2016 Postmortem

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts) Wed Nov 28, 2012, 01:07 PM Nov 2012

For all those arguing that President Obama should hold out ...

and allow the U.S. to go "over the fiscal cliff" (whether you believe the validity of whether there is in fact a cliff, or not), please answer this question ...

Wouldn't it be far more prudient to:

1) Request, publically, that boehner put the Senate Bill that preserves the sub-$250k tax cuts and allows the $250+ tax cuts to expire (as he is doing);

2) Request the Senate Democrats to request, publically, that boehner put the Senate Bill to a vote in the House (which is being done);

3) Request that House Democrats introduce, publically, a House version of the Senate Bill (something that has not been done);

4) Repeat, everyday, until the House takes action, a "grand bargain" is cut, or January 2nd comes and taxes on everyone go up.

If the House passes the Senate Bill ... phase 1 of the mission is accomplished.

If the House fails to pass the Senate Bill, either because they vote it down, or boehner refuses to put it to a vote, Democrats take back the House in 2014, when/if no deal is cut and we go over the cliff.

But if President Obama holds out and we go over the cliff, we would be looking at 2 years of the gop deflection, as they argue President Obama broken his 2008, and continuing, pledge not to raise taxes on those "earning sub-$250K.

5 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

For all those arguing that President Obama should hold out ... (Original Post) 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2012 OP

Execpt for #4 I believe that is what is being suggested zipplewrath Nov 2012 #1

+1 nt ProudProgressiveNow Nov 2012 #2

No begging, no cajoling. They're trying to Myrina Nov 2012 #3

No. Unless Republicans agree to a bill which raises taxes on the rich, we go over the cliff. Arkana Nov 2012 #4

These Things Should Be Attempted, Sir, But Are Meaningless Without Resolve To 'Go Over' Behind Them The Magistrate Nov 2012 #5

zipplewrath

(16,646 posts)

1. Execpt for #4 I believe that is what is being suggested

Reply to 1StrongBlackMan (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 01:14 PM

Nov 2012

What most mean, I suspect, by allowing us to "go over the cliff" is not to strike any "grand bargin" until the House passes the revenue increases.

I think it is fairly "sellable" to stake out the ground that some large change in entitlements, SS, Medicare/caid, and other major expenditures shouldn't be done in a month with a lame duck congress. Pass the tax bill, end sequestration, and allow the newly elected congress to take up the major spending cuts as part of their regular appropriations process. Passing the tax bill will greatly lower the deficit in and of itself. Cutting spending will be in addition, or beyond, that accomplishment.

ProudProgressiveNow

(6,129 posts)

2. +1 nt

Reply to zipplewrath (Reply #1)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 02:49 PM

Nov 2012

Myrina

(12,296 posts)

3. No begging, no cajoling. They're trying to

Reply to 1StrongBlackMan (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 05:06 PM

Nov 2012

Play chicken with POTUS, with every expectation that he'll blink first. He needs to call their bluff & let us head toward that "cliff" (which is actually more of a speed bump).

Arkana

(24,347 posts)

4. No. Unless Republicans agree to a bill which raises taxes on the rich, we go over the cliff.

Reply to 1StrongBlackMan (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 05:09 PM

Nov 2012

Robert Reich has it right--the "cliff" everyone's so scared of is a return to Clinton-era tax rates. If the Bush tax cuts expire, Obama has all the leverage. He simply has to propose his middle-class tax cut sans the tax increases on the rich, and Republicans cannot vote against it without looking like fools.

The Magistrate

(95,248 posts)

5. These Things Should Be Attempted, Sir, But Are Meaningless Without Resolve To 'Go Over' Behind Them

Reply to 1StrongBlackMan (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 05:15 PM

Nov 2012

Reply to this discussion