First cracks appear in House GOP opposition to tax hikes

For those who believe that avoidance of the “fiscal cliff” boils down to a test of will between the White House and House Speaker John Boehner, this Associated Press piece matters:

WASHINGTON — The first cracks are developing among Republicans over whether to accept a quick deal with President Barack Obama on allowing the top two income tax rates to expire.

Conservative Oklahoma GOP Rep. Tom Cole told GOP colleagues in a private meeting on Tuesday that it’s better to make sure that tax cuts for the 98 percent of taxpayers who make less than $200,000 or $250,000 a year are extended than to battle it out with Obama and risk increasing taxes on everyone.

Cole’s remarks are noteworthy because he’s a longtime GOP loyalist and a confidant of House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio. They were made in a meeting of the House GOP Republican whip team, which is a sounding board for GOP leaders.

“If we don’t believe taxes should go up on anybody, why can’t we accept a deal that takes 98 percent out and still leaves us free to fight on the other grounds,” Cole said in an interview on Wednesday. “I’m not for using the American people for leverage or as a hostage.”

Other Republicans have worried that the GOP would lose a bargaining advantage by separating tax cuts for the highest earners from everyone else, but Cole said he believes the reverse is true.

“I think we have the winning argument,” he said. “Most Americans intuitively understand that raising taxes on small business is costing them jobs.”

Cole’s comments drew a rebuke from Boehner, who is standing firm against Obama’s demand that tax rates go up for top earners.

“He’s a wonderful friend of mine and a great supporter of mine, but raising taxes on the so-called top 2 percent — half of those taxpayers are small business owners,” Boehner said. “You’re not going to grow the economy if you raise the top two rates. It’ll hurt small business. It’ll hurt our economy.”

Reaction was mixed to his idea at a Wednesday morning meeting of House Republicans, Cole said. Conservative Rep. Raul Labrador, R-Idaho, who said he opposed Cole’s idea, said he believed a majority of House Republicans also opposed it.

Cole said he expects to support whatever deficit-cutting deal Boehner is eventually able to negotiate with the White House as the two sides wrangle over how to avoid the “fiscal cliff” mix of tax increases and spending cuts that will occur automatically in January unless lawmakers avert them.

“This is a tactical argument, this is not a theological argument,” Cole said. “We don’t disagree on what we’re trying to do.”

Cole’s comments were first reported by Politico.

Meantime, Obama said Wednesday he still believes that members of both parties can reach a framework on a debt-cutting deal before Christmas.

Obama made a public statement, joined by about a dozen middle-class Americans who have raised concerns about their taxes going up at the end of the year. He said lawmakers face important deadlines in the coming weeks but the voices of the American people need to be a part of the debate.

The president said that officials need to “approach this problem with the middle-class in mind.”

Obama could be in position to blame Republicans if an impasse results in the government going over the so-called fiscal cliff, an economy-rattling set of automatic spending cuts and tax increases from the expiration of longstanding tax cuts made in 2001 and 2003 during the Bush administration.

Democrats already are portraying GOP lawmakers as hostage-takers willing to let tax rates rise on everyone if lower Bush-era tax rates are not extended for the top 2 percent to 3 percent of earners — those with incomes above $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for joint filers.

- By Jim Galloway, Political Insider

For instant updates, follow me on Twitter, or connect with me on Facebook.

41 comments Add your comment

Weetamoe

November 28th, 2012
1:33 pm

He will blame republicans no matter what the consequences so they might as well stick to their principles.. I realize trying to deal with this thug is difficult. He is the most divisive president in history. His words and actions since 2008 are testament to that fact.

muddy waters

November 28th, 2012
1:43 pm

Go back into your echo chamber with your tired Hate Radio boilerplate blather, Weetamoe. You’re either part of the solution or part of the problem. Help out or scram.

td

November 28th, 2012
1:49 pm

muddy waters

November 28th, 2012
1:43 pm

Raising taxes on the top 2% is a bogus argument and does not solve any problem. You can raise taxes to 100% on the top 2% and it will not even balance the deficit.

