GOP fiscal cliff plan echoes failed budget talks

WASHINGTON (AP) - Republicans are proposing a "fiscal cliff" plan that revives ideas from failed budget talks with President Barack Obama last year, calling for raising the eligibility age for Medicare, lowering cost-of-living hikes for Social Security benefits and bringing in $800 billion in higher tax revenue.
The counter to a White House plan last week relies more on politically sensitive spending cuts and would raise half the $1.6 trillion in revenue proposed by Obama over the coming decade.
The 10-year, $2.2 trillion proposal from House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, resembles a framework similar to what Boehner supported last year, but Obama is pressing for additional tax increases and appears to be balking at spending cuts discussed in those talks and since.
Administration officials from Obama on down say it'll take money from raising tax rates on the rich - instead of GOP proposals to simply curb their deductions - to win Obama's approval of any plan to avoid the "fiscal cliff."
It has been nearly a week since Obama and Boehner talked directly about the looming cliff, though their staffs have been in contact. Boehner attended a congressional holiday party at the White House Monday night, but avoided the photo line where members get their picture taken with the president and have a few minutes to talk.
Obama met with a bipartisan group of governors, who sought assurances that any cuts in spending as part of an agreement on the fiscal cliff wouldn't shift the burden onto states. The governors said they wanted flexibility from the federal government on certain mandated programs like Medicaid to allow them to do more with less.
"We asked for flexibility on how the federal money is passed down to the states and the cuts that are passed down, that we could have some flexibility to do what's in the best interest of our states," said Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin, a Republican.
The governors said they were not endorsing any particular proposal but said they wanted to share their ideas on ways that states could play a role in helping reduce the deficit. The governors were meeting later in the day with congressional leaders and said they planned to work with Vice President Joe Biden in the coming weeks.
The governors said that states need certainty as they craft their budget proposals but Obama expressed to them an interest in reaching an agreement with congressional Republicans.
The Republican proposal Monday, while intended to break a stalemate in place since the administration last week angered Republicans with a $1.6 trillion plan that largely exempted Medicare and Social Security from budget cuts, sparked a predictable round of partisanship.
"To protect the middle class while reducing the deficit, simple math dictates that tax rates must rise on the top 2 percent of taxpayers next year," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said in a statement. "The sooner Republicans grasp that reality, the sooner we can avoid the fiscal cliff."
The fiscal cliff is a combination of expiring Bush-era tax cuts and automatic, across-the-board spending cuts due to take effect in January. The cliff is a result of prior failures of Congress and Obama to make a budget deal.
The GOP proposal itself revives a host of ideas from failed talks with Obama in the summer of 2011. Then, Obama was willing to discuss politically risky ideas such as raising the eligibility age for Medicare, implementing a new inflation adjustment for Social Security cost-of-living adjustments and requiring wealthier Medicare recipients to pay more for their benefits.
Boehner called that a "credible plan" and said he hoped the administration would "respond in a timely and responsible way." The offer came after the administration urged Republicans to detail proposals to cut popular benefit programs like Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid.
But Obama and his Democratic allies are less willing to look to these benefit programs for cuts after his re-election last month and believe Obama possesses far more leverage now than he did in secret budget talks with Boehner last year.
Monday's Republican plan contains few specifics and anticipates that myriad details would have to be filled in next year in legislation overhauling the tax code and curbing the growth of benefit programs.
Though the GOP plan proposes to raise $800 billion in higher tax revenue over the same 10 years, it would keep the Bush-era tax cuts - including those for wealthier earners targeted by Obama - in place for now.
GOP aides said their plan was based on one presented by Erskine Bowles, co-chairman of a deficit commission Obama appointed earlier in his term, in testimony to a special deficit "supercommittee" last year.
"The new revenue in the Bowles plan would not be achieved through higher tax rates, which we continue to oppose and will not agree to in order to protect small businesses and our economy," Boehner and fellow Republicans said in a letter to Obama. "Instead, new revenue would be generated through pro-growth tax reform that closes special-interest loopholes and deductions while lowering rates."
By GOP math, the plan would produce more than $2 trillion in budget savings over the coming decade: $800 billion in higher taxes; $600 billion in savings from costly health care programs like Medicare; $300 billion from other proposals such as forcing federal workers to contribute more toward their pensions; and $300 billion in additional savings from the Pentagon budget and domestic programs funded by Congress each year.
Boehner signaled in discussions with Obama in 2011 that he was willing to accept up to $800 billion in higher tax revenues, but his aides maintained that much of that money would have come from so-called dynamic scoring - a conservative approach in which economic growth would have accounted for much of the revenue. Now, Boehner is willing to accept the estimates of official scorekeepers like the Congressional Budget Office, whose models reject dynamic scoring.
Using the administration's math, GOP aides said, the plan represents $4.6 trillion in 10-year savings. That estimate accounts for earlier cuts enacted during last year's showdown over lifting the government's borrowing cap and also factors in war savings and lower interest payments on the $16.4 trillion national debt.
Last week, the White House delivered to Capitol Hill its opening proposal: $1.6 trillion in higher taxes over a decade, a possible extension of the temporary Social Security payroll tax cut and heightened presidential power to raise the national debt limit without the approval of Congress.
In exchange, the president would back $600 billion in spending cuts, including $350 billion from Medicare and other health programs. But he also wants $200 billion in new spending for jobless benefits, public works projects and aid for struggling homeowners. His proposal for raising the ceiling on government borrowing would make it virtually impossible for Congress to block him going forward.
One of the few things the White House and Capitol Hill Republicans can agree on is a framework that would make a "down payment" on the deficit and extend all or most of the expiring Bush-era tax cuts but leave most of the legislative grunt work until next year.
Other participants in the Tuesday meeting between Obama and the governors included Republicans Gary Herbert of Utah and Scott Walker of Wisconsin and Democrats Mike Beebe of Arkansas and Mark Dayton of Minnesota.
_
Associated Press writers Julie Pace and Ken Thomas contributed to this report.
The counter to a White House plan last week relies more on politically sensitive spending cuts and would raise half the $1.6 trillion in revenue proposed by Obama over the coming decade.
The 10-year, $2.2 trillion proposal from House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, resembles a framework similar to what Boehner supported last year, but Obama is pressing for additional tax increases and appears to be balking at spending cuts discussed in those talks and since.
Administration officials from Obama on down say it'll take money from raising tax rates on the rich - instead of GOP proposals to simply curb their deductions - to win Obama's approval of any plan to avoid the "fiscal cliff."
It has been nearly a week since Obama and Boehner talked directly about the looming cliff, though their staffs have been in contact. Boehner attended a congressional holiday party at the White House Monday night, but avoided the photo line where members get their picture taken with the president and have a few minutes to talk.
Obama met with a bipartisan group of governors, who sought assurances that any cuts in spending as part of an agreement on the fiscal cliff wouldn't shift the burden onto states. The governors said they wanted flexibility from the federal government on certain mandated programs like Medicaid to allow them to do more with less.
"We asked for flexibility on how the federal money is passed down to the states and the cuts that are passed down, that we could have some flexibility to do what's in the best interest of our states," said Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin, a Republican.
The governors said they were not endorsing any particular proposal but said they wanted to share their ideas on ways that states could play a role in helping reduce the deficit. The governors were meeting later in the day with congressional leaders and said they planned to work with Vice President Joe Biden in the coming weeks.
The governors said that states need certainty as they craft their budget proposals but Obama expressed to them an interest in reaching an agreement with congressional Republicans.
The Republican proposal Monday, while intended to break a stalemate in place since the administration last week angered Republicans with a $1.6 trillion plan that largely exempted Medicare and Social Security from budget cuts, sparked a predictable round of partisanship.
"To protect the middle class while reducing the deficit, simple math dictates that tax rates must rise on the top 2 percent of taxpayers next year," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said in a statement. "The sooner Republicans grasp that reality, the sooner we can avoid the fiscal cliff."
The fiscal cliff is a combination of expiring Bush-era tax cuts and automatic, across-the-board spending cuts due to take effect in January. The cliff is a result of prior failures of Congress and Obama to make a budget deal.
The GOP proposal itself revives a host of ideas from failed talks with Obama in the summer of 2011. Then, Obama was willing to discuss politically risky ideas such as raising the eligibility age for Medicare, implementing a new inflation adjustment for Social Security cost-of-living adjustments and requiring wealthier Medicare recipients to pay more for their benefits.
Boehner called that a "credible plan" and said he hoped the administration would "respond in a timely and responsible way." The offer came after the administration urged Republicans to detail proposals to cut popular benefit programs like Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid.
But Obama and his Democratic allies are less willing to look to these benefit programs for cuts after his re-election last month and believe Obama possesses far more leverage now than he did in secret budget talks with Boehner last year.
Monday's Republican plan contains few specifics and anticipates that myriad details would have to be filled in next year in legislation overhauling the tax code and curbing the growth of benefit programs.
Though the GOP plan proposes to raise $800 billion in higher tax revenue over the same 10 years, it would keep the Bush-era tax cuts - including those for wealthier earners targeted by Obama - in place for now.
GOP aides said their plan was based on one presented by Erskine Bowles, co-chairman of a deficit commission Obama appointed earlier in his term, in testimony to a special deficit "supercommittee" last year.
"The new revenue in the Bowles plan would not be achieved through higher tax rates, which we continue to oppose and will not agree to in order to protect small businesses and our economy," Boehner and fellow Republicans said in a letter to Obama. "Instead, new revenue would be generated through pro-growth tax reform that closes special-interest loopholes and deductions while lowering rates."
By GOP math, the plan would produce more than $2 trillion in budget savings over the coming decade: $800 billion in higher taxes; $600 billion in savings from costly health care programs like Medicare; $300 billion from other proposals such as forcing federal workers to contribute more toward their pensions; and $300 billion in additional savings from the Pentagon budget and domestic programs funded by Congress each year.
Boehner signaled in discussions with Obama in 2011 that he was willing to accept up to $800 billion in higher tax revenues, but his aides maintained that much of that money would have come from so-called dynamic scoring - a conservative approach in which economic growth would have accounted for much of the revenue. Now, Boehner is willing to accept the estimates of official scorekeepers like the Congressional Budget Office, whose models reject dynamic scoring.
Using the administration's math, GOP aides said, the plan represents $4.6 trillion in 10-year savings. That estimate accounts for earlier cuts enacted during last year's showdown over lifting the government's borrowing cap and also factors in war savings and lower interest payments on the $16.4 trillion national debt.
Last week, the White House delivered to Capitol Hill its opening proposal: $1.6 trillion in higher taxes over a decade, a possible extension of the temporary Social Security payroll tax cut and heightened presidential power to raise the national debt limit without the approval of Congress.
In exchange, the president would back $600 billion in spending cuts, including $350 billion from Medicare and other health programs. But he also wants $200 billion in new spending for jobless benefits, public works projects and aid for struggling homeowners. His proposal for raising the ceiling on government borrowing would make it virtually impossible for Congress to block him going forward.
One of the few things the White House and Capitol Hill Republicans can agree on is a framework that would make a "down payment" on the deficit and extend all or most of the expiring Bush-era tax cuts but leave most of the legislative grunt work until next year.
Other participants in the Tuesday meeting between Obama and the governors included Republicans Gary Herbert of Utah and Scott Walker of Wisconsin and Democrats Mike Beebe of Arkansas and Mark Dayton of Minnesota.
_
Associated Press writers Julie Pace and Ken Thomas contributed to this report.
