With President Barack Obama’s job approval sliding, the stock market showing its nerves, the public increasingly pessimistic about a jobs rebound and signs of a slowing economy everywhere, the president looks to be increasingly in trouble.
Trying to take advantage of what they see as an opportunity, Congressional Republicans seem eager to play a game of chicken with Obama and his party, calling for Democrats to give into their demands on spending and entitlements in return for raising the debt ceiling.
The Republican position of no new taxes — even to lower the deficit — is clear, consistent and non-negotiable. There is no sign that anyone in the party’s Congressional leadership is laying the groundwork among the base for a deal that includes additional revenue, from taxes to fees or whatever you want to call it.
That means we will continue to head to the early August debt ceiling deadline with Republicans essentially arguing that “what’s mine is mine, and what’s yours is negotiable.”
By taking additional revenue off the negotiating table, Republicans have sought to pre-judge a key aspect of any talks. The question is no longer how to lower the deficit (which would leave additional revenue, the Democratic preference, part of the negotiation). It’s now only how much to cut spending and where to cut it.
Not surprisingly, both parties continue to try to make partisan points rather than look for a true compromise.
The statement by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) is a case in point.
“President Obama needs to decide between his goal of higher taxes or a bipartisan plan to address our deficit. He can’t have both. But we need to hear from him,” they said in a joint statement last week.
Of course, simply saying something is a choice doesn’t make it so. A bipartisan plan could include additional revenue if cutting the deficit is the real goal. But it isn’t for Republicans. They have rolled three different goals — less government, less spending and a lower deficit — into one and are sticking with their non-negotiable premise.
There isn’t anything wrong with their wish list, but setting up the current negotiations over raising the debt ceiling as being about either higher taxes or deficit reduction is a transparently false choice and is little more than a phony public relations spin.
Democrats at least appear willing to negotiate a compromise package, which would include additional revenue and spending cuts. But it’s hard to give them too much credit, given the way they jumped on spending cuts in Rep. Paul Ryan’s (R-Wis.) budget proposal or how they characterized House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s (R-Va.) exit from budget talks late last week.
Democratic strategists immediately fell back into their mode of attacking Republicans for wanting to hurt old people, giving no sign that anyone of clout in the party is willing to climb out on the ledge with Ryan to solve the fundamental problem of entitlement spending.
The statement issued last Thursday by Rep. Bruce Braley (D-Iowa) is a case in point.
Leaders from military and veterans service organizations joined Sens. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., Kelly Ayotte , R-N.H., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., at a press conference to urge the Senate to replace a provision in the budget proposal that cuts retirement benefits for veterans. Wicker, Ayotee, and Graham earlier called for a bipartisan solution to replace the $6.3 billion in cuts to military retiree benefits.
Each year since 1990, CQ Roll Call has reviewed the financial disclosures of all 541 senators, representatives and delegates to determine the 50 richest members of Congress. This year's report, derived from forms covering the calendar year 2012, shows it took a net worth of $6.67 million to crack the exclusive club.