Get PJ Media on your Apple

The PJ Tatler

by
Rick Moran

Bio

March 17, 2013 - 9:50 am

I suppose this was inevitable. That rock-solid wall of opposition by the GOP to raising taxes? It appears that the edifice is crumbling.

Politico:

Republican Sen. Bob Corker opened the door for a deal with Democrats on tax and entitlement reform Sunday, saying that Republicans might be open to reform that “generates additional revenues.”

Speaking opposite Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) “Fox News Sunday,” the senator from Tennessee said Republicans want to see a “75-year solution” to entitlements, adding President Barack Obama was moving in the right direction.

“I think there, by the way, is a chance on a deal, I know the president is saying the right things and we have an opportunity over the next four months,” Corker said.

If Democrats and the president were willing to make some changes to entitlements, Corker said, Republicans might be open to generating revenues – although he did not include tax rate increases.

“I think Republicans, if [Democrats] say true entitlement reform, would be glad to look at tax reform that generates additional revenues. And that doesn’t mean increasing rates, it means closing loopholes, and that also means arranging our tax system so that we have economic growth, and I think we have been saying that since day one,” Corker said.

Durbin praised Corker’s “honest and constructive answer”

“What Bob Corker just said from his side is a basis set of principles that both parties can rally around,” Durbin said.

I’m all for compromise, but it has to be realistic and enforceable. There are plenty of Republicans — even in the Senate, much less the House — who will never vote for increased revenue just as their are many Democrats who would never vote for cuts in Medicare or Social Security.

Corker should listen to John Boehner:

“The president believes that we have to have more taxes from the American people. We’re not going to get very far,” Boehner said. “The president got his tax hikes on January 1. The talk about raising revenue is over. It’s time to deal with the spending problem.”

Both Corker and Boehner, however, acknowledged that the prospect of a “crisis” over the debt is a long-term issue, not an immediate pressing threat. Other Republicans, including House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) have characterized the federal budget deficit and debt as a much more imminent danger to the health of the American economy.

“We do not have an immediate debt crisis — but we all know that we have one looming,” Boehner told ABC. “And we have one looming because we have entitlement programs that are not sustainable in their current form. They’re going to go bankrupt.”

Shortly after the ABC interview aired Sunday, Boehner’s press office released a excerpts of the interview that omitted Boehner’s acknowledgment that there is no “immediate” debt crisis.

On CBS, Bob Schieffer highlighted Boehner’s comments and asked Ryan whether the government faces an immediate debt crisis. Ryan acknowledged that it does not, but warned about an economic calamity if one happens.

“America is still a step ahead of the European nations who are confronting a debt crisis, of Japan. it’s partly because of our resilient economy, our world currency status,” Ryan said. “So we do not have a debt crisis right now, but we see it coming. We know it’s irrefutably happening.”

Ryan is correct, and further, does anyone seriously believe that once the economy is healthy again with unemployment below 6% and GDP growing at 3% or more, that it is going to be any easier or “safer” to cut the budget? This is the de facto argument of Paul Krugman and the “anti-austerity” brigade on the left and they offer no evidence whatsoever that this would be the case.

And where does it say in the rulebook that we have to wait for a crisis to be upon us before we act? That’s brainless. If people like Paul Krugman believe the pain of budget cutting would be less when we’re on the brink of catastrophe, he is sadly mistaken. If we wait 10 years to reform Medicare, Paul Ryan’s plan is going to appear like a walk in the park.

The time to get a handle on the budget is now — not when a full fledged crisis hits us. And raising revenue by fiddling with the tax code — especially the way that Obama wants to — should be a non-starter with Congressional Republicans.

Rick Moran is PJ Media's Chicago editor and Blog editor at The American Thinker. He is also host of the"RINO Hour of Power" on Blog Talk Radio. His own blog is Right Wing Nut House.

Comments are closed.

All Comments   (8)
All Comments   (8)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
All sane, constructive comments. "We, the people" can figure this stuff out. Why can't our "representatives?" Maybe because our jobs aren't on the line?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
"“America is still a step ahead of the European nations who are confronting a debt crisis, of Japan. it’s partly because of our resilient economy, our world currency status,” Ryan said. “So we do not have a debt crisis right now, but we see it coming..."

Holy cow!!!!

A 'bit' of honesty finally coming out from the new young Tea Party economic guru! The only reason the westernized nations of the global economy still have their heads barely above water is the U.S. has currency printing presses (the dominate global monetary system as a result) propping all of them and ourselves up. Heck, for over a century we've been systemically subsidizing and propping up China's coerced slow economic reforms.

Nobody in the U.S. knows fool proof, how to fix the global economy they've created and the economic collpase they've created so, now all they can think of is a slash and crash strategy on the backs of whom? Certainly not on the backs of this nations and global investors of the top 20% of wealth holders. Look at legitmate data historical data from the 20s forward! Look at the historical data of nations that have tried to implement austerity slashing and at the consequences! We've historical changed our printing presses up to a high gear to deal with their consequences. Likewise, dats shows ther to bee equal negative risks and consequences for trying to send out of like economic mess we face today. Whose really made a factually non ideologically informed opinion of what set of risks and consequences should be proposed?

Even the revered Reagan knew when to increase taxes and decrease them for the best interests of the nation and especially its people though, 30 some years later the statistical economic data shows a long term failure -- not my opinion but rather, the factual evidence of economic statistics. The government has been propping up our own domestic economies since WWII. Terminate that government subsidy and states and the national economy will take a nose dive towards bankrupty and a living standard and economic isolation and preceding WWII.

This might be a good time to put partisan ideologies aside and come together to figure out a reasonable 'best interest of the nation and its people' approach to problem solving.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I guess my question is: When have the Senate Republicans never been ready to cave in?? At least the radical left wing Democrats stand by their beliefs, unfortunate though it is.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Apparently we haven't run out of people to purge after all.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
"...[Bob Corker R] said...President Barack Obama was moving in the right direction."

1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
i tend to be a fan of bob corker and think that some of his apparent squishiness is really southern gentleman. however, the dems have always gotten the taxes and failed to follow through with the cuts. even reagan got rolled. we need to see the cuts first.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
In theory I have no problem with raising taxes slightly in order to get real reform of entitlements. It's the nature of compromise, and there's always political capital to cut taxes.

In reality Democrats have been negotiating in bad faith since the '80's. They would get what they wanted up front, higher taxes, amnesty, etc., while the lower spending, border enforcement, etc. we were promised never materialized. Any deal that raises taxes must have those hikes in out years and they must be conditional.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
As long as the ratio of spending cuts to revenue increases is (much) greater than 1, you have good policy. This is how Sweden and Canada have gotten their fiscal houses in order: Spending reductions and serious entitlement reform as well as reform of the tax-code as Corker suggests by eliminating "tax expenditures", i.e. credits, deductions, and loopholes, and by flattening it - and put K-Street on a long overdue diet as a side benefit.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
View All