representatives.
“As a by-product of doing that good work and keeping that focus, I would expect that Nancy Pelosi's going to be speaker again pretty soon,” the President concluded his remarks with, as the crowd erupted in cheers for their leader.
Leave a Comment:
Forget about the sequester for now, it's time to get IMPEACHMENT PRECEEDINGS ready for OBAMA, for being out of action while & during the Americans were being murdered, to save his re-election. They all knew(OBAMA, Clinton, Panetta, Rice and others who were in the loop) that within minutes it was a organized terrorists attack on the American Console in Benghazi, and did nothing, the lie was manufactured about the video is what caused the raid, and the poor bastard is still in jail,, Obama made a decision to stoop low and not be informed so he could escape scrutiny, but it's all out in the open, What Obama did was criminal and should be treated that way,,,,,
BUT, Obama is like our dad and he is our boss so we should just do what he tells us! - The VERY Ignorant Criss Rock.
Wonder if Obama's name is on Criss Rocks birth certificate?
I suppose your definition of "sweeping spending cuts" and mine differ. Federal outlays for 2013 will exceed those of 2012 despite the $85 billion sequester. The cuts may be ill considered and would likely do far less harm if they were not focused on just a few things, but they represent about a half of a percent of GDP, that strikes me as small, not "sweeping" and again, overall federal spending is not going down. Is it really catastrophic for the government to only spend just a little more in 2013 than 2012?
Don't forget DOD slid another 20 billion in spending for the WAR on DRUGS in South America right under everyone's noses.
Why are both sides fighting so hard to avoid the sequester when it is exactly what both sides agreed to? Why is it such a bad policy NOW, but was a good one when both Houses of Congress voted for it and the President signed it?
If we go through the sequester, it will probably be the only way we ever see any real cuts in spending. Both sides have proven that they really have no clue as to what is going on financially. Both sides spend recklessly, and no one wants to give up their favorite little sacred cows of spending.
What will happen when our interest payments consume the entire revenue stream??
I agree, let the sequester cuts take place. Then use the process of coming up with legislation for the FY2013 appropriation bills the FY2014 appropriation bills to fine tune and shift the spending cuts between various government agencies and programs as desired.
The 2/5/2013 report from the Congressional Budget Office now projects our total national debt to hit $26 trillion by 2023, in just 10 years. If that happens, annual interest on our debt will be around $1.3 trillion. That would make just interest on our debt equal to or larger than the entire defense budget. Those who think we can continue to rack up big federal budget deficits are simply refusing to face reality.
The $1.2 trillion in cuts that will happen if the sequester comes to be is a needed amount of cuts. However the meat clever nature of it most certainly will cause another recession and that will add to the debt. Too bad that the Repubs can't compromise and work out or more manageable way to do this.
I believe that the House is working on a bill to better manage the cuts. The Senate should also be working on such a bill. Then the two bodies can meet in a conference committee to negotiate their differences. That is how the process is supposed to work. The House will pass their bill. Reid is responsible for getting such a bill through the Senate.
So why did the WH push for the sequester if it was so horribly wrong NOW?
Gee, Willard, I don't understand how it came to this. The republican controlled house has passed a budget each of the last two years. If someone would wake Harry Reid up and get him to do something, maybe their could be some resolution.
And was this really all that surprising???
SS and medicare.. The teapublicans won't rest until both programs have been gutted or completely privatized...
""Obama decried Republicans, who, he said, recognize “that the sequester is a bad idea, but what they've suggested is that the only way to replace it now is for us to cut Social Security, cut Medicare and not close a single loophole,""
Wow...when did the Democrats care about closing ANY loopholes? Was it when they had complete power--Congress (both Houses) and the Oval Office?
SS and Medicare/Medicaid are going to break us without serious reforms.
What exactly do you think will happen when our interest payments on the debt total more than government revenues????
The biggest tax breaks in 2009 according to the Joint Committee on Taxation:
34.6 million taxpayers reduced their federal income taxes by a total of nearly $77 billion by deducting the interest they paid on their home mortgages.
25.7 million low-income families collected a total of $55 billion from the earned income tax credit.
36 million families saved more than $54 billion from the $1,000 per-child tax credit.
40.7 million taxpayers cut their federal income taxes by $40 billion by deducting state and local income, sales and personal property taxes.
36 million families cut their taxes by nearly $35 billion by deducting charitable donations.
28 million taxpayers saved a total of $24 billion because their income from Social Security and railroad pensions was untaxed.
33.5 million households cut their taxes by $21 billion by deducting state and local real estate taxes.
Time to step up and tell everyone just which of these would you like to eliminate?? Perhaps I should have included Personal Exemptions. Just why should a family get to take deductions for children?? That isn’t “fair” to those with no dependents.
It is always easy to claim that "tax loopholes" are the problem. Look at the above list and make your choice of things to cut out of the tax code. While you are at it, keep in mind the size of the problem, $1 trillion annual budget deficits.
Eliminate the mortgage and property tax deductions for those earning more that $500,000. End oil subsides. Make the corporate income tax a flat tax. Eliminate the 401(c)(4) non-profit status.
That would kick the debt in the ass.
Typical Democrat solution----tax the rich into oblivion. Should work really well when the highest wage-earners simply move away. Ask France how that's working out for them!
Simple question for you, J. Willard---what happens when our interest payments exceed government revenues?
The rich will have the BeJesus taxed out of them, there is no other solution.
So what happens when interest payments are more than revenue, J Willard??????
And we don't tax based on wealth, we tax based on income.
JWM - do the math. Won't make a dent. There simply are not enough high income folks. If the middle class wants all these government programs and benefits, they are going to have to step up and pay for them. The days of the "free ride" are over.
It is not the amount of folks, it is the amount of income. 1% of earners get over 20% of all the income. Tax the BeJesus out of those folks, it will kick the debt in the ass.
Data from tax returns show that the top 1 percent of households received 8.9 percent of all pre-tax income in 1976. In 2008, the top 1 percent share had more than doubled to 21.0 percent.
k1200 glad you trust the government on how to spend your SS money wisely LOL!!!
Like giving away 2 billion to the Egyptian Muslim brotherhood, and 48 billion total in foreign aid mainly to countries that don't like us
But I guess you like being cuddled by corrupt politicians
Tax the rich JWillard is in the community soup kitchen crying in his soup for being a failure. Too bad
willard
That 1% pays about 38% of ALL Federal income taxes. Why didn't you mention that little fact in your statement?
None of our current fiscal problems are beyond repair. But we can't get our elected officials to sit down and come up with a solution.
There will NEVER be a deal where one side gets everything they want and the other side just concedes defeat. What this means is that conservatives need to accept that tax increases will always be on the table. I've suggested here and to my conservative state congressman that we attack this in the following way:
1. Create a 1-2% national sales dedicated to paying down the deficit
2. Cut military and social security spending immediately
3. Have 10% across the board cuts to all discretionary spending over the next 10 years.
We had an interesting dialogue. he explained why this seems good on the surface, it would work because of the complexity of our government and we don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem.
I replied that my proposal (however the final numbers work out) is way more spending cuts than revenue increases. That was when he (or one of his staff) started down the party line and the discussed devolved.
I haven't heard back since.
Our problems aren't as dire as we're lead to believe. We can fix it but it takes political will to make the changes we need in a smart way that will pass.
You have no chance of getting a VAT even proposed in Congress, much less get enough votes to pass it. The American public has been conditioned to having low federal taxes. The next election is less than 21 months from now. For politicians in Washington DC to support a VAT would be political suicide.
The problem is not our politicians, it is the American public. They want government programs and benefits that they are unwilling to pay for.
The problem with the American people is that the takers outnumber the makers. We simple need tax reform that includes everyone paying a share.
Flat tax 15% across the board no matter what. No deductions no write offs. If you make a buck Uncle Sam gets a dime and a nickel.
And them back that up with a Constitutional amendment the calls for a balanced budget. Congress cannot spend more than it takes in.
Flat tax 15% across the board
That will never happen.
No. JWillard, it won't. That would be too FAIR!
A flat tax of 15% flat tax would not raise enough income to have a significant impact on the federal budget deficit, but it would dramatically shift the tax burden from higher income folks to those in the middle class and below. JWM is correct that it will never happen. In addition, it is a horrible idea.
Right now the middle class pays an "effective" tax rate of 4-5%. Your suggestion would triple the amount of federal income tax being paid by middle class families.
"Right now the middle class pays an "effective" tax rate of 4-5%"
Perhaps a family with several children pay that rate, My effect tax rate (income tax only, not payroll tax) is about 10%. Imagine that, I am not part of the "47%" I receive no financial assistance from the government whatsoever and I voted for Obama.
JWM - as always, data is based on group averages.
Obama is the
most radical, destructive and worst President in history. He is arrogant, a pot
head, lazy (only works 10am to 4pm) incompetent, lawless, a fraud, never had a
real job, aloof and a COMMUNIST. Obama and the Democrat party are continuing to
destroy the great US economy. In four years they have; deficit spent $6.4
trillion (most of any Pres.) with nothing to show for it, increased national
debt to $16.4 trillion and counting, real unemployment rate of 20%, no job
growth, 8.5 million lost jobs, 24 million underemployed, black/hispanic unemployment
over 30%, hate oil/coal industries, fossil fuels, military, private sector,
success, constitution, right to bear arms, over 1,808 soldiers killed in
Iraq/Afgn since Obama became Pres., one in six people in poverty (highest ever),
stole $716 billion in Medicare benefits from seniors to fund Obamacare, wasted
billions of taxpayer funds on scam clean energy deals like Solyndra and Ener1
to campaign donors, disastrous Obamacare has already raised health rates 50%,
is largest tax increase in history and now costs $2.8 trillion, foreign policy
of cowardice and appeasement, supports worst Sec. of State in history, Hillary
Clinton, who is responsible for the murder of Libyan ambassador and three
staffers in Benghazi, supports worst AG in history Eric Holder, who is
responsible for killing a border agent, 49 million on food stamps and increased
business killing govt regulation/employment more than any other Pres….
"...as the crowd erupted in cheers for The Great Leader."
There, fixed it for ya. I'm sure that suits them much better.
As did the crowds gathered for Jesse Jackson, Jr. Hee-hee!
LMFAO. Your liberals are screaming about the fact that sequestration is looming but you all seem to forget that it was Obama that proposed it and signed it. Now that is going to happen he wants more money and a balanced approach to cuts. Well, he already got his tax increase and as far as the balanced approach, the house has already passed two bills the would do that and they sit dead in the democrat senate.
Guess what all the republicans have to do now to get cuts is wait until march first and let Obamas sequestration take effect.
Cry me a river as it has come time to pay the piper.
This is not the President's sequester, it belongs to Congress. Had President Obama not signed it, the financial crisis would have occurred a few months back. Congress put this together to force themselves to do something. And once again they do nothing (Dems and Reps). 'Already got his tax cuts'? and you think that makes it balanced...no way. Tax reform will generate way more revenue without changing rates. It is time to quit believing in Reagan's trickle down version of the American economy.
The idea of tax reform is not to generate a lot of new revenue. The idea is to simplify the tax codes by lowering rates as an offset to elimination of deductions and credits. There are many who believe that this would "broaden" the base and bring in more revenue from the individual tax code because of the inability to take deductions that people are not entitled to, but the intent would be to do something like was done back in 1986.
It is possible that reform of the corporate tax code could bring in additional revenue because a simpler, "fairer" code would make companies in this country more competitive, and therefore more profitable, in the global economy.
A flat tax for corporations is an excellent idea.
Actually I am not a fan of Corporate taxes. Corporations do not pay taxes people do. Taxes to a corporation are simple line items added to the overall cost of doing business and them passed to the consumer. All taxes should be collected at the personnel income level and through import tariffs that are regulated to keep costs competitive.
Jay please read the following article and you may find the you are wrong about Congress proposing the sequestration.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/obamas-fanciful-claim-that-congress-proposed-the-sequester/2012/10/25/8651dc6a-1eed-11e2-ba31-3083ca97c314_blog.html
.
What sequestration fight? Obama proposed sequestration and he got what he wanted...sequestration is a law that goes into effect March 1...time to move on to reforming the tax code...
Poor Obama! If it weren't for those obstructionist Republicans, he could just break this nation that much faster. Four more years of this joyless, pessitic scold and we will all live in a state of depression and he is not about to take any responsibility for anything. I guess he is just "present".