I finally have the phrase to sum up my thoughts "Vacant men with careless need for greed"
Let's see, from the right...Sleazy, Dopey, Dim Bulb and Hey! What am I doin' here?
 @Mikey They cloned you.
 @lee986321 Unlikely, Lee. I'm not registered with a political party.
That's an automatic fail for them. But nice try! ;-)
So what were the specifics that boehner and his cohorts offered up as a budget plan ???
Â
The operative word is "specifics"
Â
cue the jeopardy theme music !
@sargerator so sarg, other than cranking up the taxes on the wealthy...... what are the specifics of the left??????
@kramr I'm glad you asked, it's all right here !
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Overview
Â
Now, wheres that boehner budget plan again ?
 @kramr Seriously? Asking sarg to defend his comments? He's just another liberal with the blinders on that can't see the forest through the trees. If it's not leaning left, then he doesn't like it, whether it makes sense or not.
@scoreboard @kramr Oh, and gullible isn't in the dictionary !
 @sargerator It hasn't stopped you.
 @sargerator  @kramr  @scoreboard Promise? I hope so because then I won't have to deal with your drivel.
@scoreboard @kramrÂ
Â
 "Are you and sargerator related? Brothers perhaps? Did you have the same baby daddy or baby momma?
Â
Ya, YOU don't do any such thing....for heavens sakes you're so proper....D'OH
Â
You know, just as dumb as mitt was thinking he could say something then completely deny...well, maybe you will too.
Â
As long as you ONLY comment on comments and no counter points I won't take you seriously !
Â
@scoreboard @kramr You're still commenting on comments with no counter points and that seems to be your mo !
 @sargerator  @scoreboard  @kramr Why don't you look at my history sarge.....
Â
You'll see I have made points on many stories and not just commented on others comments.Â
Â
As for name calling, no, I don't resort to your tactics. I don't use such colorful terms as RepubliCONs, Mittens, The Village Idiot, et. al. You, however, seem to have posted hundreds of comments using these and other such colorful phrases. I'd take you more seriously if you were to refrain from the name calling.
@scoreboard @kramr You still have made NO points ! Are you here just to say, "ya" to everthing any rightees says. Your comments on comments do you no service !
 @sargerator  @scoreboard  @kramr Pot meet kettle.
@scoreboard @kramr Are you just a follower ? Can you make an argument for your points or are you just blathering boob, we all want to know because you never seem to have ANY specific points to make, name calling and being stupid is no way to go thru life son !
We went off the fiscal cliff on Nov. 6th
Â
none of our current crop of  self serving politicians have the nads to stand up and say we need to cut back on spending. ....... especially the POTUS.
given our current spendthrift in chief who has added more to the deficit than ANY two term president... anyone believing this man is serious about spending reduction..... or even a reduction in the growth of spending  has spit for brains.
This comment has been deleted
@Fed up Fed   """"" So if you REALLY would rather point fingers than debate solutions, you're kind of out of luck. """"
thanks for the laugh of the day...... thats exactly what you are doing. .
Â
"""""All of the evidence points to a Republican failure, and everybody who knows anything about economics can prove it. """""
I doubt that, Reagan inherited quite a mess, the misery index, 21% mortgage rate, high unemployment which topped out at 11% but by the time his relection came around, the unemployment rate was barly above seven percent and the growth rate in the economy was THREE TIMES the growth B HO's  asinine spend our way back to prosperity plan has accomplished.
Â
@Fed up Fed Schwing ! Nailed it !
@Fed up Fed  """ Government spending has grown more slowly under President Obama than under any other president since Eisenhower.""""
Wow, you must really enjoy drinking the coolaid. all you little stat mean is that B HO spending his first year was off the charts .
spin it however you want while enjoying the koolaid,  the undeniable FACT is the deficit in actual dollars has grown MORE in B HO's first four years THAN ANY TWO TERM PRESIDENT...... you cannot deny that fact.
