Fiscal cliff action to come Sunday … maybe
Harry Reid returns to his office Friday after White House meeting (The New York Times/T.J. Kirkpatrick)
The United States Senate has the ball in its hands.
This afternoon’s White House fiscal cliff summit appears to have generated some movement toward a deal, with just more than 72 hours to go. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell both took the floor afterwards in an unusually conciliatory manner, pledging to work with their staffs to come up with a plan that can pass both Houses of Congress. Reid said “we’ll see what we can come up with.” McConnell said he was “hopeful and confident” that both sides will have a deal to take to their conferences shortly after 2 p.m. on Sunday. The words were noncommittal, but the tone was a vast improvement over the deep freeze of recent days.
That would likely be a short-term deal. President Barack Obama did not present a new plan at the meeting — a fact that, once leaked, caused a stock market dip — and told reporters this evening that he was “modestly optimistic:”
I’m optimistic we may be able to reach an agreement that can pass both houses in time. Sens. Reid and McConnell are working on such an agreement as we speak. If an agreement isn’t reached in time between Sen. Reid and Sen. McConnell I will urge Sen. Reid to bring to the floor a basic package for an up-or-down vote. … The American people are watching what we do here. Obviously their patience is already thin. This is déjà vu all over again.
House Speaker John Boehner also showed some wiggle room here. Democrats’ primary fear is that they go out on a limb on taxes and spending, and then the House does not bother to take it up. Boehner’s failure to whip votes on his “Plan B” did not inspire confidence across the hall. But with help from Democrats, Boehner can shepherd something to passage — it just might not be what the conservative base of his caucus likes. Here’s what a Boehner aide had to say after the White House meeting:
The Speaker told the President that if the Senate amends the House-passed legislation and sends back a plan, the House will consider it – either by accepting or amending. The group agreed that the next step should be the Senate taking bipartisan action.
This is a significant signal to the Senate that any Reid-McConnell accord would make it to the House floor. The details, as always, remain up in the air.
- By Daniel Malloy, Political Insider
For instant updates, follow me on Twitter, or connect with me on Facebook.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
407 comments Add your comment
Retired Soldier
December 29th, 2012
11:18 am
Real-
Again you have the facts wrong. The only legislation the must orginiate in the House is fiscal. The Senate can “propose” any othe legislation they want and send it to the House.
You also overlook the Dems had control of Congress for the first two years, why didn’t they eliminate the TSA then? Because the only thing that mattered was Obamacare.
The other points are ignored by you, well done. You have proven my point.
Retired Soldier
December 29th, 2012
11:19 am
Let-
The House did pass a bill and sent it to the Senate. Reid won’t allow a vote on it.
yuzeyurbrane
December 29th, 2012
11:21 am
L’il Barry–Seniors don’t get full Soc.Sec. until they are 66 now, 67 in a few years. So COLA we are talking about effects people on Medicare, not Obamacare. But even Medicare does not pay all health costs so non-covered health expenses continue to be a disproportionately larger part of Seniors cost of living. I don’t really know whether or not Obamacare will have ancillary effect of reducing some out-of-pocket health costs for Seniors. But if it does lower them then good. My argument would remain the same—a special COLA reflecting real costs for Seniors would be better than present general CPI or proposed “chained” COLA. And let the chips fall where they may regarding rising or decreasing out-of-pocket health care costs.
Georgia
December 29th, 2012
11:24 am
The bailout money to banks went to buy stocks like Ford after GM stocks went bust. Ford sold for a dollar. The banks probably multiplied the bailout money prodigiously. But the country was denied the bailout money in the form of tougher risk criteria. No risk criteria for the banks themselves was ever redefined, only for the customers, you and me. If the money is worthless, zero percent interest rates, then the banks are going to have to invent new growth derivatives. It’s the idea that becomes an insurable asset, and thus, like Einstein’s ideas, nobody else can possibly understand the new construct. So even now. After four solid years, the banks are creating the same fantastic wealth bubbles that popped in 2008. With even less oversight. So we’re forced to spend our way out of this in order to grow our way out of this. Just like when it’s cruel to be kind in the right measure. It means that I love you baybeeee. gotta be cruel to be kind.
we’re forked.