If you want to raise taxes back to the Clinton era the spending should go back to the Clinton era.

History Will Teach Us if we Will Learn

November 28th, 2012
1:51 pm

You got to have “principles” to stick to them.

mike

November 28th, 2012
1:52 pm

“thug” another one of those code words used by that other group of people. “most divisive president in history”…I suppose those patriots and American citizens who seceded from the United States pre-Civil War don’t qualify. You do remember the war when all those people died on both sides because the southern states wanted their own rights about keeping a group of people as property. And yes the repubs are to blame. They lied about the war in Iraq. They have spent much effort into hindering people from voting. ie Florida. BTW you do realize a majority of the American people voted for the guy with the big ears. However I am glad you people wake up every morning and realize Mr Obama is still the President. I know it justs ruins your day. GOOD!!!

td

November 28th, 2012
1:57 pm

mike

November 28th, 2012
1:52 pm

You libs seem to forget that there were a great deal of those same people that voted Obama back into office also put their Republican House member back in office to make sure Obama does no harm.

Auntie Christ

November 28th, 2012
2:04 pm

wee wee mo, I have to agree, Obama has really been divisive. Just imagine the gall, dividing people like you and allen west and the other tea baggers when you all have been so willing to cooperate, and the very essence of civility and bi-partisanship. My heart goes out to you.

On another note, how’s that GED preparation going? Look forward to hearing from you with that new found intellect and reading skills.

honested

November 28th, 2012
2:08 pm

td,

You can only hope that the sane republicans don’t see the writing on the wall and jump.
Just over a dozen and the fake ‘cliff’ washes away.

curious

November 28th, 2012
2:17 pm

td

There may not be a Republican House majority after 2014 if they don’t start trying to solve this problem.

I don’t think anyone has ever suggested tax hikes or spending cuts alone will balance the budget and begin bringing down the debt.

d

November 28th, 2012
2:24 pm

The only way to bring down the debt is to have 0 deficit – and in order to have 0 deficit, we have to spend no more than what we bring in in revenues. If our national income is less than than our national expenditures, then we have a deficit and we have to borrow money to cover that. Simple enough. Where things get complicated is that Americans are comfortable with our current spending levels. They like what the government “provides” for us (I use that term lightly). They don’t want to give it up, but they don’t want to pay for it either. The other issue that we aren’t looking at is that if we ever, in theory, only *balance* our budget, the debt never gets paid off. We have to start running surpluses and use that money to pay down the debt. For what it’s worth, though, although China does hold a significant portion of our national debt, we actually owe the largest portion to Americans…. any of you have a savings bond?

JD

November 28th, 2012
2:25 pm

TD may be on to something — go to Clinton era spending (numbers in billions)
FY 13 FY 01
DOD $526 $278 Net $248 savings
HHS $940 $421.4 Net $518.6

Reduce Deficit $766.6 billion

Add in the tax increase — and we are almost there — of course there will be a lot of unemployed defense contract employees, people starving, dying of disease — but, hey, what’s more important?

Danny O

November 28th, 2012
2:30 pm

70% of the American economy is consumer spending. The vast majority of that spending is done by those who make less than the top 2%. Raising taxes by a few percentage points on the top 2% will not have a substantial impact on the economy.

Progressive Humanist

November 28th, 2012
2:33 pm

td @ 1:57: You’re fooling yourself once again if you think that keeping the House was some sort of victory for the Republicans. More Americans actually voted for Democrats in House races in 2012, but because of gerrymandering by state legislatures the Republicans held the House. To put it to you plainly: far more Americans voted for President Obama than for Romney, more people voted for Democrats for the Senate, and more people voted for Democrats for the House. Keep whistling past the graveyard and ignoring the fact that the majority of Americans reject your “principles” and philosophy. That majority is growing every day, and you’re unlikely to see your party in power again in your lifetime because they can’t change course.

I'm in the 2%

November 28th, 2012
2:47 pm

The top 2% probably voted for Romney and congressional Republicans by a significant margin. The 98% obviously preferred Obama. I say let them pay the increased taxes that the policies of their guy require. The top 2% pay more than their fair share. Any more taxes on my and I’ll simply eliminate jobs or not invest in my businesses. Who is John Gault? Enough is enough. I’m ready to go on strike!

