Ezra Klein: This is why Obama can’t make a deal with Republicans

[babylonsister]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/03/02/this-is-why-obama-cant-make-a-deal-with-republicans/


This is why Obama can’t make a deal with Republicans

Posted by Ezra Klein on March 2, 2013 at 3:19 pm

snip//


The bottom line on American budgetary politics right now is that Republicans won’t agree to further tax increases and so there’s no deal to be had. This is not a controversial perspective in D.C.: It’s what Hill Republicans have told me, it’s what the White House has told me, it what Hill Democrats have told me. The various camps disagree on whether Republicans are right to refuse a deal that includes further tax increases, but they all agree that that’s the key fact holding up a compromise to replace the sequester.

But it’s unpopular for Republicans to simply say they won’t agree to any compromise and there’s no deal to be had — particularly since taxing the wealthy is more popular than cutting entitlements, and so their position is less popular than Obama’s. That’s made it important for Republicans to prove that it’s the president who is somehow holding up a deal.

This had led to a lot of Republicans fanning out to explain what the president should be offering if he was serious about making a deal. Then, when it turns out that the president did offer those items, there’s more furious hand-waving about how no, actually, this is what the president needs to offer to make a deal. Then, when it turns out he’s offered most of that, too, the hand-waving stops and the truth comes out: Republicans won’t make a deal that includes further taxes, they just want to get the White House to implement their agenda in return for nothing. Luckily for them, most of the time, the conversation doesn’t get that far, and the initial comments that the president needs to “get serious” on entitlements is met with sage nods.

I don’t mean to pick on Murphy, who, as I said, is an important guide to contemporary Republican politics and a force for good in his party. But his series of missives on the subject today offered an unusually clear view of where the GOP actually is in the budget debate, and why there was really no alternative to the sequester. There’s no deal even if Obama agrees to major Republican demands on entitlements. There’s no deal because Republicans don’t want to make a deal that includes taxes, no matter what they get in return for it.

The interesting question is whether the possibility of a government shutdown, a debt-ceiling breach or simply the pressure of the sequester’s cuts will, in the coming months, break one side or the other. But as long as the GOP’s position is they won’t compromise, there’s not going to be a compromise.

[Thinkingabout]

1. As explained by the likes of Grover Norquist, it was not a tax increase, just resending of

Bush temporary tax cuts. Now we need tax loop holes closed in order to start paying for two wars started by Bush and his Republican Congress. We could have remained in the black Clinton left if it for Washington big spenders, the Republicans. Bush never met a dollar he would not spend which had been printed or would ever be printed.

[Jumpin Jack Fletch]

12. I think Norquist knows his time in the sun has passed

[Thinkingabout]

13. Very true, now if we could get the TP folks to understand they will probably never be

Majority and Boehner bones up and gets to work they might be able to govern. I am not so sure Obama is ready to bow to their wishes this time. It will be interesting if the sequester should get worked out and with the repubs saying it was Obama's plan, how will it sound. Bet Boehner will take credit for the thought.

[KaryninMiami]

2. Does that mean there are no options at all?

Except to wait it out and pray for a change in congress in 14? Does the President have any power using executive orders? At this point, what exactly can be done to avoid the catastrophic scenario if in fact this becomes a long term situation? Can they furlough congressional salaries? Do we have any options? It's all so very upsetting and infuriating. It just really sucks- they really are a selfish bunch of assholes those GOP monsters.

[The Magistrate]

3. Pretty Much, Ma'am: Being Sure The Public Is Angry, and Aims It In The Right Direction, Is About All

Everyone knows if a deal which did include tax increases came to a vote in the House, it would pass, albeit mostly with Democratic votes. Public outcry could force Boehner to bring such a measure to the floor.

[1StrongBlackMan]

17. And ...

I suspect that President Obama (and his team) quietly hoe that no deal is reached ... at least, not for late in 2013 ... as that would be key to flipping the House (and expanding the Senate) in 2014.

The problem is, that means a lot of ain for working class families for a long time. Politically, that's a good thing ... how else does one get Joe and Jane Six-pack to see? We/they have shown time and again that we/they do not vote their interests until every bit of sparkly things on the gop position is exposed as custume jewerly; not the diamonds, we/they, so wish them to be.

[The Magistrate]

18. I Fear, Sir, Something On That Line Is Necessary

Necessity can be a cruel mistress, but I suspect there is no other way to open people's eyes to the facts of the situation.

[1StrongBlackMan]

21. Agreed ...

So, I guess we'll just have to lace up our boots and hope that people reach the intolerable pain threshold, sooner rather than later, and that they carry that memory with them to the polls in 2014 and beyond.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

37. so sad....I worry about media.We know the GOPravda networks

will avoid, twist, distract and disinform.

[Phlem]

29. You know

That is the one thing dislike most about republicans, how they hold a high threshold for other people's pain. This makes us not any different than them.

I'm not saying I have the answer.But what we area reaping right now is the dumbing down of America, remember that? We are living in a time where one's ignorance is givin the same weight and attention as another's knowledge, and we all accept it.

Maybe electing more Warrens, and Sanders with the same intensity as we elected Obama all the way down to the local level.

-p

[Skittles]

55. hey, the P on your keyboard is sometimes skipping (hoe / ain)

for me it's my O - I keep having to backtrack

[1StrongBlackMan]

64. Yeah ...

I know. Too many Cheetos, too many too short dog jumps and too many scotch/wine/beer spills!

[Skittles]

65. OH DON'T I KNOW IT

I've got a cat who becomes OBSESSED with my keyboard when I am typing - I do believe he thinks I am scratching the keyboard

[1StrongBlackMan]

66. My three miniture poodles ...

are convinced that the couch is a track and when I'm seating on it, it's a track with high huddles and when I'm seating on it with my laptop and a drink in my hand, it's a steeple-chase ... they're not very good at the steeple-chase.

[ewagner]

20. 2014 is High Noon for America

If we cannot end the scourge of Republican/TP tyranny in 2014, then we will suffer these manufactured crisis over and over....until the rest of the world believes we are incapable of governing ourselves.

Our efforts should focus on the 2014 elections...and how to overcome the Republican Gerrymandering that gave them power in the House of Representatives in the first place

and

Hold onto the Senate at all costs.!

[Cobalt-60]

35. Gerrymandered districts can be blockbusted

Blockbusting. Its an practice that has been quite successful at making people move.
A gerrymandered district is a stationary target, a fixed fortification.
Moving a few conspicuous minorities in will cause the local demographics to change far out of proportion to their numbers.
So maybe some of the money currently wasted on fascist media advertising could be spent on...housing.
I loathe the traitors of the Republican party so much I'd be fine with burning them out.
But this practice gets them to do the heavy lifting.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

38. I always learn things here.

Sounds worth adding to the arsenal.

[AndyTiedye]

41. Then They Will Re-Redistrict

They can redistrict as often as they need to to stay in power.
Thank you Supreme Court.

[world wide wally]

7. Now THAT is a great idea!

Furlough Congress and don't pay them for those days. They haven't passed anything in two years anyway.
We could save a ton if they only get paid for what they actually do.
I honestly believe... and I am NOT exaggerating, that 9 year olds could be equally incompetent in managing our budget.

Which brings me to another idea.
People are always declared incompetent to manage their own finances as they get old and Alzheimer's sets in. Can Congress be declared incompetent and replaced ASAP?

[AndyTiedye]

11. Even 2014 Is Unlikely to Bring Relief due to Massive Gerrymandering

How may seats are really in play now that they have redistricted all the red states to give them a lock on those seats?
Obama's historic landslide last year barely made a dent, despite a clear majority nationwide voting Democratic in House elections.

Obama will have to cave eventually, because he is responsible for keeping the country running,
while the rapeuglicans are responsible only to grover norquist and the koch brothers.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

57. you hit the nail on the head.....change in congress....because the two sides are polar

opposites. You can not compromise polar opposites.

We have actually won some battles - more than they have.

So I say, just don't do anything and concentrate on other less partisan issues. Why beat your
head against the wall? The more we participate, the more people think everything has gone
to hell in a handbasket

[robinlynne]

4. which is why Obama should have simply let the tax cuts expire. twice.

[blkmusclmachine]

5. The Administration can be rolled (easily). The GOP learned that years ago.

Bipartisanship sucks

[msongs]

10. sorry but "the Administration" is demaning even more bipartisanship...lol nt

[freshwest]

6. They violate their oath to uphold the country, but will never violate their pledge to Grover.

He still owns the GOP. This is a standoff between the Oligarchs and Americans. Obama is standing up for millions, but the press is bought and paid for and run with lies instead of truth. They can't help it because they are owned, too.

[sulphurdunn]

8. The wrath of the American

people is a lot of foot stomping and chest thumping. It don't mean nothing, and the politicians know it.

[AndyTiedye]

9. Until They Get REALLY Angry

Then they start shooting people at random.

[sulphurdunn]

15. Since Sandy Hook

nearly 60% of Americans have supported bans on assault rifles and high capacity magazines. About 90% favor background checks before firearms can be sold at gun shows. How much legislation has come up for a vote in Congress to address those demands?

[abelenkpe]

16. Pathetic and disappointing isn't it? Nt

[TheProgressive]

14. Obama can't make a deal with Republicans because...

Obama agrees with republicans.

We don;t have a spending problem - we have a jobs problem.

Its all a game and we will be the losers if we don;t pipe up.

[1StrongBlackMan]

19. B.S. ...

I have grown tired, and less tolerant, of that B.S. narrative "Obama agrees with republicans." It is, both, demonstrably false, as your very next sentence shows. But even if you believe that in the face of your own statement, it needlessly provocative on a cite named "Democratic Underground."

[TheProgressive]

22. I just call them as I see them...

Consider this: Why on Earth would a Democratic President knowingly sign a bill that could have disastrous economic consequences?

Why would anyone even propose this sequester? Everyone in the world knows that republicans/tea baggers are out to destroy America. So why would you trust them to do the right thing - especially since the House, under republican/tea bagger majority, won't present a bill. There is no such thing anymore as a 'bill so bad that everyone would change it'.

Sorry 1StrongBlackMan, but something very wrong is happening and it involves *everyone* in Washington DC.

[1StrongBlackMan]

23. I agree that something is wrong ...

and that that something is most people in Washington, DC. But if you have been awake during the past 4 1/2 years (the Obama Presidency) and know anything about leadership, you would not ask those quesstions.

[TheProgressive]

24. I have been 'very' awake for the last 12 years.

I and America needed a FDR or a Truman. We did not get that.

So, yes, I understand leadership.

[TiberiusB]

25. Of course, the sequester could be to pressure progressives...

... into accepting cuts to Social Security and Medicare.

Read this Digby piece

[treestar]

31. What exactly could FDR or Truman have done?

What total BS. No Democratic President would be in any different a position with today's Republicans.

[1StrongBlackMan]

33. It's so damned easy ...

to create the fantasy that some historic figure would fix everything ... when you ignore the differences of the times ... isn't it?

[TheProgressive]

34. There is not much different going on as compared to...

FRD days and Truman days...

The republicans always use the same tricks - you should do some research
and you will be amazed.

FDR and Truman did not take much crap and fought for the people... not give into
the madness that is the republicans.

[1StrongBlackMan]

36. Maybe ...

You should do some reseaarch, if you believe there's nothing much different from the FDR days. To begin with, there NEVER IN THE HISTORY OF CONGRESS has been an circumstance where one party ignores governing in favor of obstructionism. Second, you might want to research the composition of the congress under FDR, and the opposition voting record ... hell, check even the voting record of Democrats under FDR and compare it to the Democrats in Congress' voting record under President Obama. Now factor in the difference in how politicians handle themselves during the FDR days versus today. And then, if you really want some shits and giggles ... factor in the restraints imposed upon the first African-American president of the US.

And if you can do so and state with a straight face "there's nothing much different from the FDR days" ...
's

[TheProgressive]

39. Yes, I recognize the unjust treatment of Obama...

...as the first African-American president. I cannot imagine, no actually I can, imagine the unjust treatment of those of 'color'.

But, you see, a huge majority of *all* Americans voted for President Obama including me twice (although I did a write in for Senator Sanders in 2012 in the Primaries).

Sorry, I do not give any lenience to any president who does not uphold the Democratic beliefs. FRD and Truman fought for what is right. Mr. Obama has not.

The American people have already proven the loyalty to Mr. Obama (independent of any god damn thing). Mr Obama needs to fight for the American people like FRD and Truman did. And...he unfortunately is not fighting for us..

[1StrongBlackMan]

40. The simple fact is ...

both FDR and Truman had non-obstructionist congresses and near complete party support, President Obama ... not MISTER Obama ... does not and has not. So your beef should not be with PRESIDENT Obama; but rather, the Democrats in Congress that refuse to put forth a progressive agenda and cut President Obama off at the pass whenever he attempts to.

[treestar]

49. This is politics!

And deals with reality. It is no time for idealistic "beliefs." You do the best you can with the voters you have. If voters send Republicans to Congress, you do the best you can with that. The Presidency does not gain power depending on who is in Congress. It remains the same.

Enough of this unreasonable, high school attitude. Just "standing for [your] ideals" would result in problems for other people, who have just as much significance as any other voter.

[TheProgressive]

50. Thank you for telling me your beliefs...

Actually I deal in truth and reality and I will say and fight for what I believe to be true.

[treestar]

54. "Fight?"

What does that mean? Are you going to punch people?

If you are an American, then it means you would vote, or run for office, and if elected to office, carry out that office within its limits under our system.

[treestar]

48. Not true at all

Today's Republicans are unreasonable. Look at the charts for use of the filibuster just for starters.

"Fighting" is ridiculous. There is no "fighting." This is about making a compromise amongst elected officials and having a system that has divided power. FDR did not "fight" Congress for us, he cooperated with them, and they were considerably more reasonable (and the economic situation was much worse, making them less intransigent too).

Congress represents us too, they are not a body we wish the President to "fight" - with what? No more than the powers he has at any rate.

It's just too easy to sit around and blame one man rather than "fight" for votes to get Republicans out of office.

