Boehner: Spending, Not Taxes, Stalling Fiscal Cliff Deal

Speaker of the House signals Republicans will agree to higher tax rates on rich.

I know, right? Now tell your friends!
Boehner: Spending, Not Taxes, Stalling Fis...
Zeke Miller

WASHINGTON — Speaker of the House John Boehner sought Thursday to build a case for blaming President Barack Obama for the lack of an agreement to avert the fiscal cliff, saying the president has yet to get serious about spending cuts.

In a Capitol Hill press conference, Boehner is set to criticize Obama’s proposals to avoid trillions in mandatory cuts and tax increases as unbalanced, saying that Obama wants more stimulus instead of getting serious about reforms.

“It’s clear the president is just not serious about cutting spending,” Boehner will say. “But spending is the problem.”

But as striking was Boehner’s new focus on spending, a tacit signal that Republicans know that they will have to surrender on keeping tax rates on the highest earners at Bush-era levels. Obama has made raising the rates above 35% a prerequisite for any agreement.

“The president wants to pretend spending isn’t the problem,” Boehner will say. “That’s why we don’t have an agreement.”

The full excerpts are below:

“More than five weeks ago, Republicans signaled our willingness to avert the fiscal cliff with a bipartisan agreement that is truly balanced and begins to solve our spending problem. The president still has not made an offer that meets these two standards. Republicans have.

“While the president promised the American people a balanced approach, his proposals have been anything but that. He wants far more in tax hikes than spending cuts. And instead of beginning to solve our debt problem, he wants new ‘stimulus’ and the ability to raise the debt ceiling whenever he wants - without cuts and reforms.

“It’s clear the president is just not serious about cutting spending. But spending is the problem. How big a problem? Take a look at this chart prepared by Paul Ryan and the Budget Committee.

“Republicans want to solve the problem and get this spending line down. The president wants to pretend spending isn’t the problem. That’s why we don’t have an agreement.

“Unfortunately, the White House is so unserious about cutting spending that it appears willing to slow-walk our economy right up to – and over – the fiscal cliff.”

Check out more articles on BuzzFeed.com!

Facebook Conversations

          

    6 Responses So Far

    • seang9   Boehner: Spending, Not Taxes, Stallin...  about 5 months ago
    • LizReszke 5 months ago

      Wow. The middle class part of the fiscal cliff is all agreed on. They can start doing it and getting that into motion, but they aren’t. Why? I don’t know. The only thing theyndontnagreemon is the tax increases for the wealthy. STOP GETTING THE MIDDLE CLASS STUCK IN SOMETHING THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THEM!

    • bartmiller thinks Boehner: Spending, Not Taxes, Stallin... is Win  about 5 months ago
    • benr11   Boehner: Spending, Not Taxes, Stallin... and thinks it’s Fail  about 5 months ago
    • kylee3 thinks Boehner: Spending, Not Taxes, Stallin... is Cute  about 5 months ago
    • abrahamc3 5 months ago
       

      Could this graph be more useless? More than 2/3 of it is based off of crystal ball data and the imaginings of the republican political machine. The points in the graph that have actual data show that when the Dems took office spending began to decrease along with the gap between spending and tax revenue. This probably could have been much more pronounced if the republicans were not dead set on filibustering the country into bankruptcy.

    • JuneauKiki 5 months ago

      I would totally agree with spending cuts. How about we stop spending so much money on two unnecessary wars and we also stop sending so much aid overseas. I don’t see why we borrow money to send to other folks, while we are trying to figure out what to cut at home. Sorry for the poor folks, students, and elderly in the US, we’re sending money that could support your programs to support military of other countries. Yup, that makes sense.

    • gcs3 5 months ago

      All that graph tells me is that spending dropped a lot once Obama came into power, and so did the disparity between tax revenue and spending. All those massive increases are a guess taking place after Obama is out of office…presumably when a Republican is in office and starts another war or three.

    • gcs3 5 months ago

      Spending money on tax breaks is expensive. Spending money on wars is expensive.

    • robb23 5 months ago

      We could start off with a combination of tax increases and spending cuts, such as the ones scheduled for the beginning of 2013. After the impact of that combination settles down, adjust again in a couple years’ time. Repeat until deficit eliminated. (If spending can be cut further after budget is balanced, tax cuts could again be introduced to avoid evil surpluses..)

    Hot Buzz

    Chinese Photoshop Trolls Are Way Funnier Than American Photoshop Trolls

    viral

    22 Reasons Bearded Men Are Better

    viral
    Now Buzzing