Let those who gave us Obama pay more taxes!!!

Kris

November 28th, 2012
2:53 pm

The fact is Romney wasn’t “narrowly beaten.” He was shellacked. The entire Republican party was shellacked

Get over it……Shady your next in 2014!

Progressive Humanist

November 28th, 2012
3:03 pm

@ 2%-

You’re not in the top 2%. Anyone in the top 2% would have enough sense to realize that damaging their own business and/or earning potential because their tax rate gets bumped from 36% to 39.5% would be about the dumbest thing they could do with their lives. But have at it. Go on strike. Stop investing in your “business”. You remember that thing called capitalism? There will be someone else who’ll be more than willing to come in and take your customers.

Auntie Christ

November 28th, 2012
3:13 pm

td

November 28th, 2012
1:49 pm
If you want to raise taxes back to the Clinton era the spending should go back to the Clinton era.
*************************************************************

Maybe you can tell us how to unspend the 1.5–2 Trillion bush’s bogus war has cost us so far, and how to avoid the interest on it, since it was financed on a credit card. Maybe we can go over to Iraq and tear down the bridges, hospitals, airports and highways we built there and transplant them here since you baggers don’t want to allocate any monies to support our own infrastructure here. And head over to the local VA and tell the paraplegics how sorry you are, but we have to cut back to 1996 levels, and you’re on your own, buddy, but we thank you for your service nonetheless.

Surprisingly for you though, the idea has merit, but just try to tell john mccain and his girl friend lindsay and the chicken hawks like chambliss that keeping troops in Italy, Germany, Japan and Korea does nothing to protect you, and you’ll be just as safe without that expense. But being a chickenhawk yourself, you won’t do that, instead you will scream about having to pay for Obamacare, which does actually protect the lives of American citizens, a lot more so than a PFC stationed on the 32nd parallel of Korea.

joke on us

November 28th, 2012
3:21 pm

the tax increase for the top 2% is nothing; taxes are going up on a bunch of rich ppl; yawn, they just pass the cost on to the consumer; gas taxes are going up or a mileage tax (mark my words, it is going to happen), a VAT will come to America; and to top it all off some form of Carbon tax is coming.

if they would just use a clinton era budget it would work. but, to pay for all the “new stuff” everyone has to chip in.

Auntie Christ

November 28th, 2012
3:22 pm

I’m in the 2% is going to quit hiring. I think what he’s trying to say is his days of picking up Mexicans at the Home Depot parking lot are over, his wife is gonna make him start raking the leaves.

BTW 2, if you’re gonna pretend to be an Ayn Rand aficianado, it’s John Galt.

jconservative

November 28th, 2012
3:43 pm

“He is the most divisive president in history.”

Maybe. But he is only the 4th president in the last 100 years to win over 50% of the popular vote in two elections . The others – FDR, Eisenhower and Reagan. That puts BHO in rare and exclusive company.

I cannot see the Republicans winning public relations fight over the Bush tax cuts. The White House is wanting extend the Bush/Obama tax cuts to 100% of all taxpayers on the first $250,000 of their income. The Republicans have boxed themselves into refusing 100% of taxpayers a tax cut just to protect the taxes of 2% of taxpayers. I cannot see how the Republicans win this battle.

If there is no compromise and the tax cuts expire and the spending cuts go into effect, so what?

You don't say

November 28th, 2012
3:58 pm

Maybe td & cc can tell us what Dick Morris and Karl Rove are predicting………

They both follow those guys because of their great prediction abilities

:-)

td

November 28th, 2012
4:08 pm

Yes, 30 states are controlled by Republican governors and Republicans control both chambers in their legislatures. The districts have been gerrymandered and Republicans will control the Federal House of Reps for the next 10 years. 2014 will also be a mid term election and all these Obama supporters will not come out and vote so Republican numbers will go back up in the house. In the Senate there will be 7 Dems running for re election in states that Romney won and there will be ZERO Senators running in states that Obama won. Republicans will gain seats.