The reason this country is going down is half of it believes in the BS the president says and never follows. The many times he has broken the constitution and they avoid recognbizing it. Prtoof just read half the crazyk people for the democrats and their policies. It all has to happen befor they wake up, the country fails and it is coming.
What needs to happen is everyone pays the same % of taxes no matter who they are and we cut the military by at least 50% and put that money into rebuilding our infrastructure. Time to take the money out of contractors going to third world countries and spend it at home rebuilding America.
Defense is 24% of the budget, Welfare is 12% of the budget. I find it more discouraging that welfare is catching up to defense spending. At least the military earn their money
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/federal_budget_detail_fy13bs12012n_30708040#usgs302
This is beginning to look like a repeat of 2011 where the President makes a hell of a deal but when he gets what he wants he comes back and says he had his fingers crossed and the deal doesn't count so now the Republicans have to give more.
More then likely Obama will do his disappearing act to Hawaii no matter what happens
Washington, from our "president" on down, is too lazy, too corrupt, or too smitten with their own manifestos to do what must be done. The reform of our Tax Code and the development of a meaningful, responsible Budget are the key priorities in saving the American economy and "way of life". The successful completion of both related projects will require a considerable amount of time, energy, competence, and cooperation; therefore, I guess we're out of luck on all factors. Unbiased experts from the private sector could accomplish much in achieving these goals, especially in the short run by making the "tough decisions". They, of course, would not be given a chance by the politicians who would not allow a basic question to be answered" " Is America to continue as a "free enterprise" economy and a free society, or is it to become a "socialistic" entity controlled by the government?
Anyone for a cup of Tea, it will cost you your S.S. and Medicare, this is terrible !!!
Glad you trust the government on keeping and spending your SS money wisely LOL!!!
But I guess you like being cuddled by corrupt politicians.
Both sides more worried about their jobs than the good of the people. Let the sequester happen. Its a good a deal as is gonna happen between these 2 groups of people. Good to see the GOP agreeing to gutting defense. A lot of waste there.
Defense is 24% of the budget, Welfare is 12% of the budget. I find it more discouraging that welfare is catching up to defense spending.
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/federal_budget_detail_fy13bs12012n_30708040#usgs302
Obama steels...headline starts out ok...should have read...Obama steels and keels...maybe a little too much Mexican lingo used but more to the point...
What a comedy. Obama proposed the sequester; now he defers to Congress to fix it.
It appears that "The Obamanation" has determined that there's no way he can win by involving himself in resolving that which he created, so, since there's nothing in it for him, "The Obamanation" just doesn't care.
"Obama 'steels'...." come on man!!! #editing
Should have been "Obama steals" from the middle class and the rich. Needs the money for his 20 million dollar Hawaiian vacations and his 35 million dollar mansion he just acquired in Hawaii
Of course Obama is against anything that keeps him from spending / wasting our tax dollars. Seems many are okay with Obama / Democrat spending on give away programs yet continue to place all the blame on the Republicans that are doing everything in their power to cut spending and get a budget.
Neither party wants to stop spending but it sounds good when election time comes around. Both parties raised our taxes (on those paying taxes) walking away united using the same line "it not as bad as it could have been" and its not the first time and not going to be the last time it will be used. They both agree we need a 10 year plan to "save" 1.2 trillion. How is the "Saving" anything when they are adding 1.2 trillion to our debt every year? So at the present course we would only be 26 trillion in the hole vs. 27 trillion.
Stop following the party line and hold them equally accountable
I'm not sure what all of the complaining is about...
This is a bipartisan law that the President signed and it will reduce spending and hence reduce the deficit. If they can't come up with something that does the same (or more), then let it happen. Enough with the "we'll work on a plan later" idea. This IS the plan so let it happen.
Obamacare; asking the 250K+ to pay a little more.
Self-induced "financial cliff"; asking the wealthy to pay a little more.
Now to replace the sequester, reached by compromise and Presidential approval; ask the wealth to pay a little more.
How can "we" have achieved greatness when the roads to success were paved by so few?
I don`t think it would be to much to have the 150k+ pay a little more, to get this budget deficit out of the way.