 @kramr By the way, it's Kool-Aid®
@Fed up Fed  Ohmygawd...... Bronco Bamma has been POTUS FOR FOUR YEARS and you still have the audacity to talk about the Bush years.  Whatever is happening now is because of the policies of B HO.  Just wondering, in your mind when exactly is B HO going to be responsible for his time and president?????
Â
so with your regarded (think t) logic, I can blame Clinton for the recession during the first term of the Bush years. ...... or is that just a one way street hypocritically speaking
@Mikey @kramr  """"""Talk about calling names...have you read your own posts, numbnuts?"""""""
rather hypocritical that you calling me out on name calling and can't help yourself to call me a name at the same time...
BTW, its very very rare I call anyone on this board a name.  Â
 @kramr Talk about calling names...have you read your own posts, numbnuts?
 @kramr  @Fed Funny thing is your "Republicans" won't ever win a seat in the White House ever again..  look at the numbers, you are a dying race my friend.
@pdxd @Rob C 503 Ohhhh, double schwing !
 @Rob C 503 It's tough being civil when the nun is spanking you with a ruler for not going into confessional with the priest.
@kramr .......you're wasting your time with fed. He's an angry, bitter mean spirited troll who couldn't have a civil conversation with a nun !
@Fed up Fed Â
"""" Sooooo...you didn't look at the chart. And you've now disrespected the President of the United States several times. You, sir, are an idiot. Have a terrible day. """""
Â
Â
Typical lib........... runs out of logical responses and can only resort to name calling and insults.
Â
Thanks for showing us who really is the party of hate.....
Â
BTW, I'd bet my lunch money you've called our former president A LOT MORE than George W. Bush .
Maybe just maybe if the Republicans would agree that the tax cuts for the top 2% of earners need to be abolished, may then we could decrease the fiscal cliff. On the flip side, cuts to medicare & social security benefits should not be taking place, audits for medicare & sociail security fraud should take place to reduce fraud.Â
@pdxd   """""Maybe just maybe if the Republicans would agree that the tax cuts for the top 2% of earners need to be abolished,""""
Â
Currently the top 1% of wage earners pay 37% of all personal taxes paid..... thats 1/100th of the population paying over 1/3rd (37%) of taxes paid.
Â
How much do you expect these folks to pay????? 40%, 50%, 60%??????
Â
 @kramr Removal of their tax-cut, just brings their tax back to what it was originally, and if they have substantially more income to be taxed, then they will indeed be paying a larger share of the overall taxes paid.Â
@pdxd @scoreboard  its called humor...... basically using humor in what is going to happen to our country in the next few years
 @pdxd I think so too. I always try to take the high road and not resort to name calling ( though I admit I have in the past). No one will take me seriously when I do and I never really take people seriously when they resort to it.Â
Â
I think people can get their point across without it.
 @scoreboard I bit my tongue, as I thought of the come-back that I could have tossed out, and I didn't say it. I think there is some truth in our dialogue.
 @pdxd Then take the high road.....be the bigger man.
 @scoreboard And his image of a donkey screwing the country doggy-style is indicative of dealing with someone who is mature and conducts him/herself in an adult manner?
Â
 @pdxd  @kramr Perhaps but there is always a better way of going about it than insults (an in some cases - name calling). To me, that's just childish.
 @scoreboard @kramr If he can't handle the truth, it really isn't my problem.
 @pdxd  @kramr You didn't call him a name but you did insult him....
 @kramr take a look at your "image" on here before talking about hate. And where oh where did I call you a name?
@pdxd  typical lib response, with the absense of a thoughful logical response, they can only resort to insults and name calling...... nice Â
thanks for showing us who really is the party of hate.
Â
Â
 @kramr I chose to not answer your question, because I assumed your cheeks would muffle the sound from reaching your ears, based on where your head is currently located.
Â
@pdxd Â
""""" Removal of their tax-cut, just brings their tax back to what it was originally,"""""
Then whats wrong with eliminating all the Bush/Bamma tax cuts????
