Senate may be last, best hope for cliff deal

  • Article by: JONATHAN WEISMAN , New York Times
  • Updated: December 23, 2012 - 9:48 PM

With House in gridlock, some Senate Republicans want partial deal.

  • 51
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
furguson11Dec. 23, 12 9:23 PM

There will be no deal. It's easier to go over the cliff, let all the temporary deals go away, then negotiate "tax cuts" from the new norm. Then the GOP can claim that they didn't raise taxes and the Dems can say they protected the middle class. They all win.

21
4
upnorth85Dec. 23, 12 9:46 PM

Obama had proposed fencing off household income up to $400k. I am puzzled why the GOP did not accept it. This household income level includes over 98% of the population. Makes one wonder whose interest are the GOP in the house are looking after. In the senate why can't Democrats accept a level of $5 million for estate tax exemption? That level again would cover 98% of the population. Why are they hankering for a limit of $10 million? Really, both sides of the aisle are personally rich and they look after their own family. Obama on the other hand is much more honest and really cares for the poor and middle class.

18
19
avejoeconDec. 23, 12 9:48 PM

This is the worst Idea yet. Reminds me of the Reagan years when the dems promised spending cuts if tax increases were past. Spending cuts NEVER happened. Let everyone get a tax increase! This fiscal cliff is a media created disaster that did not have to happen! Phase in tax increases for everyone, 1% a year! Phase in spending cuts at 5% a year, across the board. We need SIGNIFICANT deficit reduction. Not kicking the can down the road.

22
20
jtsnscDec. 23, 12 9:58 PM

We all just have to face the facts that this whole financial mess is going to get a lot worse. There will not be ant agreement on the fiscal cliff and when the great one keeps blaming republicans I see the tp making life miserable for him when the debt limit comes around. Probably should put all your cash into gold since the greenback is going to be worthless.

17
16
banjo2Dec. 23, 1210:27 PM

I agree with ferguson11. Let's go over the cliff and then lower the rates for the middle class. Bush created the "future" problem. Let his party fix it.

12
22
JRBDec. 23, 1211:42 PM

banjo2, how exactly did Bush create the "future" problem? What he got through was a tax cut that actually benefited the working class more than the wealthy. In fact those in the lowest bracket saw their tax rate go from 15% to 10%, a reduction of 50%! But those paying in the highest marginal bracket only got a reduction of less than 12% (39.6% to 35%). Now that we are about to revert back to what everything was before Bush put through the reductions, people are panicking! It seems the economy did OK under what they were in the Clinton era, which is now what it appears they'll revert to after January 1. AND, the best thing about the cliff is the mandatory spending reductions that will be implemented, which are far more than what the Senate and more importantly Obama would accept as part of a negotiated deal. So I say, let's go off the cliff, and then negotiate a comprehensive tax and spending plan that has a little more thought put into it.

21
12
GjbrayDec. 23, 1211:42 PM

No tax increases for anyone. We have a spending problem. Obama refuses to admit that since he wants to spend, spend, spend. He is the most dishonest President in my lifetime. Where is his plan to make real spending cuts? Where is the Senate's? They just sit around and blame the House. Show some leadership and present solutions - real spending cuts. Promoting tax increases that will last for less than two weeks of spending indicate that there is no desire to solve the spending problem, only want to blame the other guy. If I ran my house or business the way the politicians run the country, I would be in jail. We have to have significant spending cuts, and now.

22
22
barefootpaulDec. 24, 1212:37 AM

Gjbray - What cuts were offered by House Republicans? Their latest offer only ensures none of them would come from defense - the budget item that needs cutting more than any since we're paying for systems the Pentagon doesn't even want.

16
9
barefootpaulDec. 24, 1212:38 AM

JRB - Your numbers lie. They only consider fed. income tax rates. You also need to account for estate and capital gains cuts. If you count the dollars saved you'll see how skewed the cuts are favoring the top earners.

14
10
bigtmnDec. 24, 12 1:45 AM

Trying to understand why the "Tea Party" is part of the Republican party and not a third (or fourth, or fifth, ....) political party. They don't seem to agree with "regular" Republicans and don't see to be willing to vote with them.

14
10

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT