“House Speaker John A. Boehner abandoned efforts Saturday night to cut a far-reaching debt-reduction deal, telling President Obama that a more modest package offers the only politically realistic path to avoiding a default on the mounting national debt.
On the eve of a critical White House summit on the debt issue, Boehner (R-Ohio) told Obama that their plan to “go big,” in the speaker’s words, and forge a compromise that would save more than $4 trillion over the next decade, was crumbling under Obama’s insistence on significant new tax revenue.”
“The sweeping deal Obama and Boehner had been discussing would have required both parties to take a bold leap into the political abyss. Democrats were demanding more than $800 billion in new tax revenue, causing heartburn among the hard-line fiscal conservatives who dominate the House Republican caucus. Republicans, meanwhile, were demanding sharp cuts to Medicare and Social Security, popular safety net programs that congressional Democrats have vowed to protect.
Obama, at least, was willing to make that leap and had put significant reductions to entitlement programs on the table. But on Saturday, Boehner blinked: Republican aides said he could not, in the end, reach agreement with the White House on a strategy to permit the Bush-era tax cuts for the nation’s wealthiest households to expire next year, as lawmakers undertook a thorough rewrite of the tax code.”
Did we just miss what happened in Minnesota? It’s not a compromise if one side gives and gives and the other side just takes. If Democrats are willing to make historic cuts to satisfy Republicans, why are Republicans then not willing to accept tax increases for the wealthiest Americans to satisfy Democrats? I am sorry, but I cannot believe that John Boehner is interested in debt reduction when he has the opportunity to save $4 trillion over the next 10 years, and because the Democrats want to compromise and include tax hikes for the wealthiest Americans, he completely scraps these cuts and goes for saving $2.4 trillion instead. It is clear, Mr. Boehner, that you do not have the best interest of the American people in mind. Once again, those with the most money hold the most influence.
Read the entirety of the article here on the New York Times.