LyrArc Article Gist
Eric Cantor is the senior Republican leader in the House of Representatives. He is a key figure in the negotiations with the Obama White House over the budget, deficit reduction, and raising the debt ceiling. Cantor and House Speaker Boehner are leading the negotiations on the Republican side. Cantor rejects any compromise on tax increases. He told reporters: "I think behind this notion of 'We want shared sacrifice' that they continue to say means 'We want to raise taxes,' and we don't accept that we raise taxes in an economy like this." Cantor is a lawyer and a former state legislator from a district that covers the Richmond, Virginia, suburbs. He was elected in 2000. Through his "Young Guns" program Cantor recruited many of the 87 new Republicans who were elected in 2010. It is this support from rank and file Congressman that has propelled Cantor into a leadership position for the deficit talks. Responding to critics that say a compromise is needed from both sides in the talks, Cantor says- "I don't think the White House understands how difficult it is for fiscal conservatives to say they are going to vote for a debt-ceiling increase." On June 23, Cantor pulled out of talks with the White House. In the current round of negotiations Boehner pulled back from "a grand bargain" which included tax increases, after consulting with Cantor....

LyrArc Article Gist
The structure of the deal that is coming up for a vote in Congress on August 1st, a day before the August 2 deadline. A deal put together mainly by Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell and Vice President Biden after other deals failed. It gives the government $400 billion immediately and another $500 billion in the fall for raising the debt ceiling. Another 1.2 trillion will be added in 2012. The entire burden for raising it falls on Obama. Obama will be able to get the debt ceiling raised without another long struggle before 2012 elections. On spending cuts- agency spending will be cut by $900 billion over the next 10 years. A new legislative committe will be set up to come up with $1.2 trillion in additional savings by the end of 2012. The mechanism that would force the committe to act or make sure spending cuts were taken if the committee failed, was set up as one in which the trigger is to force automatic across the board cuts. The automatic across the board cuts would be for $1.2 trillion to agency budgets for the next 10 years, and split this half and half between domestic programs and defence. Programs aiding the poor including Medicaid and Social Security would be exempted, but Medicare payments to providers could be touched. No new taxes are part of this deal....

LyrArc Article Gist
The tough job President Obama faces as he faces opposition from politicians who have interests to protect, and healthcare businesses with interests to protect. The President has to come up with a plan that is deficit neutral, because financial markets could see a healthcare bill that further widens the deficit as a signal for higher interest rates that would deepen the recession. At the same time each of the three sources of revenue puts him at loggerheads with political leaders in Congress or groups with interests to protect. Limiting income tax deductions for high earners could raise $267 billion in 10 years. It would require taxpayers in the top tax brackets deduct their mortgage interest, state and local taxes, and charitable donations, at the 28% tax rate instead of the 33% and 35% tax rates. The opposition is with democratic leaders that it would hurt charities, universities that depend on tax deductible donations, and taxpayers in high tax cities like New York city that are the home base of Democratic leaders. Yet only 1.4% of households would be affected says the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. The Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, says charitable giving would decrease by 2%. The other opposition on this comes from the preference of Senators Baucus and Grassley, who head the Senate Finance Committee, for tax increases or cost savings to come from the health sector. Specifically they want to see the value of workers' employer provided health benefits subject to income taxes. It is a situation in which every sensible person admits the need for healthcare reform and would see the current pace of healthcare costs as unsustainable and dangerous; and after that will just go back to his group and try to preserve as much of the status quo as possible, so as not to disturb by much the benefits or compensation they have secured from the system over the years. Then there are political leaders in Congress with their own preferences, and Congressmen who are the subject of heavy lobbying by these interests. The administration and the Presidents job is to navigate this stream with a workable deficit neutral plan, without any requirement for any group to make sacrifices, and in some situations even small sacrifices for the public interest. Would charitable institutions be hurt that much, what if charitable institutions were exempted, why would other interests the try to obtain the same exemption. Its like the unions trying to keep the old unsustainable goldplated healthcare and other benefits at GM even as the ship was going down. Taxing employer provided employee health benefits as income would raise $2.5 trillion over a decade. The opposition here is from unions which are a force in the Democratic party and which count tax free health benefits as a legacy of the labor movement. Employer provided health insurance covers 160 million American employed and their dependents under the age of 65, so it has a wide impact. Yet most economists favor ending the tax break. They say it mainly goes to upper income taxpayers, and discourages cost consciousness among consumers of health care, thus encouraging excessive spending and surging health care costs. Senior Obama advisors, Peter Orszag, the budget director, and economist Jason Furman favor this approach. So do Republicans in Congress. Senators Baucus and Grassley are not asking for the complete removal of the tax break, what they want to see is capping the value of benefits that go untaxed. If the tax-free limit is $13,000, a policy worth $15,000 would pay income taxes on $2000. A third spource is to spend less on Medicare. About two thirds of the $948 billion in savings Mr Obama has proposed over 10 years comes from a number of reductions in Medicare spending. $177 billion comes from insurance companies bidding for government reimbursements for offering private plans to seniors. $106 billion comes from cutting the subsidies to hospitals serving the uninsured as universal coverage should remove this need. And $110 billion in reduced payments to hospitals and doctors because of productivity gains. A range of industries insurance companies, hospitals, doctors drugmakers, nursing homes, home health care companies and medical device makers, all stand to lose from reduced payments from Medicare and Medicaid. And these groups with interests to protect are another factor in this process of working out a healthcare plan. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The non-partisan approach taken by Republican governor Snyder of Michigan contrasts sharply with the approach of Governor Walker in Wisconsin and Governor Brownback in Kansas.

LyrArc Article Gist
A Republican move for a 3 month extension of the U.S. debt ceiling to provide time to reach a negotiated deal with Democrats.

LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. House of Representatives votes 285-144 to suspend the debt ceiling till Feb. 7, 2014. The deal forged in the Senate by Democrat Reid and Republican McConnell passed in th Senate by 81-18. The U.S. stock markets closed with the DJIA at 15374, up 1.6% compared to Sept 30 when the government shutdown began. The Republicans opposing the passage outnumbered those supporting it 144 to 87 in the House of Representatives. Because this was a repeat of similiar failure to reach agreement and last minute deals in 2012 and 2011 the equity markets appear to have taken the conflict between the two parties in stride.

LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman points out that a centrist solution is not the panacea it sounds. A lot depends on what it is and what is seen as centrist, if it really is centrist, and if it makes sense. A centrist proposal that leaves out tax expenditures but is different from the positions staked out by the factions on both sides of the political spectrum, and sounds moderate may not be the right solution.

LyrArc Article Gist
Krauthammer says he favors the Boehner Plan because the two stage debt ceiling hike will give time for negotiations and public scrutiny of plans for entitlement and tax reforms. He is critical of the Reid Plan because more than half of the $2 trillion deficit reduction under the plan comes from not continuing surge spending in Iraq and Afghanistan for the next 10 years, which he calls outrageous and fictional savings. The lack of Obama's own plan even after setting up and receiving the report of the Bowles-Simpson deficit commission is a sore point for him and other observers, demonstrating a stark failure to lead. Tea party advocates will need a new mandate in 2012 where they control more than just the House of Representatives to push for their plan of aggressive deficit reduction and a balanced budget. Krauthammer sees the Obama stimulus, auto bailouts, health-care reform, financial regulation, and the current battle over deficit spending as a large Keynesian gamble which has failed to revive the economy. A choice on limiting government or a different set of policies should now be left to voters to decide....

LyrArc Article Gist
Matt Miller, a former Clinton aide, says both U.S. parties have failed to do serious problem solving. The reason is that both are looking primarily for election advantage and are not interested in blending the best of liberal and conservative thinking. He even goes so far as to say both parties don't trust the public enough to lay out all the facts openly and explain what action needs to be taken. This is clearly true in one of many examples- the way Clinton advisor Bowles and Republican Senator Simpson took up the job of coming up with a deficit reduction plan looking at things from all angles, and laying out all the facts. Contrast that with the way a Democratic president Obama shied away from openly discussing Bowles-Simpson's closing of most tax expenditures as a key a part of a new action plan. Republican leaders Boehner, Cantor, McConnell, instead of seriously challenging the Democrats to take up the Bowles-Simpson or Rivlin-Domenici proposals, focussed their attention on defunding the government unless certain conditions were met. Serious debates and discussion that should have taken place to arrive at a consensus never took place, eroding the credibility of politicians of both parties, as Miller points out. The failure of leadership brings America back to its roots in community organizing through independent intitiative at all levels for crucial problem-solving discussion. This is the way to arrive at a consensus of what needs to be done for renewing America....

