Greg Sargent at the Plum Line (Washington Post) is one of my daily reads. He's an excellent reporter who shows that advocacy journalism can be rigorous and "real" journalism. He has a new post up that suggests good news, as I see it:
And over the cliff we go
Sargent starts by quoting John Boehner's short press conference today:
“Tomorrow, the House will pass legislation to make permanent tax relief for nearly every American — 99.81 percent of the American people. Then the president will have a decision to make. He can call on the Senate Democrats to pass that bill, or he can be responsible for the largest tax increase in American history.”
Sargent sees this as a threat to take it or leave it, and if President Obama leaves it, over the cliff we go.
That appears to be a straightforward threat: If Obama doesn’t agree to raise tax rates only on income over $1 million, we’re going over the cliff. No other choice is offered. It’s one or the other.
Sargent notes that others (Brian Beutler at TPM is mentioned) think that Boehner has decided his only option is to go over the cliff, but he also allows for the possibility that this is show for the Republican caucus to convince them that Boehner can't get much more from President Obama in order to sell an eventual compromise. That's certainly possible. But one thing Boehner's threat does is make Democrats far less likely to accept any further concessions.
One thing Boehner’s comments accomplish: They make it even harder for Democrats and liberals to accept a single additional concession on the President’s part.
snip [too many concessions already]
This last bit of hostage taking from Boehner will only make things worse.
snip
Now he’s threatening to take us over the cliff unless Democrats agree to lower taxes on all income between $400,000 and $1 million, after winning the election. There is no way liberals and rank and file Dems will be able to accept it if Obama gives up anything significant in response to that.
So there's a good chance we are going over the cliff. It's not a good thing in itself and some folks will suffer, but it appears to be the best of many poor options. The deal President Obama offered was not a good deal for people (and gave Republicans too much), but still they would not accept it.
I don't think Boehner can deliver any compromise and I wonder if more concessions in negoitiations by Dems and Obama would alienate Dems in the Senate and House so they would not give the needed votes. The gulf between the parties on this appears to be too much to have a compromise that can get enough support from either party to pass.
I prefer the cliff. And then no negotiations on the debt ceiling.