I wish I could tell you that I have some idea about what is going to happen with the Fiscal Cliff, but I’m finding the whole subject impenetrable. None of the reporting is very helpful and it’s hard to read beyond the posturing of the principals’ public statements. One clue, however, I found in this The Hill article. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor has informed members that they should return to Washington on Sunday in time to take votes beginning at 6:30pm.
When Speaker Boehner dismissed the House for the holidays, he said that he was not certain that they would return before the New Year. Why would he have them come back again to humiliate him some more? Yet, we now know that he has made the decision to force the 435 members to cut short their holiday with their families. He must expect something to pass, right?
I also noticed that Mitch McConnell was mumbling something about the president submitting some kind of plan. Yet, Harry Reid says he doesn’t think there are enough hours left in the year to hash out a deal.
Some kind of pared-down bill might pass at the last minute, but whatever negotiations that have actually gone on over the last week are not being discussed. It could be that Boehner is bringing back the House in more of a “just-in-case” than “get ‘er done” attitude.
I think the stakes for Boehner are quite high. He faces a vote on his speakership on January 3rd, and he isn’t going to be going into that vote a hero no matter what he does now. If he cuts a deal with the House Democrats and the administration, most of his caucus will be enraged, but if he doesn’t get a deal done, he’ll be seen as a totally ineffectual leader who doesn’t have the trust of his own party. Ironically, the latter scenario gives him a better chance to keep his job.
My guess is they kick the can down the road by extending the drop dead date. I think some sort of deal has been made last week but not announced.
Because of this:
http://www.boomantribune.com/comments/2012/12/27/121818/53/13#13
This is also germane:
http://www.boomantribune.com/comments/2012/12/27/121818/53/7#7
I’m guessing they just want to be seen as ‘back to work’ when we go over the cliff instead of kicking back at home.
I like how Obama has set the optics. He leaves his family on their holiday vacation, he returns to D.C., shirtsleeves rolled up for work… but woops: no Congress.
I have long suspected that he knew there was no possibility of a deal, we would go over the cliff, and he’ll have a better chance with the next Congress. With the Bush cuts out of the way, it’s a new playing field, and again, all the old deals are gone. Boehner must lie awake at night hearing “You get nothing,” knowing he’ll get even less in January, again.
But in the meantime, Obama will dutifully play along, ensuring the blame is entirely on the House Republicans.
This is definitely Obama’s chessboard.
Or not. There is still definitely the fear that Obama, desperate for a compromise and hating confrontation, will buy into Ryan’s budget.
Or, as I suggesting in a link above, BOTH sides want to go over the cliff, but neither wants to admit it so that they can blame the other side for political gain. That should be Manchurian Candidate enough.
I know, two completely opposite theories, but both fitting the observations made so far. More observations are needed.
Well, I came here to say that I wholeheartedly agree with the POV Booman presents in the last paragraph of his post here, particularly the hilarious but seemingly accurate last sentence, but had to respond to this.
I’m not happy with Obama’s willingness to bargain over Social Security cuts, but there’s no reasonable fear that Obama will “buy into Ryan’s budget.” There’s no evidence that he would do that at all. For example, there was a trial balloon floated for a Medicare cut much less radical than the one in Ryan proposed, and they’ve pulled that balloon from consideration after we successfully mobilized in opposition.
As I said, more observations needed.
I know, two completely opposite theories, but both fitting the observations made so far.
Which makes perfect sense. If Obama’s was acting to set up the Republicans to take the fall, he would be trying to make it look like he was really trying to accomplish a deal.
More observations are needed.
I don’t think we’ll know for sure until we see the final outcome – either going over the cliff, or some deal struck.
An interesting opinion from one of my lunch partners, he thinks no deal because even with McConnell, Boehner, reid and Obama on board, the Tea Party will not go along because it’s Obama. They would vote for their own executions if Obama wanted to pardon them, just to spite him.
I fully expect lame duck (and wild turkey) Joe Walsh to do something totally against his former constituents.
Yes, Obama’s optics are perfect. This Saturday’s message may be one for the history books and that is the only reason the GOP is coming back to DC Sunday….they must have a reply. Only a reply no deal.
Or, with all those Congresscritters returning to DC, it’s a bailout for the airlines.
Perhaps there are enough fresh water republicans that have an agricultural base that they know passing the farm support bill is the real deal for their continued bonafides as supporters of Real Amuricuns.
Nothing will get done before the cliff. The Democrats will want to (rightly) be able to blame Repubicans. Republicans will want to be on record as showing how uncompromising Obama is.
The in the first few weeks of January republicans will vote to “lower” taxes and show they are interested in us common folks.
I don’t see any other way.
I’m worried about some last minute cave by Obama. I love the guy and voted enthusiastically for him, but until he shows an ability to be tough in these hostage-taking negotiations I don’t trust that he won’t cave.
I’ll be livid if they pass anything that continues the tax cuts for those making over $250k. If they continue the estate tax as it currently is, I will be pissed. If they extend dividend and capital gains rates, I’ll barf.
Let’s just go over the cliff and restart negotiations. I was on unemployment for a year myself, I know how important it is. I also know that you can survive a month or so without benefits. We can’t let Obama cave just to keep the benefits rolling nonstop. It will suck to see the unemployed face short term pain, but this is Obama’s last chance to make sure taxes go up substantially. Don’t panic and let it happen.
I was unemployed two years, had benefits for nine months. You are right, the benefits are just a band-aid. In my case they paid the mortgage but food, utilities, school and clothes for the kids were just on credit cards and were the credit card payments. An 18% exponential curve grows very fast.
To add insult to injury, the benefits are taxable which I think we can blame on Reagan, but maybe it was Clinton.
Well it’s an economic benefit, of course they’re taxable. HOW they’re actually taxed on the other hand….
They were tax free before the Reagan “reforms”.