Fiscal cliff: Impasse on tax rates is big hurdle

Speaker of the House John Boehner, R-Ohio, talks about the elections and the unfinished business of Congress,at the Capitol in Washington, Wednesday, Nov. 7, 2012. The first post-election test of wills could start next week when Congress returns from its election recess to deal with unfinished business  including a looming Show caption
Speaker of the House John Boehner, R-Ohio, talks about the elections and the unfinished business of Congress,at the Capitol in Washington, Wednesday, Nov. 7, 2012. The first post-election test of wills could start next week when Congress returns from its election recess to deal with unfinished business including a looming "fiscal cliff" of $400 billion in higher taxes and $100 billion in automatic cuts in military and domestic spending to take effect in January if Congress doesn't head them off. Economists warn that the combination could plunge the nation back into a recession. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

WASHINGTON (AP) — House Republicans’ hard line against higher tax rates for upper-income earners leaves re-elected President Barack Obama with a tough, core decision: Does he pick a fight and risk falling off a “fiscal cliff” or does he rush to compromise and risk alienating liberal Democrats?

Or is there another way that will allow both sides to claim victory?

Obama has been silent since his victory speech early Wednesday morning, but is set to weigh in Friday in remarks at the White House.

Capitol Hill Republicans, meanwhile, vow to stand resolutely against any effort by the president to fulfill a campaign promise to raise the top two income tax rates to Clinton-era levels. A battle would set the tone for the start of the president’s second term.

“A ‘balanced’ approach isn’t balanced if it means higher tax rates on the small businesses that are key to getting our economy moving again,” House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said on Wednesday. “Raising tax rates is unacceptable,” he declared Thursday on ABC. “Frankly, it couldn’t even pass the House. I’m not sure it could pass the Senate.”

A lot is at stake. A new Congressional Budget Office report on Thursday predicted that the economy would fall into recession if there is a protracted impasse in Washington and the government falls off the fiscal cliff for the entire year. Though most Capitol-watchers think that long deadlock is unlikely, the analysts say such a scenario would cause a spike in the jobless rate to 9.1 percent by next fall.

The analysis says that the cliff — a combination of automatic tax increases and spending cuts — would cut the deficit by $503 billion through next September, but that the fiscal austerity also would cause the economy to shrink by 0.5 percent next year and cost millions of jobs.

The new study estimates that the nation’s gross domestic product would grow by 2.2 percent next year if all Bush-era tax rates were extended and would expand by almost 3 percent if Obama’s 2 percentage point payroll tax cut and current jobless benefits for the long-term unemployed were extended as well.

All sides say they want a deal — and that now that the election is over everyone can show more flexibility than in the heat of the campaign.

Obama will address the issue Friday though he’s not expected to immediately offer specifics. His long-held position — repeatedly rejected by Republicans — is that tax rates on family income over $250,000 should jump back up to Clinton-era levels. Republicans say they’re willing to consider new tax revenue but only through drafting a new tax code that lowers rates and eliminates some deductions and wasteful tax breaks. And they’re insisting on cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and food stamps, known as entitlement programs in Washington-speak.

The White House’s “opening position is, ‘We’re willing to do big entitlement cuts. In return we need you to go up on the rate,’” said Democratic lobbyist Steve Elmendorf. “Then they’re going to get into a discussion. It’ll be a process.”

The current assumption is that any agreement would be a multi-step process that would begin this year with a down payment on the deficit and on action to stave off more than the tax increases and $109 billion in across-the-board cuts to the Pentagon budget and a variety of domestic programs next year.

The initial round is likely to set binding targets on revenue levels and spending cuts, but the details would probably be enacted next year.

“What we can do is avert the cliff in a manner that serves as a down payment on — and a catalyst for — major solutions, enacted in 2013, that begin to solve the problem,” Boehner said.

While some of that heavy work would be left for next year, a raft of tough decisions would have to be made in the next six weeks. They could include the overall amount of deficit savings and achieving agreement on how much would come from revenue increases and how much would be cut from costly health care programs, the Pentagon and the day-to-day operating budgets of domestic Cabinet agencies.

Democrats are sure to press for a guarantee that tax reform doesn’t end up hurting middle-income taxpayers at the expense of upper-bracket earners. Republicans want to press for corporate tax reform and a guarantee that the top rate paid by individuals and small businesses goes down along the way.

While some Democratic partisans want Obama to play tough on taxes and use his leverage to force Republicans to accept higher rates on the wealthy, Republicans warn that such hardball would poison the well even before Obama takes the oath of office and imperil prospects for second-term Obama initiatives including immigration reform.

Another idea is to raise revenue from the wealthy but not through higher income tax rates. Instead, policymakers could cap the amount of itemized deductions that the wealthy might be able to claim, an idea that’s in Obama’s budget and was a suggestion of Mitt Romney in the campaign.

“There is more than one way to bell the cat. So why are people so fixed on the 39.6 (percent rate)? It’s because of the progressivity of the code,” said Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., on CNBC on Thursday. “You can accomplish that same progressivity with lower rates if you broaden the (tax) base in a way that’s progressive.”

Other items on the agenda for the lame duck session include a multi-year farm bill, legislation to reform the Postal Service, and a renewal of Medicare payment rates for doctors.


Please log in to comment on this story

Comments (11)


1) Comment by agagent - 09/11/2012

The Democrats have held the balance of power or total control in Washington since January, 2007. Obama said the Republicans had to get to the back of the bus when he became President in January, 2009. It cannot be anyone else’s fault except Obama and the Democrats as they tax and spend us into another recession.

2) Comment by DMJ - 09/11/2012

So...when Americans go through the democratic process and elect someone you don't like...it's a MOB (make sure to put that word in all caps every time) but when the exact same democratic process "works" and someone you like is elected, it's the country fixing itself? What a joke. And Whatnow, you know full well that Obama can't just do what he wants. He's not a dictator. Relax.

3) Comment by Whatnow - 09/11/2012

Obama will do what he wants. Just look at what happened with the overthrow of Qadaffi and getting approval afterwards. He'll just make a new mandate to fit his wants.

4) Comment by Mygulfbleedsforu - 09/11/2012

If Republicans continue their obstructionism, go over the damned cliff -- it's not the edge of the Earth, for chrissakes. Then maybe they'll come to the table to pass well-thought-out, responsible, compromised CUTS to the taxes and they can all get off on making tax cuts.

5) Comment by Mygulfbleedsforu - 09/11/2012

Ever the drama lamas, the R Party. Work yourself into a lather. Rinse. Repeat. You play your game ferociously, then lose ungraciously. You create scary monsters then believe them real. You will thieve and kill to win, then you got nothing but lowering taxes on the wealthy and spending tons on blowing stuff up, which makes even more rich friends more wealthy. And, most hilariously if it wasn't so sad, you convince the low-information religious brigade that it's all for good and for God. Sheesh. How did it get like this?

6) Comment by TommyRucker - 09/11/2012

The majority of people in this country want to be 'masters' today with 'slaves' serving them as they feel they deserve it and will continue to look for demagogues such as Obama to lead them. Reasonable and logical approaches to solving problems in this country died this past Tuesday. The real principle behind this behavior is 'I want to be served, I deserve it and I should not have to work or sacrifice for it'. It does not matter what is said as this principle dominates, its the principle of POWER that makes up MOB thinking and as Aristotle said, pure democracy is nothing more than a mob and that is what we have in America today and our democratic party mob leaders are going to do everything and anything to make the MOB principle even more dominating than it is today. Eventually things are going to get a lot worse and then, only then, will we start to reverse this mess we are in.

7) Comment by DMJ - 09/11/2012

Tommy, you need to get a grip. You're losing it, bub. Even Romney himself recanted the stupid 47% theory. Obviously, not everyone who doesn't pay federal income tax votes Democratically. This is statistically impossible. You don't even have to be smart to understand this. Nor do you have to be smart to realize that the House Republicans must be willing to compromise in order to get anything done. If Tuesday's election taught us anything (apparently, it taught some of us nothing) it's that the two parties must work together. This is not some kumbaya, hold-hands type of wishful thinking. It's common sense. It's pragmatism. Rucker, by the way, your posts are getting weirder and weirder. I think you might want to talk to someone. Seriously. You clearly have a warped sense of your political opponents that has no basis in reality. Want to know what an Obama supporter actually thinks and believes? Ask one. Ask me. Shoot. Actually, that may be a bad choice of words. Ask away... Yeah.

8) Comment by TommyRucker - 09/11/2012

The problem is that the 47% has increased to more than 50% and it will not change until it gets worse as pain is the only thing that changes most people's behavior, no reason or logic. We used to have a majority of people that were reasonable, logical, believed in God, worked hard, made sacrifices (especially for their families), and were identified as being part of the traditional family unit-NO MORE and the election of Obama and his destructive policies and procedures are the consequence. He like his supporters are going to point the finger at someone else for the mess and to make someone else fix the mess. Unfortunately it ain't going to happen and it is not even going to be improved until it gets a lot worse as Obama's supporters are determined to drag everyone else down to where they have put themselves.

9) Comment by TommyRucker - 09/11/2012

We went off the cliff when Obama was re-elected. The only thing left is the consequences and the PAIN is coming and the only solution is to blame others, to take from the people who have been responsible and worked for a living and give it to the slight majority who voted for Obama. The lazy and irresponsible are now in the majority and things will not get better until they get worse. Once you trust in man rather than God, it will not work out. The majority in this country want a demagogue as president and it happened. The consequences will come, they always do, just look at the countries in the history of the world that tried the Obama approach.

10) Comment by bourbon-soda - 09/11/2012

Why should Obama care whether he alienates liberal Democrats? He is now a 4 year lame duck and has flexibility both in dealing with Putin and with his fellow Americans.

11) Comment by agagent - 09/11/2012

You cannot say we are going back to Clinton era taxes. For one thing Obama and the Democrats have added $1 trillion in Obamacare taxes since then. I see no mention of how the federal government has increased entitlement spending by $900 billion dollars in just 4 years. We can go back to Clinton era tax rates only if we revert to Clinton era federal spending.