General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsAP: Republicans showing 'a willingness to bend' on taxes, immigration and guns
A most hilarious article from AP:
What long has been a nonstarter for Republicans raising tax rates on wealthy Americans is now backed by GOP House Speaker John Boehner in his negotiations with President Barack Obama to avert a potential fiscal crisis. Party luminaries, including Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, have started calling for a wholesale shift in the GOP's approach to immigration after Hispanic voters shunned Republican candidates. And some Republicans who previously championed gun rights now are opening the door to restrictions following a schoolhouse shooting spree earlier this month.
I don't know if this is wishful thinking or willful ignorance, but however you look at it, the notion that Republicans are signaling some sort of newfound willingness to compromise is just nonsense.
On taxes, John Boehner hasn't endorsed raising taxes. Instead, he's said Republicans should be willing to cut taxes on income below $1 million without simultaneously cutting taxes on income above $1 million. You could argue he's changed the threshold at which Republicans will hold tax cuts hostage, but that's not the same thing as supporting tax hikes. Despite the modesty of Boehner's tax cut plan, House Republicans were so furious that he couldn't even bring it to a vote. If that signals a willingness to bend, Lord help us all.
On immigration, Bobby Jindal hasn't suddenly become the poster-child for reform. It's true he did say that Republicans had made "offensive" and "bizarre" comments on immigration and other issues during the campaign, but he didn't embrace an overhaul of immigration policies.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/27/1173937/-AP-Republicans-showing-a-willingness-to-bend-on-taxes-immigration-and-guns
randome
(34,845 posts)I do think eventually some reasonable Republicans (written with irony) will abandon their party and vote with Democrats on some of these issues.
The Tea Party faction (it's not even a proper 'party') is causing too much friction from the inside.
Angry Dragon
(36,693 posts)When the bush tax cuts went in they had a sunset. So there is no tax increase.
hfojvt
(37,573 posts)On January 1, the Bush tax cuts expire - all of them.
Let that happen, and now look at Boehner's bill.
Suddenly it is not a tax increase - it is a tax cut. It's a $3.7 trillion tax cut over the next ten years.
And who gets most of the benefits of that tax cut?
Obama's original proposal was a $2.6 trillion tax cut, and even in THAT proposal, the RICHEST 20% got over 40% of the benefits, and the top 1% gets $40 billion a year or $400 billion + for ten years. Obama offered another $200 billion in tax cuts for people with incomes over $250,000, by raising the ceiling to $400,000. Boehner's proposal was another $850 billion in tax cuts - with that whole $850 billion going to people with incomes over $400,000.
So with his plan B, Boehner was basically proposing almost $1.5 trillion in tax CUTS for the top 1-2%. Those tax CUTS completely dwarf the $338 billion in tax increases that he was proposing.
Now, he proposes those cuts before the Bush tax cuts expire and the foolish media portray them as tax increases. Let the Bush tax cuts expire and show his proposal for what it really is - a huge tax CUT for the rich.
Republicans did not accept it, because their masters at Heritage and Cato think they can get even more.
OR they think they can get the same deal - only with Obama and the Democratic Party's name on it.
My fear is that they are right in their optimism. When the dust finally settles, the rich will get many more years of tax CUTS.
Flashmann
(2,140 posts)Just the Headline is hilarious.......
BeyondGeography
(39,374 posts)Obama has made 75% of the movement on fiscal cliff talks. The MSM will NEVER call the thugs out on their extremism. It's a problem.