Skip to main content

View Diary: Senate/House Negotiators Give Up On Grand Bargain (185 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  There was never going (14+ / 0-)

    to be any true bargaining from the GOP side, only hostage taking. Once the prez stood them down and default is (hopefully) off the table, they have nothing. They'll never give on taxes and in return we should never give on SS and Medicare.

    Going forward, the Dem negotiating position should be, "you want X trillion in cuts? Ok 50% needs to come from revenues, go back to your conference and let us know what tax revenues you can swallow" they will never do it.

    Dems need to STOP offering cuts, from this day forward, whenever the grand bargain is mentioned, Simpson Bowles or and big deficit deal by the media or GOPer, tell them sure we're willing to strike a deal as soon as you can convince 130 GOP house members to vote for a package containing tax increases.

    Pelosi and Reid need to insist that Boehner must come up with 100-130 votes in any major deal on the deficit. We all know that will never happen.

    •  In return!? (8+ / 0-)

      We should not be offering anything on SS and Medicare even if the Republicans were willing to adopt huge tax increases.

      "The smartest man in the room is not always right." -Richard Holbrooke

      by Demi Moaned on Fri Oct 18, 2013 at 07:23:52 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  "they will never do it" (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Deep Texan

        "We all know that will never happen."

        •  But what is the advantage of proposing ... (5+ / 0-)

          bad policies that you don't want implemented even if you are confident that the other party to the negotiation won't accept them? You are still validating them as worthwhile policy goals.

          My idea is that you should only propose policies that you would actually like to enact whether or not you think they stand a chance of being adopted. Proposing policies you don't want is a risky business. You may miscalculate and they could end up being adopted. The downside is clear. What's the upside?

          "The smartest man in the room is not always right." -Richard Holbrooke

          by Demi Moaned on Fri Oct 18, 2013 at 10:12:23 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  so the public sees Obama as negotiating (0+ / 0-)

            which means Republicans get more of the blame when the negotiations go south.

            hell Obama proposed Republican legislation and they turned it down. their strategy is obvious.

            they voted against tax cuts.

            -You want to change the system, run for office.

            by Deep Texan on Fri Oct 18, 2013 at 11:36:06 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  So, do you think he's bluffing? (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              quagmiremonkey, greenbell

              If so then he stands the risk of losing whatever slight cred he gets for negotiating and is exposed as a fraud if they call his bluff. I don't call that good negotiating.

              Good negotiating is putting forward things you really want to do and then making concessions relative to that.

              "The smartest man in the room is not always right." -Richard Holbrooke

              by Demi Moaned on Fri Oct 18, 2013 at 11:43:56 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  a good bluff is not detectable (0+ / 0-)
                Good negotiating is putting forward things you really want to do and then making concessions relative to that.
                Republicans aren't negotiating in good faith. Obama isn't either but he had to bend over backwards to appear as if he were. If they were then you would be correct. So the process isn't clear cut, which would make it easier to understand.

                People can have the opinion that Obama wants a grand bargain. I think he doesn't. He isn't negotiating in good faith just as the Republicans. However, he is negotiating and getting public perception of that. Which helps Republicans get more of the blame, rather than it's both sides fault. Which very well could have been the case, had Obama not negotiated at all over the years. Had things been different, we would see a different strategy. If Obama had the congress that FDR or LBJ had, then things would be very different.

                -You want to change the system, run for office.

                by Deep Texan on Fri Oct 18, 2013 at 12:02:36 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I see how this works, now. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Demi Moaned

                  Obama isn't negotiating in good faith because Republicans aren't, so that makes his bad-faith negotiating a "good bluff" that's so good, we don't know it's just bad-faith negotiating done with good intent.

                  The public is clearly willing and able to untangle all of this, and will thank the President for a Grand Bargain he really didn't want, but was forced to offer, for their own good.

                  I need some Dramamine.




                  Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ J. Garcia

                  by DeadHead on Fri Oct 18, 2013 at 01:16:10 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  Republicans want Dems to cut social security (0+ / 0-)

                It's an election strategy.

                Dems know that. Even so, they wave that carrot, knowing full well Republicans can't make a deal.

                Making deals is tearing them apart.

                -You want to change the system, run for office.

                by Deep Texan on Fri Oct 18, 2013 at 12:04:23 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  For some context (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Demi Moaned

                President Obama's Deficit Reduction Package and Other Proposals in the 2014 Budget From the Center On budget and Policy Priorities:

                The deficit-reduction package reflects a compromise position.  The proposals in the offer — such as substantial savings in Medicare, the adoption of an alternative cost-of-living adjustment affecting Social Security, and further cuts to non-defense discretionary programs — were made in the context of negotiations where both the President and Speaker Boehner were making significant concessions.

                It is unusual for a President to include these kinds of compromise policies in his budget.  Typically, the President’s budget would include policies that are more akin to an opening bid in a negotiation — that is, the President’s budget generally reflects his preferred policies.   This budget, in contrast, reflects the President’s position at a stage of the negotiations after several rounds of offers had been made. This budget differs significantly from the approach taken in earlier Obama budgets.

                His budget cements negotiations with Boehner as the STARTING point for new negotiations. What did he get in return?

                “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR

                by Phoebe Loosinhouse on Fri Oct 18, 2013 at 12:07:01 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

    •  It really should be very simple (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      3goldens

      1) get rid of ALL unnecessary corporate loopholes subsidies for large corporations and lower the upper corporate tax rate from 35% to 15% (that seems globally reasonable)
      2) Tariffs on ALL goods manufactured by U.S. companies overseas and shipped back into the U.S. for consumers.  
      3) Raise the SS wage limit to $1MM.  That is technically what is deductible on corporate returns for executive salaries.
      4)Allow for the purchase of prescription drugs from other countries
      5) Fix the ACA to allow a Medicare buy-in at premiums that are commensurate with reality.
      6)Cut defense by 10 - 20%

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site