Go and do a little study of the map below of election results and find how the vast majority of seats won by Republicans and Dems in the House were won by 56 to 80%. These districts are not going to change.

Go look at the maps for Ohio, VA, PA, and FL. Look at the Obama votes in areas of the state and then go and look at the House map and see how Obama won these some districts but then the same people sent Republicans back to Congress. If this does not tell you Obama does not have a mandate for his radical policies then nothing will. You are living in a dream world if you think Republicans lost and need to just roll over and beg.

td

November 28th, 2012
4:09 pm

td

November 28th, 2012
4:13 pm

You don’t say

November 28th, 2012
3:58 pm

Maybe td & cc can tell us what Dick Morris and Karl Rove are predicting………

They both follow those guys because of their great prediction abilities

I do not need Dick Morris or Karl Rove to tell me about house races. All I need to know is that Republicans control 30 states by holding both chambers and the governors office and then control at least one chamber in 6 additional states. Just take a look at Georgia and the % both Dems and Republicans won by and tell me which seats could flip in 2014? The numbers are the same in most ever other states.

Mr. Snarky

November 28th, 2012
4:17 pm

Life is full of bitterness and sorrow if you’re a con these days.
Oh the humanity!

You don't say

November 28th, 2012
4:18 pm

td

Demographics is a problem for Republicans. Gerrymandering will help for a few more cycles, but if the party thinks that status quo is a winner….. I hope they do what they continue to do.

Democrats lost no seats in the House in which they already held. How about the Republicans?

When looking at total votes, Democrats had more total votes in House races than Republicans.

I want Republicans to keep doing exactly what they are doing. It will work in a few states, but even some Republicans acknowledge the current demographics and voting patterns will have GA, NC & TX more purple than red within a few election cycles.

Good luck and keep betting on Dick Morris and Karl Rove…………………..

You don't say

November 28th, 2012
4:22 pm

“I do not need Dick Morris or Karl Rove to tell me about house races.”

Yet you foolishly quoted them numerous times on this blog as well as Bookman and Wingfield’s blog before the election.

What a clown. can’t even admit that you were knee deep into what those charlatans were brainwashing you with, as well as Rush, Hanitty, Olielly and Boortz.

How did the latest Rush listening club alumni pizza party go?

Why the long faces?

td

November 28th, 2012
4:32 pm

You don’t say

November 28th, 2012
4:18 pm

td

“Demographics is a problem for Republicans. Gerrymandering will help for a few more cycles, but if the party thinks that status quo is a winner….. I hope they do what they continue to do. ”

Huge assumptions on your part to make this statement.

1: You are assuming that whites will still give Democrats 30 to 40% of the vote.
2: You are assuming that African Americans will continue to vote 95% Democrat when there is not an African American on the ticket. (I am pretty sure Bush received 11% in 2004)
3: You are assuming that Hispanics will still give 70% to Democrats. This after a candidate like Rubio is put on a national stage and after the far left pushes more and more anti religious policies.
4: You are assuming that White women are not going to get married. It is proven that white married women vote Republican.
5: You are assuming that Asian’s are going to keep voting 70% Democrat when Dems keep killing their small businesses with their tax policies.

Big assumptions there my friend and we shall see if they come true or not.

Marlboro Man

November 28th, 2012
4:34 pm

98% of small business earn less than $200000, the speaker speaks not the truth.

td

November 28th, 2012
4:40 pm

You don’t say

November 28th, 2012
4:22 pm

Wow you happen to be right for one election cycle and I was wrong and now you are thinking you have all the answers?

I am sure you were on these blogs prior to the 2010 elections (under a different screen name) saying the Dems would maintain control of the House, Barnes would be the governor and Thurmond would be our Senator.

Since the time of Ronald Reagan this is the second Presidential election that I have missed (the other being Clinton beating GHWB).

You don't say

November 28th, 2012
4:43 pm

td

And you are assuming they will not. I mean you are the same guy who touted Rove and Morris.

The trends are not your friend. Republicans need to do exactly what they are doing for much more of the same on the national level and even in some states they control now.

What are the Republicans doing to halt the trends and as Lindsey Graham said “They are not making anymore angry white males……..” or something along those lines.

If you are not smart enough to figure out what he said, let me clue you in: If the Republican’s continue to do the same thing, they will get the same result and even worse on a national level.

But ” Keep Hopelessness Alive”

You don't say

November 28th, 2012
4:46 pm

td

You lie. I have been on these blogs for one yr.

So keep lying as you do and touting Morris and $5 gas.

Your God is looking for LION Christians, not LYING Christians.

You are a loser lying dolt

You don't say

November 28th, 2012
4:49 pm

not only was td touting a Romney win, but a Senate takeover and more seats in the House

hahahahahahahahahaha

You willingly and willfully allow Fox, Drudge and the radio pundits to brainwash you with anything they want to program you with……….

You are funny. Keep up the good work, so I can laugh at your posts

DJ Sniper

November 28th, 2012
5:11 pm

I just love how neo-cons keep shouting this nonsense about Democrats and anti-religious policies. I guess it never occured to these people that it’s the religious zealots that are trying to force their beliefs down everybody else’s throats. I really want these people to stop using the “religious freedom” argument as well, because it does not apply.

td

November 28th, 2012
6:24 pm

You don’t say

November 28th, 2012
4:46 pm

You may not have been on the blogs but I am sure you thought Barnes, Thurmond would win GA and the House of Reps would remain in Dem hands.

You must be young or you would know that the electorate changes over time. In 1990 the dems had super majorities in GA, had held the governors office for 150 years, had every member of the House except one and look what has happened.

I really think we are may go through a 20 year or so period like in the 1950 to 1994 nationally where the Republicans control the house, the Senate goes back and forth and the President is mainly Dem with a Republican every now and then.

You don't say

November 28th, 2012
6:29 pm

td

And like what you “thought” three weeks ago, you are probably wrong.

You are wrong a lot with the bs you post on these blogs. Admitting it is another story, but you are just a right wing walking and talking point..

Nothing more

You don't say

November 28th, 2012
6:32 pm

td

And as for age; with the stupidity that you regularly post, you shouldn’t tell anyone that you are over 20.

You don't say

November 28th, 2012
6:36 pm

td

Where you on of the blogs recently saying that you rent?

Maybe it wasn’t you.

td

November 28th, 2012
7:56 pm

You don’t say

November 28th, 2012
6:36 pm

td

Where you on of the blogs recently saying that you rent?

Maybe it wasn’t you.

I do not rent my friend but you probably rent from me. Probably the one that paid me in pennies before I had the family put on the street.

You don't say

November 28th, 2012
8:24 pm

td: you lie much? of course you do

_______________________________________

td

November 26th, 2012
2:17 pm

SBinF

November 26th, 2012
2:04 pm

“Once you have your deduction then you “effective tax rate” is not above 15%. If it is then you are in the top 1% or really need to hire an accountant to do your taxes.”

Have you seen my W-2’s? Of course not. As a middle class, single, childless renter, I surely get the least benefit from tax deductions as anyone in the country.

As a single, middleclass, childless renter you are not doing the right things to keep your taxes down to what the normal tax rates should be for a person with your income thus you are not doing what the people believe is in the best interest of the nation as a whole.

Like I said you need to hire an accountant to show you how to reduce your tax burden. If you owned a home and had a child then you would not be paying more then Romney. Since you have no other expenses then you should have tons of money invested in the stock market so your gains are being taxed at the same rate as Romney’s and your income is being taxed at a lower rate then Romney’s income was taxed at.

td

November 28th, 2012
8:29 pm

You don’t say

November 28th, 2012
8:24 pm

Now I know from your lack of reading comprehension skills that you are

1: A product of a sub par Elementary and High School education.

2: Have very little if any college

3: young Obama voter.

If you actually read the conversation between myself and this poster and had the capacity to understand then you would know that it is this other person that has said he was single, a renter with no children and paid more money then Romney in taxes due to those conditions.