I’m not really sure why John Boehner didn’t announce his resignation tonight. Honestly, I don’t understand. He doesn’t have any control of his caucus and that means that he has no business presuming to be their leader. He had a stupid plan which, as best as I can understand it, had no other purpose than trying to demonstrate that the Republicans weren’t trying to protect millionaires from tax cuts hikes. Why that was so important is unclear. The Plan B bill still contained generous tax cuts for millionaires and tax hikes for the middle class, so it wasn’t even an honest effort. And the Speaker wound up demonstrating the opposite of what he intended when his caucus refused to faux-raise taxes on millionaires.
The president has no incentive to bargain with Boehner anymore. Why make concessions to someone who can’t deliver on his promises? The administration has now been through this process twice with Boehner. If they are going to cut a deal now, it is going to have to be on Nancy Pelosi’s terms and designed to win with only a sliver of Republican votes. That would cost Boehner his speakership.
The only alternative to that is for Boehner to give up and let us go over the cliff and hope the caucus reelects him as Speaker again in the first week of January. However, I don’t see why he would be reelected as their leader since they refuse to follow his lead.
All I know is that any military leader who faced a mutiny of this magnitude would either resign his post or start employing courts-martial on a massive scale.
There is no recovering from this humiliation. Speaker Boehner might need a night or two to realize it, but his command is over. If he has any honor, he’ll do the right thing.
I asked this in the other thread and it’s mainly because I don’t know the House rules on these types of votes.
Does the Speaker need to have a majority (50+1) or just a plurality?
The reason I ask is there is a possibility that Boehner doesn’t resign and there’s a split in the GOP House caucus between 2 or 3 candidates for Speaker. If that happens and all the Democrats vote for Pelosi, could she be Speaker even as leader of the minority?
I was under the impression that it was a simple majority of the votes.
Majority of cast votes: the (outrageous) spending cut re-allocations passed 215-209; you need 218 for an absolute majority.
I get that’s it’s 218 for legislation but does that apply to the Speakership vote?
What happens if no one get 218? There has to be a Speaker of the House.
they keep voting until someone has a majority.
What’s the right thing? Resignation?
I’d say the right thing would be to cut a deal with Pelosi to get a bill all the dems can vote for and the rest from the few sane republicans.
Then he can resign and become a distiller lobbyist.
At first glance, I thought you wrote, “Then he can resign and become a distiller hobbyist.“
that he already is
a) that’s the problem with stupid people: they’re too stupid to know that they’re stupid, and hence their decisions continue to be stupid.
b) “if he has any honor…” BWAHAHAHAH
Orange Julius has no honor.
I thought tonight was hilarious.
I’m guessing he’s hitting the Johnnie Walker Black pretty hard tonight.
Not just that he invited his Old Grandad and his BFF Jim Beam to this evenings drowning of the sorrows.
I just watched the video of Cantor as he was leaving the meeting after the vote was tabled. People are labeling it the “walk of shame”, but from the smirk on Cantor’s face, I don’t think he is “shamed” at all. I think Cantor’s perfectly happy with the knife he put in Boehner’s back. He literally looks like the cat that ate the canary.
Seriously look at the video and tell me that Cantor looks doesn’t look like a cat who sees a bowl of cream right within this reach.
http://youtu.be/F56fEyNOTVM
I’m not up on my Bible lit, but would Cantor not be Boehner’s Judas?
I saw him on my teevee and I do believe you are on to something. Cantor is not someone I would ever trust, even if he were a Democrat. He’s all about the power.
yes, Looks like Romney walking away from his press conference [?] about BenGhazi.
Helluva legacy. Participate in designing the bargain that created this cliff, curb, whatever; fail in negotiations with not only the President but his own Party. And then he will lose his gavel in January. Way to end a career.
Tomorrow’s Wall Street should be in for a ride.
So will Cantor ride the bomb over the cliff?
http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2012/1/2/183623/5698#1
That was me from a year ago. And I’m not that smart.
This was written in the stars from the moment when “Mr. 98%” managed to accomplish a task (cutting federal outlays in 2012) that could have humbly and quietly been taken care of in the routine budgeting process, without ruining the public standing of his party, sabotaging the nation’s credit, and handing the President all of the leverage on taxes and defense spending. Republicans are plainly too stupid and incorrigible to extract compromises instead of purely obstructing at every turn, and yet for a party of fascists, they have no strongman. Oh well.
I’d say you’re pretty smart; maybe a little needlessly crass at times, but you’re certainly smarter than 90% of the talking heads on teevee. Ok, sorry, low bar lol.
I don’t see why Boehner can’t just say “F’em” to his colleagues and say “If you want me out, you have to kick me out! Let’s see you assholes do better!”
I wonder if we can now get consensus on this question:
How smart was it for President Obama to say earlier that he’d accept the chained CPI and setting the threshold at which to raise taxes to $400,000? Has that strengthened or weakened his negotiating position in the current circumstance?
Unfortunately, I think we are back to the old bargain-at-any-price Obama. I’m going to be looking in the mirror for the bus tracks on my back.
I think you missed the point
Re
You tell me. Explain why this White House has abandoned the campaign pledge of raising tax rates on income over $250K to a new threshold of $400K.
