HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » G.O.P. Backs Off a Demand...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:05 PM

G.O.P. Backs Off a Demand, Clearing Way for More Talks (chained-CPI)

Source: New York Times

WASHINGTON — Negotiations over a last-ditch agreement to head off large tax increases and sweeping spending cuts in the new year appeared to resume Sunday afternoon after Republican senators withdrew their demand that a deal must include a new way of calculating inflation that would lower payments to beneficiaries programs like Social Security and slow their growth.

Senate Republicans emerged from a closed-door meeting to say they agreed with Democrats that the request — which had temporarily brought talks to a standstill — was not appropriate for a quick deal to avert the tax increases and spending cuts starting Jan. 1.

To hold the line against raising taxes on high-income households while fighting for cuts to Social Security was “not a winning hand,” Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, said.

The concession could be a breakthrough, but Senate Republicans were still balking at an agreement on Sunday, adopting a new talking point that Democrats want to raise taxes just to increase spending, not to cut the deficit. That concern appears to center on a Democratic proposal to temporarily suspend across-the-board spending cuts to military and domestic programs as talks resume on a larger deficit deal.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/31/us/politics/obama-accuses-republicans-of-blocking-tax-deal.html?_r=0



Stay tuned...

6 replies, 2829 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 6 replies Author Time Post
Reply G.O.P. Backs Off a Demand, Clearing Way for More Talks (chained-CPI) (Original post)
Purveyor Dec 2012 OP
Xipe Totec Dec 2012 #1
Samantha Dec 2012 #6
Festivito Dec 2012 #2
Autumn Dec 2012 #3
NorthCarolina Dec 2012 #4
underpants Dec 2012 #5

Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:14 PM

1. Chain of fools

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Xipe Totec (Reply #1)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:05 AM

6. Any time I can listen to the late great Eva Cassidy

is a great day. Thanks for posting.

Sam

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:16 PM

2. Obama should counter with an INCREASE in benefits.

A chained-up CPI. It would increase low level recipients to where they should be based on salaries, not COLA. Instead of a chained CPI that decreases high-level recipients over years.

(Personal note, I don't mind the chained CPI as long as it can be revoked later.)

And, they can start by adding more to SS because it will stimulate the economy and bring in more.

And, while we're there, take the cap off FICA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:27 PM

3. So do we need to thank the pukes for agreeing with the Democrats that

the CPI was not appropriate for a quick deal? I'm fucking grateful that this happened and still pissed it was even put on the table.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 06:43 PM

4. So, chained CPI is essentially agreed upon, just not for this short term fix.

They don't think they could pull it off just yet, so they need a "larger deal" to make it "palatable"...but "palatable to whom?

That's the way I read it anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 06:57 PM

5. Fiscal Cliff: GOP Gives In On Social Security Cuts In Stalled Talks (UPDATE)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread