Fiscal cliff deal in danger in House

This is where things get interesting.  House Republicans don’t seem to agree with many progressives about the fiscal cliff being a sign that President Obama caved.  They think Boehner caved.  And they may kill the deal.

From Ryan Grim at HuffPost we learn that Paul Ryan and Eric Cantor, both GOP House leadership, oppose the fiscal cliff deal.  The biggest complaint, Grim reports, is the “lack” of spending cuts.  Senate Dems are saying they’ll reject any House changes to the deal.

And some progressives are upset about the deal – others, less so.

But the problem for Republicans remains that if they don’t support this deal, they will be blamed for pushing America over the fiscal cliff. Which would be a political disaster for them.  That’s the general consensus among progressive and traditional media:

fiscal cliff

Cliff via Shutterstock

Brit Hume ‏@brithume
Appears the House GOP’s pie-in-the-sky caucus will blow up the deal, leaving new higher tax rates in place and assuring Rs get all blame.

Glenn Thrush ‏@GlennThrush
In terms of the politics, it’s a no-brainer: WH-Mitch cliff deal sets House GOP up for a biblical reckoning if they block it and taxes rise

Howard Fineman ‏@howardfineman
House GOP see it as an act of courage for them to send the government over the cliff. They aren’t here to legislate, but to blow up things

Ben White ‏@morningmoneyben
The fury that will rain down squarely on House GOP if they kill the#fiscalcliff deal by amending it will be a sight to behold

Sabrina Siddiqui ‏@SabrinaSiddiqui
RT @ryangrim: Senate Dem aide on whether they’ll take up a bill amended by House GOP: “They are full of hot air. Not a chance we come back.”

Brian Beutler ‏@brianbeutler
Even if Boehner can cobble together 218 votes to amend, return to Senate, no way Reid gets jammed. House Rs take us over the cliff.

Luke Russert ‏@LukeRussert
If House GOP sends this deal back amended, it’s as good as dead. No chance Reid moves on amended bill. House will force USA off cliff

Glenn Thrush ‏@GlennThrush
So… Didn’t the House lose its right to amend the bill when they pick up their toys and went home for Xmas

Follow me on Twitter: @aravosis | @americablog | @americabloggay | Facebook | Instagram | Google+ | LinkedIn. John Aravosis is the Executive Editor of AMERICAblog, which he founded in 2004. He has a joint law degree (JD) and masters in Foreign Service from Georgetown; and has worked in the US Senate, World Bank, Children's Defense Fund, the United Nations Development Programme, and as a stringer for the Economist. He is a frequent TV pundit, having appeared on the O'Reilly Factor, Hardball, World News Tonight, Nightline, AM Joy & Reliable Sources, among others. John lives in Washington, DC. .

Share This Post

9 Responses to “Fiscal cliff deal in danger in House”

  1. Dean Garrison says:

    Unfortunately, I’m not sure it will be all that disasterous to the House Repubs if they let the economy go over the fiscal cliff. I think the way the House Repubs see it, opposing the deal now will be a short-term loss in terms of public outrage, but at the same time will hold them in good stead with their increasingly rightest base and their donors and will work out ok for them politically down the road. The House Repubs can oppose the deal now, expecting that they will be able to get a better deal after we go over the cliff. Then they can vote to retroaactively restore the tax cuts and benefits that will be part of the deal. Thus, they are likely to view the fiscal impact on the public as a zero net loss after all is said and done. And they are probably counting on the public having a short memory of these matter (which it tends to have), so that the House Repubs can be in good stead by the time the mid-term elections roll around two years from now.

  2. MyrddinWilt says:

    I really can’t see why Boehner wants the job of house speaker right now. It is not like he is really the speaker.

    If they can’t get a vote through the house and the Senate does not step in to let them off the hook, we are likely going to be seeing a split opening up in the House GOP ranks.

  3. MichaelS says:

    When will Dems grow HALF the set of balls that the crazies on the other side have? THIS is why the Repugs get almost anything they want — and if they weren’t so bat-s__t crazy they’d win everything.

  4. Kim_Kaufman says:

    The Mighty O was a jerk for not letting all tax cuts expire. He could then have been the one to give “tax cuts” to the middle class. But of course the Mighty O doesn’t really want the rich to pay their fair share.

  5. Guest says:

    We will get some kind of deal. Whether it’s before or after noon on Thursday — and maybe before if the markets tank tomorrow. But the other question in the wings is what happens to Boehner’s speakership. Does he have the balls to take a stand? And if he does, do we end up after Thursday with fusion leadership in the House, in which Boehner and the (relatively) sane Republican members cut a deal for committee chairmanships with Pelosi in which most of the Democratic caucus ends up voting for Boehner for speaker? Almost unprecedented, but it would at least allow something to get done in the next two years by marginalizing the Republican crazies.

  6. BeccaM says:

    This is exactly what I was saying yesterday and last night: It didn’t matter if Obama and the Senate agreed on a bill — the key is where nearly all of the non-filibuster obstruction has been happening the last two years, the House GOP. They’ve also been the source of the most extreme, repetitively pointless wingnut legislation. How many times did they vote to repeal and/or defund Obamacare? I’ve lost count.

    The notion of the Senate taking action first, as the GOPers were saying needed to happen and then the House simply voting on the result was never going to happen. Of course they wanted more bites at the apple, so amendment demands should have been expected from day one.

    True to form, Boehner and his extremist House Tea Bagger crew have flat out said they won’t allow a vote on the Senate bill unless they can amend it — which means they plan to tack on great big handfuls of poison pills. No doubt their “insufficient spending cuts” complaints would include eliminating all funding for PPACA, Planned Parenthood, public broadcasting, alternative energy investments and a host of other programs, along with raising the Medicare eligibility age and adding the Social Security chained-CPI benefits cuts. (From my readings of other blogs and news sources, it also sounded like they wanted to raise Medicare premiums and co-pays, and to tighten means testing.) Essentially, they’d turn the Senate bill into the Romney/Ryan budget.

    The only ‘out’ left was the one Boehner and Cantor have just ruled out, which is to allow the Senate bill as it exists, unamended, to go to a floor vote, where the full Dem minority and a handful of GOPers could pass it.

    That Senate Democratic aide who said the House GOP was full of hot air? No. What they are full of is radicalized hyper-conservative political zealotry. They are willing to burn the entire economy, and the country along with it, right to the ground if denied anything less than 100% of their demands. There is no negotiating with a political party that will not compromise at all. There is only resistance and refusal… or capitulation and surrender.

  7. Rik Elswit says:

    Simply saying that even Luke “I can’t believe I got this job” Russert can read the writing on the wall.

  8. Jimmy says:

    Boehner really is in a no-win situation, and ain’t it grand! If he gets this passed, with significant support from Dems, he risks the ire of the the far right in his party who can still make his life hell. If he doesn’t get it passed he look even more weak than he already is and becomes the new Gingrich. Poor baby, he’ll probably cry.

  9. Ron Thompson says:

    You’re quoting Luke Russert to us for the truth of what he says?

© 2020 AMERICAblog Media, LLC. All rights reserved. · Entries RSS