A big disconnect as 'fiscal cliff' clock ticks

WASHINGTON (AP) - Republicans' newfound willingness to consider tax increases to avert the "fiscal cliff" comes with a significant caveat: larger cuts than Democrats seem willing to consider to benefit programs like Medicare, Medicaid and the president's health care overhaul.
The disconnect on benefit programs, coupled with an impasse between Republicans and the White House over raising tax rates on upper-bracket earners, paints a bleak picture as the clock ticks toward a year-end fiscal debacle of automatic spending increases and harsh cuts to the Pentagon and domestic programs.
Democrats emboldened by the election are moving in the opposite direction from the GOP on curbing spending, refusing to look at cuts that were on the bargaining table just last year. Those include any changes to Social Security, even though President Barack Obama was willing back then to consider cuts in future benefits through lower cost-of-living increases. Obama also considered raising the eligibility age for Medicare, an idea that most Democrats oppose.
"I haven't seen any suggestions on what they're going to do on spending," a frustrated Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said Tuesday. "There's a certain cockiness that I've seen that is really astounding to me since we're basically in the same position we were before."
Well, says Obama's most powerful ally on Capitol Hill, the Democrats are willing to tackle spending on entitlement programs if Republicans agree to raise income tax rates on the wealthiest Americans — a nonstarter with Republicans still in control of the House.
"We hope that they can agree to the tax revenue that we're talking about, and that is rate increases, and as the president's said on a number of occasions, we'll be happy to deal with entitlements," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said Tuesday.
But Reid speaks only in the most general terms, wary of publicly embracing specific ideas like boosting Medicare premiums or raising the program's eligibility age.
At the White House, Obama met with a group of small business owners. Participants described the hour-long meeting as a listening session for Obama, with the business owners urging him to reach an agreement.
"They had one message for the president, which is they need certainty. Please get this deal done as soon as possible. They very much want consumers out there knowing that they're going to have money in their pockets to spend. That's why it's so important to pass the extension of the tax cuts for 98 percent of consumers, 97 percent of all small businesses," said Small Business Administration head Karen Mills.
Obama planned to meet Wednesday with more than a dozen leaders from large corporations, including Lloyd Blankfein of Goldman Sachs, Marissa Mayer of Yahoo!, Brian Roberts of Comcast and Arne Sorenson of Marriott.
Obama hits the road on Friday, visiting a Pennsylvania toy factory and broadcasting his case to extend current tax rates for all but those families making more than $250,000 a year.
Private White House negotiations with top aides to House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and others are cloaked in secrecy, with no evidence of headway.
"There's been little progress with the Republicans, which is a disappointment to me," Reid, a key negotiator, told reporters on Tuesday. "They talked some happy talk about doing revenues, but we only have a couple weeks to get something done. So we have to get away from the happy talk and start talking about specific things."
Republicans say it's Obama and his Democratic allies on Capitol Hill who are holding back, and they point to a balance of power in official Washington that is little changed by the president's re-election. Republicans still control the House, despite losing seats in the election. Democrats control the Senate.
"Democrats in Congress have downplayed the danger of going over the cliff and continue to rule out sensible spending cuts that must be part of any significant agreement to reduce the deficit," said Michael Steel, spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio.
Just last year, Obama and top Democrats were willing during budget negotiations with Republicans to take politically risky steps such as reducing the annual inflation adjustment to Social Security retirement payments and raising the eligibility age for Medicare, which provides health care coverage to the elderly.
Now, with new leverage from Obama's election victory and a playing field for negotiations that is more favorable to Democrats than during the talks of the summer of 2011, Democrats are taking a harder line, ruling out any moves on Social Security and all but dismissing ideas like raising the eligibility age for Medicare from 65.
"The election spoke very strongly about the fact that the American people don't want to cut these programs that actually really sustain the middle class in America and allow people to become part of the middle class," said Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa.
"I think they feel somewhat emboldened by the election," said GOP Rep. Tom Price of Georgia. "How could you not when your president is re-elected after running four straight years of trillion dollar-plus deficits?"
Indeed, Obama could be in position to blame Republicans if an impasse results in the government going over the fiscal cliff. Democrats already are portraying GOP lawmakers as hostage-takers willing to let tax rates rise on everyone if lower Bush-era tax rates are not extended for the top 2 percent to 3 percent of earners — those with incomes above $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for joint filers.
"One thing Republicans have to realize — we're in much better shape in January," said Harkin, referring to a time when taxes would have already risen and Democrats would be offering to cut taxes for all but the wealthiest Americans. "Fiscal cliff? I don't care."
Obama's opening position in the negotiations calls for $1.6 trillion in higher taxes over the coming decade, balanced by just $340 billion in cuts to rapidly growing health care programs, generally taken from health care providers instead of beneficiaries. That balance would have to change for Republicans to sign onto any agreement.
Given the crunch of time and the complexity of issues such as tax reform and wringing savings from programs like Medicare, negotiators are working on a two-track process: an initial "down payment" of deficit cuts next month, coupled with work next year on overhauling the tax code and curbing entitlement programs.
Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., a leading Senate liberal and a member of Obama's special 2010 deficit panel — which drafted a bold deficit reduction plan blending painful entitlement cuts with $2 trillion in higher tax revenues — weighed in with a demand that any short-term down payment avoid politically sensitive safety net programs.
"Progressives should be willing to talk about ways to ensure the long-term viability of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, but those conversations should not be part of a plan to avert the fiscal cliff," Durbin said in a speech at the liberal Center for American Progress think tank in Washington.
Copyright 2012 The Associated Press.
Watch a short video below on how going over the edge of the 'cliff' will affect you (by income level)
For a more detailed breakdown:
- Tax Policy Center Analyzes "Fiscal Cliff" Impacts on Taxpayers
- Tax Policy Center: "Toppling off the Fiscal Cliff: Whose Taxes Rise and How Much? (pdf)
- Watch a video from the Tax Policy Center that breaks down its own research
The rich Democrats and Republicans play games while America suffers. Wake up America, quit subscribing to the two party system, nobody in government cares about you. All you morons intoxicated on Obamas kool-Aid, he doesn't care about you and never did. The Republican party is too stubborn to work with the Democrats, not that there is much to work with, and the only thing the Democrats know how to do is blame other people for everything. Isn't America grand.
What always impresses me about the Democrats is just how good they are at these games. They've successfully sold the tax rate increase to all the useful idiots as soaking the rich. Instead the rich are completely unfazed by it as they have a great deal of flexibility in how they invest or are compensated. It largely only affects their liquidity, and will produce little to no revenue from the truly rich.Instead this tax increase on the $250K and above will only harm professionals and small business. In other words the exact sort of people that can undermine the rich. You don't think there's a reason they want to do that do you?
 @ChrisJ82 Fundamental Transformation (Hope & Change). "Never let a good crisis go to waste"
Â
Utopia
If the Democrats succeed in raising all of the taxes that they desire, that money would fund the government for 9 [nine] days. That's all, 9 days. If we crash, if we go into a recession, it will be the sole fault of the Democrats. The Democrats REFUSE to CUT spending. So if you voted for Obama, don't bother complaining.Â
 @last boyscout Actually it would remove 12% of the deficit. I know you're opposed to reducing the deficit, but still . . . .
 @ShallowEnder BS. Show me proof. And not 'proof' from some wack job Liberal website. Proof that Bob Beckel and Rush Limbaugh would agree on and I'll at least give it some thought.
 @last boyscout  @ShallowEnder Yep anyone dumb enough to believe they would cut spending later if they raised taxes now already voted for Obama...
 @ShallowEnder Ok. you got that one. So now let the democrats show that they are honestly trying to save America, and simply cut government BS spending by [ 12% ] and we'll call it a deal. But none of the typical Liberal Democrat pap of 'we will cut spending later' BS. Do them both simultaneously.
 @last boyscout How about the guy named Mitch McConnell - you know Senate minority leader? He admitted on MSNBC that the math I just quoted is correct. The same amount that represents 9 days of government spending is 12% of the budget deficit. If you increased revenue by that amount it would pay for nine days of federal spending and reduce the deficit by 12%.
Â
Of course, if you don't trust republicans . . . . .
This comment has been deleted
 @wahoo  @last You are such an idiot and don't know jack. Obama has screwed us worse than Bush did. Obama is out Bushing, Bush.Â
Let it go over the "Cliff". What difference does it make? It won't effect over 50% of the people anyway since they don't pay taxes Even if congress did anything to save it the taxpayers will still have to pay outrageous taxes just to cover the rest of the freeloaders.
 @Razor1Â
Â
Â
Many of the people who "don't pay taxes" are employed, often by the government (thus why they don't pay federal income tax). Many of those are military.
Â
The resulting layoff would effect a substantial portion of people who do pay state income, sales, and even payroll taxes.
Â
None of those would be paid for anymore by those people (as they would be unemployed) and the government would then STILL have to pay unemployment benefits.
Â
Thus a double whammy to both the state and federal government.
Â
So be careful about calling people "freeloaders" who actually work full time and pay their fair share of taxes.
Â
 @Repoman I work for the government, and I certainly do pay federal income tax. I'm also in the National Guard, and I pay federal income tax. Where did you get your "facts" from?
 And yes the people whether they work or not that don't pay taxes are freeloaders... What... did I hit a nerve there repoman?
We are in debt....we have to cut the budget. Â Liberals dont understand that there isnt any more money.
@sortbait yes those liberals like Reagan, Bush SR. and Bush Jr. That ALL significantly raised the deficit and national debt. Both sides are responsible for the increased levels of debt, but none more so than Reagan who nearly tripled the debt in his years in office.
A prime example of what happens when you take taxing the "rich" to the extreme......which is where we are headed.
Â
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9707029/Two-thirds-of-millionaires-left-Britain-to-avoid-50p-tax-rate.html
This comment has been deleted
 @wahoo According to the IRS and CBO, the rich are the only ones who do pay their fair share.
 @wahoo How is what happens in the UK a Fox talking point? Clueless person.
I think they want us to go over the ege. So when taxes go up they will all get together to lower taxts and say"See we are the heros now that we lowered you're taxes. Now re-elect us". Because it won't be untill just before the next election when they are all up for re-election they can have something to say they saved us money by lowering taxes. Then try to get re-elected. Same old dog and pony show.
We need massive spending cuts. But the GOP always tries to cut a deal with the Dems (Regean, Bush1, Bush 2)
The Gop raises taxes then the Dems never give the spending cuts. Happens like clock work. The GOP should stand their ground till the dems actually cut spending (fat chance).
@Jack_Bauer I'm a hardcore democrat and agree that spending needs to be cut significantly. Start with ALL subsidies to profitable companies, if you're posting profits you don't need govt. money. Next close 2/3 of military bases around the world, stop the military industrial complex that is rampant among the right, and slash the military budget down to the 180-200B range from the over $500B range that it is now. Then raise ratchet the Medicare eligibility age up to 67. Lastly, return the marginal tax rates to Clinton era and close ALL loopholes in the tax code. That's more that closes the deficit.
These negotiations should be held on CSPAN live.
Now I see Republicans offering compromise, I dont believe Obama actually wants it.
Â
 @Jack_Bauer My thoughts are that the House Republicans should just pass their own compromise spending bill, making reasonable (in the eyes of the Dems) cuts, and throw the Dems a bone with tax rate hikes on $1M and above crowd.
Â
That's the only way the Repubs will be able to overcome the President's BS and the media's fawning over him, as it'll put him and the media on the defensive instead of the offensive.
....I'm now going to look into my crystal ball and tell you the future....