Hell, if its just taking the rates back to where they were before, Why not take ALLÂ the rates back to where they were before and not just the rates that effect so few citizens???
Â
you also did not answer my question..... if 1/100th of the population is paying well north of 1/3rd of the taxes and that is not enough..... HOW MUCH IS ENOUGH???
Â
This comment has been deleted
 @diddy_bop  @kramr I like that. Why not have a flat rate tax where EVERYONE pays the same percentage? Hmmm???
 @kramr  @diddy_bop the only jealousy i see on this board is from folks who wishes they too can live on the meager few hundred bucks a month from 'entitlements'
Â
/sarcasm
 @diddy_bop  @kramr Many would love that since most pay at much higher rates then us unless the have a job where they can tell the company to pay them in stock not cash so they can only pay 15%. You know like Obama's good lying buddy the Buffet who only pays 15%.
@diddy_bop @Fed  """"how about the 1% pay at the same taxes and rates us working folks pay?"""""
Â
They along with all the other middle class retired folks living off their investments is just fine.
Â
BTW, if you are pissed off by what wealthy folks pay on their investment income, don't be envious/jealous of them..... be pissed off at the politicians who created the tax laws.
 @kramr  @Fed how about the 1% pay at the same taxes and rates us working folks pay?Â
@Fed up Fed  wealth is not part of the equation when discussing income tax. at any rate, what is your source for that 80%?
and you didn't answer the question..... how much should the 1% or top 5% pay of the total tax bill????Â
 @pdxd If we taxed everyone above 250K at 50%, it would not even put a dent, a dimple or a pin prick in the deficit. We won't get anywhere till we openly admit we have a SERIOUS spending problem. We're like a skinny pock marked no teeth smelly scab covered Meth addict that refuses to admit that he's addicted. We are addicted to over spending.
 @last boyscout Most of the people I know who over-spend live in the "red-states", and take advantage of entitlements, and they voted for the "white guy"
This comment has been deleted
 @pdxd Hmmm.....keeping it classy. Are you and sargerator related? Brothers perhaps? Did you have the same baby daddy or baby momma?Â
Â
All I can do is shake my head.....
 @scoreboard Listen here you conservative piece of trash, the slang term "baby daddy" as well as "baby mamma" have mostly been used within the black race. When was the last time you heard someone refer to a white man as "baby daddy"? Sit down, drink the milk from Fox News, and put your tin-foil hat back on so the liberals don't read your thoughts.
 @pdxd  @last boyscout Where did he say that the black mothers were impregnated by black men only? Did I miss something? All I saw was Black Mothers, wedlock, baby daddies, etc. but nothing implied that they were impregnated by black men only.
Â
You're putting words in his mouth.
 @last boyscout And where are you getting these statistics from? And how many "black mothers" are impregnated by men that are a race other than black? Oh wait, some people still believe that each race should stick with their own.......
 @sargerator  @last  @Fed  @last  @pdxd Since "single moms" are now in this discussion, let's acknowledge that 4 out of 5 children born to Black mothers are born out of wedlock. Maybe a good start would be for the baby daddies to get married before they start knocking up all of their girlfriends.Â
@Fed up Fed Nicely said !
@last boyscout @Fed up Fed @last @pdxd Maybe the guy you're talking about skipped town and left her ("single mom") with the bills hey ???
Â
Like this guy ! You know , the "fiscal conservative" guy !
Â
http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/americas/united-states/110728/joe-walsh-tea-party-child-support
 @Fed up Fed  @last  @pdxd OK, well stated. All but the "single mom" analogy. I prefer this analogy, a homeowner under water, after buying a house the he had no business buying, a new car when he should have kept the old Corolla that was running just fine, a 50+ inch flat screen and an I-pad, cable and every other luxury he was foolish enough to think he could afford. And now he must realize, gee, I don't earn enough money to pay for all of these luxuries, and it's time to cut my spending habits.
 @pdxd Well said.