Dusty
December 29th, 2012
11:25 am
Clem 10:59
I believe you have conceived an overall idea based on a few examples. Of all the big businesses in the USA , few have been found to be crooked. Have AT&T, Merrill Lynch, Wells Fargo, Kroger, and thousands of others been found with dishonest & criminal indictments? NO. Even Halliburton, one of the few companies in the world who can deliver on any continent, have had many accusations but little of nothing from political accusations. OUr country cannot run without big business.
We love mon & pop stores and hope for more. But they are neither the main support or the financial raisers of our country. They do their part and give ideas but a big country ;must have big business. Can we build our own cars, ocean liners, mammoth bridges and skyscrapers and the list goes on? No way. And big business must have the smartest people to run them. Don’t forget that either.
Ethics come from ethical people, not business itself.
yuzeyurbrane
December 29th, 2012
11:26 am
td @ 11:10—I guess it depends on who you consider who to be the patriots and the tyrants. I don’t think the self-appointed “patriots” of the TeaParty are patriots since they act in a tyrannical way and want to impose a tyrannical government on the majority.
Retired Soldier
December 29th, 2012
11:29 am
yuz-
What is tyannical about smaller government, balanced budgets and lower taxes?
td
December 29th, 2012
11:32 am
A little math prospective to put this mess in terms the uninformed Obama voter can understand:
US national revenue: 2,170,000,000,000
Federal Budget: 3,820,000,000,000
New Debt: 1,650,000,000,000
National debt: 14,271,000,000,000
Recent budget cuts: 35,500,000,000
Now let us remove 8 zeros and pretend it is a household budget:
Annual family income: $21,700
Money family spent: $38,200
New debt on the credit card: $16,500
Outstanding balance on the credit card: $142,710
Total household budget cuts so far: $38.50
clem
December 29th, 2012
11:35 am
dusty, there are many good leaders in business, but unfortunately, i could run a list longer than your arm of bad ones. it is a fine line between controll and promoting fair enterprise. if left unchecked the world would disintegrate with the likes of enron, goldman sachs, ubs, monsanto, etc.
i wish there were a perfect answer but balance like everything in life seems to be the key.
td
December 29th, 2012
11:41 am
Add one more line to the household budget:
New revenue coming in this next year (Obama tax increase): $80.00
Retired Soldier
December 29th, 2012
11:42 am
td-
Well done.
Rafe Hollister
December 29th, 2012
11:42 am
want to impose a tyrannical government on the majority.
So, lower taxes and less spending by our government is tyrannical, yuzey. What color is the sky in your world? I have never heard the Tea Party advocate any other positions. Some of those, who are supported by the Tea party have their own social agenda’s, but that does not make them Tea party agendas. The Tea Party has stuck to one message, lower taxes, less spending.
Paul Ryan proposed a budget that was so moderate it did not balance the budget for 26 years and he was branded an “extremist” and his budget likewise. I would say that those who oppose a balanced budget are “extremist”, preferring their misplaced Utopian ideology over fiscal sanity.
In America these days, anyone who expresses a view point that is not in line with those held by the lapdog MSM is branded an extremist, when any logical person realizes that people fall out all along the political spectrum. The media never speak of left wing extremists, although logic tells us that if people move farther to the right on the spectrum, an equal number move the opposite way.
tell the truth
December 29th, 2012
11:45 am
td hide and watch those new revenues- you can go back to your coloring books now
Voter
December 29th, 2012
11:46 am
Wow- What did I miss? Looks like some more liberals have joined the discussion. Let’s go.
Dusty
December 29th, 2012
11:48 am
LIberalefty,
Your ID is certainly correct. Your last two statements are incorrect.
President Bush, along with almost total approvment from Congress, went to war against a dictator who had already invaded a neighbor country and thought by our intelligence department to have wmds. Those are established facts you ignore.
President Bush was reading a story to a kindergarten class when he received the news of the attack on NYC. He stopped for a moment in thought and quietly left the little children. What did you want him to do? Burst into tears? Make a speech? Scare the children to make a good photo-op?