Â
I see a 'deal' coming through at the last minute. A 'deal' that will somehow kick the problem down the road about 6-12 months. This 'deal' will keep all tax rates right where they are, and will be heralded by both parties as 'victory' for 'their side'. It will create a bipartisan committee.... let's call it a 'supercommittee', and it will debate behind closed doors for at least 2/3 of the time of the extension, and then collapse along partisan lines. This will create an impasse in all 'bipartisan' work in both houses, and be complete with talking points by all associated talking heads on broadcast and print media about how the failure of the 'supercommittee' is all 'the other parties' fault.Â
Â
...now, I will look deeeeeper into the future....
Â
With less than a year before midterm elections, the (now even further pushed out) 'fiscal cliff' will become the keystone campaign fodder of the 2014 Congressional elections.Â
Â
thank you, that will be $20.Â
Â
Â
Dang I forgot to Bill for my Prediction. But you'res is alittle better then mine. I guess that is why I forgot to bill...
We will go over a fiscal cliff. Either now or later. It will happen and while there is a way out of it, the politicians don't have the stones to make the tough calls.
Â
The reason that politicians won't deal with it is due to the electorate who only votes for politicians who promise them the world.
I can predict this much RalphCramden and that is anyone in Power seeking re-election after the Tax increase will have a Really hard time getting re-elected. I think it's time for the Old timers in power to step aside and let new blood in.
 @cpt.icemanÂ
New blood, old blood, they are all the same. It will never change.
For Reference . .
Â
When we started the 'New Deal' taxes were at:Â Â **Note:Â All $$ are in 2011 $.
If you make (joint) $50,000 your tax in 1932 was 4%, in '41 before WW II, 4%, in 1998 under Clinton 15% and 2011 Obama 15%.
Â
Here are some rates.  There are more and these are not the bookends.
Â
 Income   1932   1941  1998    2011   Â
50,000Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 4%Â Â Â Â Â Â 4%Â Â Â Â Â 15%Â Â 15%
75,000Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 8%Â Â Â Â Â Â 8%Â Â Â Â Â 28%Â Â Â 25%
100,000Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 9%Â Â Â Â 10%Â Â Â Â 28%Â Â Â 25%
150,000Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 9%Â Â Â Â 12%Â Â Â Â 31%Â Â 28%
200,000Â Â Â Â Â 11%Â Â Â Â 16%Â Â Â Â 31%Â Â Â 28%
Â
Now add in debt . . . .
1929 - Federal debt at 16 percent GDP.
2011 - Federal debt at 97 percent GDP.
Â
Take a peek at the deficit and debt. (Second reference) Public debt is going up more than the deficit.  How does what we owe go up faster than what we borrow? Simple (found in the footnotes), it's 'spending' that's not in the budget.   I thought we were promised 'transparancy'.
Â
http://taxfoundation.org/article/us-federal-individual-income-tax-rates-history-1913-2011-nominal-and-inflation-adjusted-brackets
Â
http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/federal_budget
Â
 @NorthernBlackBear http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_FoundationÂ
I can't say they are partisan, but being funded by Koch brothers and Exxon doesn't give me confidence that they aren't.
Harry has said âI am not going to be part of having Social Security as part of these talks relating to this deficit."
Â
He has little room to say "There's been little progress with the Republicans, which is a disappointment to me."
Â
Obama has not met with any of these turkeys in the last 11 days.  In fact, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney suggested in the daily briefing on Monday that holding direct talks with lawmakers might not be the best strategy for the president's agenda.   Obama is negotiating by giving speeches; his hand is not out across the aisle.   Â
"Carney pointed to Obama's meetings with labor and business groups as a way to put indirect pressure on Congress."Â Â Â Â http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/27/obama-to-hit-the-road-to-avoid-driving-off-the-fiscal-cliff/?hpt=hp_t2
Â
Thatâs Obama â Indirect. Â
Â
Meanwhile the debt ceiling is coming to a head.  They will run out of $ before the end of the year. At which time they say they âcan stave off the risk of default until sometime in early 2013 through the use of "extraordinary measures," such as temporarily using federal workers' retirement savings normally invested in government bonds.â
Â
http://money.cnn.com/2012/11/27/news/economy/debt-ceiling/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
Â
Once again â working by bypassing congress (for a while).
Empty Promisess to Everyone,,,, same old song and dance ,,, you cannot make chicken soup with chicken poop ,,,,, Someone has to pull the wagon , poor working class will continue to pull the wagon untill it gets too heavy ... when the Working class cannot find work and are starving to death , then the real Revolution will begin like the French had back in 1789 to 1799,,, it happened once and can happen again ... Rep - Dem leaders will be the first targets, if you can catch them....
Fiscal Cliff:.... The problem is that our elected officials have no accountability. They have been mis- managing tax revenues for decades, borrowed over $6 trillion from the social security trust fund, and have no apologies.
Time to start cutting Paychecks up there in Washington DC.
Harry Reid is the poster boy for whats wrong with congress. went to DC with a very nominal net worth and now he's reportly worth north of ten million dollars........ didn't become that wealthy making ~$150k a year as a senator.
Thats like Obama. He was asking to move into the Whitehouse or a guest house 2 1/2 months before hand cause they had lost thier home due to the cost of needing to pay the extra time where they where living.But Bush had already rented it out. Now he's a Multi-Millionaire with a huge estate in California. Not bad for 400,000 a year with no over head. I want to know how someone can make  Millions all on the Public Joes money and sleep at night while doing it.  How about if all the Politition's give up thier pay for the next 4 years to save money?I'm sure they can sell a house or two to make up for the loss in saleries.Â
Let's at least be honest about the whole situation. Both sides have been screwing the taxpayer and OVER spending with their 'vote for us if we GIVE you more money, benefits, phones' etc... It's time to start CUTTING government handouts in a major way. The problem is the democrats, even if Republicans bring in more tax dollars, the Democrats REFUSE to do any substantial CUTTING. Watch and see.
This comment has been deleted
 @wahoo Do you think your use of childish insults like referring to Republicans as "repubes" make your comments appear to be levelheaded and reasonable or are they more likely to appear as more bitter partisanship?
 @last boyscout >'Democrats REFUSE to do any substantial CUTTING. '
Â
They're still riding high on President Obamas electoral college 'decisive' victory.Â
Â
ROFLMAO...Â
Â
Frankly, I see the debacle benefitting the GOP come the midterms. The fact that they're falling off Grover Norquists bandwagon at least shows an interest in compromise (real, or manufactured). The press that will create will go a long way come 2014.
 @last boyscout "Both sides have been screwing the taxpayer and OVER spending" Amen!
Nancy Polosi's is the worst Offender in waste I have ever seen. Her Office building cost over $18,000 a month to rent. Her other office was around $7200 amonth.She is having a railroad built to her winery built for by the Tax Payers.; Wich Oregon Gov. was against the home owners on the coast to fix thier property from the ocean. Untill it threatened his place then it was a differnt story. I don't remember his name, But it's on the tip of my toung. Or the Airport in 1 state that has less then 20 people through it but it has had upto $50 million in stem.$$$ poured into it. The number one customer is a Congressmen who fly's from it to Washington D.C and back. If you stopped this kind of spending then we might be able to deal with the deficit. Look at the waste on the Hwy between Newport and Toledo that went on for to long. All for nothing they are saying that that whole road needs to be gone over again..........Â
Dirty Harry speaks.
That picture better tell you the story. A senile, incompetent fool, from Searchlight Nevada is impacting your lives in a huge way. Pay attention America.
 @Rob C 503 Not sure how he got re-elected. Most of the people in Nevada can stand him.
 @Jamie  @Rob C 503  Might have something to do with the fact that it is legal to engage in prostitution in Nevada.