[Jamaal510]

67. +1

[robinlynne]

45. could have simply let the tax cuts expire. period. as they were supposed to. problem solved.

revenue increased, rather back to normal. This is a result of caving in january. "compormising" as some people call it.

All he had to do was NOTHING. let the cuts expire. He would be in a position then to negotiate for whatever he wanted. AFTER letting the cuts expire.

[treestar]

47. You really think FDR would have done that?

At the time there was a downside, if I recall.

Notice this time, the President did not cave and now there are posts about how terrible the sequester is.

Just letting them expire would have had consequences, which would be complained about, too. The goal seems to be complain no matter what.

[robinlynne]

51. Oh yes he did cave. both times. each time saying he would act stronger the next time around.

[treestar]

53. But this time he let the sequester take effect

And did not make any deal. But yet, he's still wrong. So this means you aren't going to complain of any of the sequester's results, right?

[robinlynne]

56. Do you not understand what happened 2 months ago?

Had Obama let the tax cuts expire naturally, he could have asked for anything he wanted at that point. He could have easily stopped the sequester by offering a tax break, which he gave them anyway.

This is not about a personality. This is about not standing up for what is right. choosing "compromise" as the goal over and over again, whether or not it is necessary. to the detriment of this country.

[treestar]

59. And at that point, you'd have been complaining

about the lapse of programs extended by agreeing to extend the tax cut.

[robinlynne]

61. No. at that point I said Mr Pres, let the tax cuts expire.

frequently. here on DU.

[robinlynne]

52. I think any real Democrat would have done that! And we all said os loud and clear BEFORE the fact. n

not after.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

58. It all sounds good - just let them expire. But then there's the economic theory

that if you raise taxes in a recession you could end up in a depression. this is what motivated Obama.
He's first and foremost a pragmatist, IMHO.

[robinlynne]

60. funny thing, Obama said what motivated him was the GOP.

Raising revenue, and increasing govt spending is the only answer to recession, according to Paul Krugman.

[Phlem]

32. [phone]

Amen.

-p

[dkf]

26. That is why they should have negotiated the Bush tax lapse and the sequester together.

Now the Democrats have no leverage.

Moreover the stock market gave the sequester a pass.

People have gone through government cut backs on the local level. If that didn't reverse them all what kind of outrage on the national level would be needed?

[robinlynne]

62. of course!

[high density]

27. No matter how much Obama compromises with them, it is never enough

I mean if they can't even realize that he has compromised, what is the point?

[TomCADem]

28. It Is So Refreshing To Have A Break from the False Equivalency

The corporate media's relentless false equivalency narrative is what gives the Republicans cover to refuse to compromise.

[robinlynne]

46. and why does obama continue to compromise? There was no need to compromise in January.

[TomCADem]

68. The Tea Party Says The Same Thing...

...I am not sure how you govern in a Democratic society without compromises. In fact, the need to compromise is built into our system by virtue of divided government.

[robinlynne]

63. We (Obama) haqd aboslute cover to not compromsie in January.

The GOP will not compromise. Why should they? the more they want, the more we give them.

[treestar]

30. A bunch of bullies

I've dealt with that. People who demand what they want and then say you aren't negotiating unless you give them their way entirely.

Republicans believe they are right and we are wrong. We believe we are right but live and let live. That makes a huge difference.

[Phlem]

42. This is why this administration drives me crazy.

He's done good things, but for some reason the 1st 4 years were all about bi partisanship that fooled no one. I know damn well you can't compromise with Republicans. Duh. Did we not just go through 8 years of Republicans walking all over us? And then going on Fox and throwing his constituents under the bus for some some kind of mystical bipartisanship session in congress that never happened. Four years of this shit. Even after all the cause and effect examples dealing with Republicans in the past, they're going to some how turn into humans immediately and care for other people?

You don't deal with terrorists.

And back to the present...."There’s no deal even if Obama agrees to major Republican demands on entitlements."

Those so called "Entitlements" the we contribute too and some count on for the sum total of their retirement income, yes those "Entitlements" that we've worked so hard for are to be "adjusted" to some Republican standard as a negotiation pawn in this 5th dimensional chess game? That's where we are at......?



-p

[TomCADem]

69. Yet, we seem to give the "terrorists" a free pass...

...and blame Democrats for the actions of Republicans.

[blkmusclmachine]

43. Obama makes plenty of "deals." Has for nearly 5 years now.

Just the deals usually suck. No learning going on in this White House. Or is it a different explanation, something more??? Hmmm

1 Party, 2 Faces

[The Wizard]

44. It is impossible to negotiate

in good faith with Nihilistic sociopaths who lie without compunction. We're normal; they're not.

[budkin]

70. Like always their plan is working. Obama is starting to take the blame and is having to kiss ass

It pretty much always goes like this.