You have read too much liberal popaganda. Can’t you draw some conclusions from your own reasoning? Such misconceptions were tiresome when they were fresh but they are not any better stale.
Voter
December 29th, 2012
11:50 am
Ahhh liberallefty, no use arguing with him when he is off his meds.
Rafe Hollister
December 29th, 2012
11:51 am
td
Well done, but I think the Libs think that Gov does not have to obey the laws of finance, that somehow they are immune.
The biggest problem with the Obama regime and its re-distribution agenda is that they have spent all this time trying to divide an ever shrinking pie, so that there sycophants get a bigger piece, but as the pie continues to shrink the pieces do as well.
We are not going to improve the fiscal condition of this country until we get growth in the economy. To do that, Barry has to finally admit that the private economy is what stimulates growth and quit hampering and restricting the private sector. I don’t see that happening until the American people demand change and that is going to be after the collapse.
Retired Soldier
December 29th, 2012
11:51 am
Rafe-
Well written and exactly correct. I know a lot of Tea Party folks. They are regular middle class folks very concerned with the direction of our government.
Voter
December 29th, 2012
11:51 am
And I mean liberallefty being off his meds. lol
tell the truth
December 29th, 2012
11:52 am
Lil’ Barry Bailout –OBAMAPHONE!!! So the Dems had 60 in the Senate in the first two years????
Seriously?? You must De-ranged!!! They have not had the filibuster proof majority for 2 years- but please don’t let the truth stop your fairy tales
Retired Soldier
December 29th, 2012
11:56 am
tell-
But they did during some of BO’s first two years, that is the point that escapes you.
Voter
December 29th, 2012
12:01 pm
@tell the truth – Actually, they did have 60 Dem. Senators for awhile, 72 days, but with Specter switching and Franken in a recount and Kennedy sick and then dies, that were some issues ti iron out.
Georgia
December 29th, 2012
12:01 pm
What is the difference between yearly national deficits and accumulated national debt? But back to Django. Charlie Rose got Tarantino to talk about the idea for Django. Tarantino had the idea, but not the story for eight years: a former slave who becomes a bounty hunter. That explains the movie completely. He just patched together very well crafted scenes. The idea itself should have been swatted around instead of being allowed to ferment in Tarantino’s unchallenged imagination. Taratino wrote every word of dialogue, too. The idea had no chance. Thats why it stinks. He should have opened the movie at the auction where Django gets separated from his wife. Then, Django’s foot convoy through the desert should have been ambushed by Apaches who would set the 3 slaves free with a horse. (and slaughter the guards). A snip here and an edit there, and the movie would have worked. Too long. Too many cliches. Cliches worked in much of Kill Bill because the genre itself is so much fun. But in the western genre, originality is all that’s left. Unless Tarantino thought he was remaking Blazing Saddles. It’s all been done. I think it’s a matter of common sense, but for Tarantino it’s proof of his genius!!! Redbox this one.
Dusty
December 29th, 2012
12:02 pm
td 11:32
I really liked the comparison you made with government expense and household expense, If only we could get people to realize the similarities.
The national debt is OUR debt. How in the world can Democrats seemingly ignore it?
Retired Soldier
December 29th, 2012
12:05 pm
Dusty-
That is an easy question to answer. The democrats simply don’t care.
Voter
December 29th, 2012
12:05 pm
@Dusty – they ignore it because they believe the rhetoric the media and their elected representatives spew into the airways.
tell the truth
December 29th, 2012
12:06 pm
Buckhead Boy at 4:58 am excellent posts friend- but the Repukes will not spend any time answering your questions- they will merely deflect and change the subject to their stock talking points.
It actually is a waste of time to point out facts to them because they never recognize the truth. Thanks for your comments.
Voter
December 29th, 2012
12:07 pm
Look at hussein obama’s answer to this “fiscal cliff”. Why is this a “fiscal cliff”? The media said so. What did hussein do? He went campaigning. Did he talk to House and Senate Leaders right after the election? No. He went campaigning.
tell the truth
December 29th, 2012
12:08 pm
Voter the issue was did they havea fillibuster proof 60 voters- they never did read on
http://www.thepragmaticpundit.com/2011/12/obama-did-not-control-congress-for-two.html
honested
December 29th, 2012
12:08 pm
No Action Necessary!