LyrArc Article Gist
Michael McConnell, was Assistant General Counsel of the Office of Management and Budget from 1981-1983. He is now a professor of constitutional law at Stanford University. Here he tries to throw light on how the budgetary process that is required by law, and which makes the formal budget proposed by the president available for public scrutiny, was circumvented through a sequence of events starting in February 2011. The Budget Act of 1974 sets specific deadlines and a process for generating revenue, setting spending priorities, and setting the debt limit. The President first submits his administration's budget by the first Monday in February. The Congressional Budget Office has until Feb. 15 to score the budget using identical metrics for all proposals for a consistent scoring. The budget President Obama put forward in February did not take into account the growing deficit and was rejected by the Senate 97-0. The President proposed a new plan in April 2011, but the proposed budget was so vague that CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf said he could not score it. The subsequent efforts in June and July 2011 were carried out in closed door negotiations between senior Republican leaders and the Obama White House. This subverts the original intention of the law. The Budget Act says that both the House and Senate hold hearings on the proposal, with testimony from the administration, "national organizations" and the "general public." Transparency, openness and accountabilility are key aspects of a proper process that is democratic and prevents the parties from engaging in blame and competing claims. The closed door negotiating sessions and the lack of a concrete written budget proposal from the President has turned the current budget process into an effort by each side to see how it can best position itself for the 2012 presidential election. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The skills to navigate different personalities and work patiently on the issues surrounding changes to the U.S. tax system of Rep. Dave Camp (MI), chairman of the U.S House of Representatives Ways and Means Committee, will be immensely useful in the effort to make changes to the U.S. tax system. Camp works well with fellow House Republican leaders Boehner, Ryan, Cantor, and his Democratic counterpart in the U.S. Senate Max Baucus. Camp is a good listener, refuses to engage in partisan criticism, and has the patience to work through difficult issues of achieving savings and keeping fairness in the the tax changes. Earlier efforts to achieve consensus in late 2011 failed, making it even more important to have leadership which can create productive debate and bridge the differences. The tax changes are part of the overall effort for U.S. economic recovery by reducing the deficit.

LyrArc Article Gist
Rep. Dave Camp, House Ways and Means Committee chairman, representing northern Michigan, says every deduction in the tax code is there because of a reason, and powerful lobbies will oppose any changes. The best he can do is work himself out of this job as he will have to tackle the Democrats on entitlements, the business lobbies on tax loopholes, and other lobbies protecting their preferences in the tax code. He plans to achieve a simpler tax code with lowered rates of 25% for business and earners above six figures, and 10% for everyone else. The approach he is taking is to be revenue neutral when tackling tax reform, in the belief that the economic growth generated from a simpler tax code and lower rates would generate revenues of 18 to 19% of GDP, up from about 16% today. He says the economc cost of not getting this done to get the economy rolling again is so high that he is upbeat that both sides can come together after the election no matter who wins. He is also looking at a repatriation tax of 5% on profits kept by American companies overseas, which would boost revenues for business which could be reinvested in stead of sitting idle. Today the much steeper tax rate on repatriation makes businesses reluctant to bring it back....

LyrArc Article Gist
Rubin questions the idea that lowering the deficit by reducing tax expenditures, deductions and loopholes at the same time as lowering rates would work. It would not raise enough revenues if many of the deductions that help the middle class were not considered doable and crossed off the list. He disagrees with Republicans about increasing taxes to Clinton era levels as creating disincentives for work and business by citing the economic record of growth in jobs and GDP during the Clinton period. On the proposal to use limiting deductions and loopholes for the the rich as away to provide a more equitable distribution of the tax burden he says this would still require increasing taxes on the middle class to achieve deficit reduction.

LyrArc Article Gist
Greg Ip of the WSJ cautions about thinking that the GDP growth of 3% is likely to be achieved with the Trump plan for a corporate tax rate of 15%. He says evidence from Britain and Canada- Britain reducing the tax rate from 30% in 2007 to 19% today, and Canada from 28% in 2000 to 21% in 2004- is disappointing. In Britain the increase in GDP averaged about 0.1% a year. Business investment increases with cut in corporate taxes, and the U.S. corporate tax rate is higher than other advanced countries such as Germany, yet GDP growth includes other factors, such as the business cycle, demographics, productivity growth, aging, technology, regulation, says Ip. It is better if the tax cuts are spread broadly over the population, and tax cuts are offset to a greater extent by savings in other areas, and that tax cuts promote productivity boosting investment, to create enough of a surge in growth above 2%.