Let the Federal Revenue Rates return to Clinton Era Sanity.
Then let the republiklanners beg for their home state military subsidies!
Retired Soldier
December 29th, 2012
12:08 pm
Tell-
Your answer is what I have been saying about libs/dems for years. Stop stealing my line!
honested
December 29th, 2012
12:10 pm
tell the truth,
Bringing facts into the discussion will not help those lost conserrrrrrrrvatives who’s minds are made up.
Heck, they won’t even accept responsibility for the terrible damage they have already done.
Retired Soldier
December 29th, 2012
12:10 pm
honested-
For everyone or just the rich?
Rafe Hollister
December 29th, 2012
12:11 pm
Dusty
The national debt is OUR debt. How in the world can Democrats seemingly ignore it?
Logic, reasoning and situational reality are obviously recessive genes, not passed on unless both parents have them. Democrats don’t get those attributes, they get a double dose of emotion and empathy.
Voter
December 29th, 2012
12:11 pm
@tell the truth – I understand, they did have the 60 Dem. Senators for 72 days, but during any time of Congress in session they did not have the fillibuster-proof they desired. They would come up 1 or 2 short because of Franken and Kennedy issues.
Dusty
December 29th, 2012
12:11 pm
Georgia,
Well, nice critique of Django . Is that a movie? :You really get carried away. Somewhat interesting. Maybe you could volunteer as movie critic for AJC.
Dusty
December 29th, 2012
12:15 pm
Rafe, 12:11
Nice explanation of Democratic virtues and otherwise. It’s those GENES that did it!!
tell the truth
December 29th, 2012
12:19 pm
It’s ok repukes- don’t worry about it- let all the tax rates increase. We’ll let the public sort this out in 2014 and 2016. That’ll work.
honested
December 29th, 2012
12:19 pm
retired,
We can all tolerate our share of the burden of Civilization.
Plus, returning to tax sanity for all deprives the wrong wing of yet another whining point.
double
December 29th, 2012
12:19 pm
Time—-Romney man of year 1912.
clem
December 29th, 2012
12:20 pm
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/28/finance-stocks-2012-fines-scandals-fraud_n_2366090.html
read and weep dusty
honested
December 29th, 2012
12:22 pm
retired,
On another note, without the ’sequester’ we will never reign in the current runaway military expenditure.
Voter
December 29th, 2012
12:22 pm
@tell the truth – “It’s ok repukes- don’t worry about it- let all the tax rates increase”
Spending cuts have to happen.
honested
December 29th, 2012
12:24 pm
voter,
Agreed, if we start with closing offshore military bases, cut weapons procurement, cease providing free security for offshore oil companies….
50% up front ought to do it.
Voter
December 29th, 2012
12:24 pm
@tell the truth – Let’s talk some reality here. I lost my job last year. I lived off unemployment til obama cut the program, the first thing I did was CUT MY SPENDING. I cut my bills down to bare essentials and stopped spending so much.
Voter
December 29th, 2012
12:27 pm
@honested – I think a even % across the board to government salaries would be a good start. Then we have to cut every department the same way and remove the waste. Stop travel to Hawaii for conventions for example. Cut down travel altogether. There is too much waste in our Government. More taxes is not the answer.
Dusty
December 29th, 2012
12:30 pm
Tell the Truth and Honested
Please change your IDs. You are incorrect.
When your namecalling is reduced to REPUBLIKLANNERS & REPUKES there is nothing honest or truthful about either of you.
Oh how they cry
December 29th, 2012
12:30 pm
Dusty rants like a child while speaking about the emotions of others
How righteous is that?
And by the way big Dusty, your new brushed from Broad Brushes R US have just come in…
You sure like to generalize but don’t want to be generalized
Hypocrite much… Sure you do
Voter
December 29th, 2012
12:32 pm
@oh how they cry – Don’t pick on Dusty because he tells the truth. Let’s hear some facts from you and less name calling.
tireofit
December 29th, 2012
12:34 pm
Please let us go over the “cliff”. At least the mooching DOD will take some hits. The DOD budget should be no larger that 150 billion.