Who cares about Boehner? Who cares if he resigns or not?
What matters is the outcome. Sounds as if liberals should complain about Obama’s inept bargaining and not get distracted by goings on within the Republican party.
yes, it’s really sad about the concessions and Barack “selling us out” – not, and how it so backfired on Barack. not. p.s. we’re laughing at your concern
p.s. we’re laughing at your concern
Six comments, all written during the fiscal cliff negotiations, all telling liberals they should break ranks with the White House.
Gee, that’s not too obvious or anything.
Explain why this White House has abandoned the campaign pledge of raising tax rates on income over $250K to a new threshold of $400K.
To allow Boehner to demonstrate that he and his caucus can’t cut a deal. Have you ever heard the saying “Give them enough rope and they’ll hang themselves?”
Sounds as if liberals should complain about Obama’s inept bargaining and not get distracted by goings on within the Republican party.
You know, Q, there are those who would say that you need to watch the other guy when judging someone’s bargaining skills.
Herr Krauthamer has offered this regarding gun control:
I would suggest that there is a fourth element that might deserve some consideration: THE VICTIMS.
Booman Tribune ~ A Progressive Community
I think you meant protect millionaires from tax hikes.
I have a Masters in Peace Studies and considered doing and was accepted to do a Phd on the negotiation process – based in part, on my many years in business as a HR professional in a heavily unionised environment.
The one key requirement of a successful negotiation process is to have negotiators who can trust each other to be able to deliver on their commitments. Otherwise there is no point in even talking to them, as any agreement you might reach will not be delivered on, and any concessions you made in that process will be “banked” as already agreed in principle and then the issue becomes what further concessions are required to bring a deal across the line
It will now be very difficult for Obama to revert to 250K and unchained CPI without it appearing that he was negotiating in bad faith.
Of course, if you don’t want a deal, it helps to have an incompetent negotiator on the other side. The focus is then on their thrashing about rather than on your intransigence or concessions.
I would suggest that Boehner is currently Obama’s best friend because he ensures the Republicans keep getting blamed for the lack of a deal.
Cantor, on the other hand, from what little I have seen of him, could be a cold and slippery fish who could really be a thorn in the President’s side (if I may mix by metaphors).
The President must be hoping that Boehner hangs on for as long as he can…
In the new session of congress, with a new Speaker, and post re-inauguration, both sides can reset their negotiating positions from a new base.
I have not seen anything yet which leads me to conclude that cutting a deal this side of the fiscal cliff is a good idea. Indeed I’m not sure that a good deal is possible with this congress. Obama should be exploring the scope of what he can achieve by Executive Orders and minting Trillion Dollar Platinum Coins to (retroactively) pay for the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. After all, it was the failure of Congress to fund those wars which caused the Debt ceiling to be breached in the first place.
Prepare for two more years of a “do-nothing” Congress.
The trillion $ coin [s] is out. But read “The big picture” post and comments from yesterday for the strategy against this congress – a lot of explanation in the comments.
Because as I understand it (fairly recently, not last summer) the admin/Obama said he wasn’t going that route
It’s a last choice, to be sure, after other options have been exhausted. But I haven’t heard any argument that it would be illegal – especially if it were explicitly used to retrospectively fund unfunded wars.
It’s not illegal but it’s a technicality. Roughly, iirc Obama won’t resolve it via a technicality, but I’ll if I can find something more concrete. BTW the Pierce article marie2 just linked to, and I’m linking it below, is very good. I have tried to explain to Europeans about the Republican party collapsing (haven’t explained it very well either), it’s difficult to get a feeling for it if you’re not here, but the Pierce article also conveys the feeling of it
http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/john-boehner-over-the-fiscal-cliff-122112
Thanks – it seems to me that guys like Hoyer are more of a problem than guys like Boehner. Boehner has the excuse of having an inchoate caucus. Hoyer should have more intelligence for the position he holds…
not appealing what he said today, but the problem is that there are no longer two functioning parties, there’s one party (democrats) and a collection of crazies with tremendous amounts of $$ supporting them from outside sources. how to get gov to function under these circumstances? what Boo is saying on “The Big Picture” is {and we can’t wait for 2014 anyway because the issues must be addressed} strategy to fragment the repubs in the House of reps then pick up enough of them on any given issue to move forward on legislation. If anyone can do it Obama and Pelosi can, but it remains to be seen whether it can be done.
It also seems that Democrats could more credibly revert to $250K and no chained CPI if Pelosi hadn’t backed Obama’s concessions. But she can’t easily now turn around and say that the chained CPI is bad and unwarranted, can she?
I agree — If Obama goes back to $250K and no chained CPI now, he’ll look like he’s becoming more recalcitrant to a deal. It’s when the opposition has suffered a defeat that it’s best to look like you’re extending your hand.
My apologies to all concerned, but I’m not buying the X-dimensional chess game for Obama. His offer of CPI and upping the bottom limit for taxes was just that: an offer to move a recalcitrant negotiator off the tracks. The fact that the Speaker couldn’t deliver a pizza to a frat party makes it seem prescient, but you can’t bluff if you’re not willing to go thru.
Obama might have HOPED for this outcome, but if the R’s had taken him up on anything close to his proposal, he would’ve signed off.
I don’t know if it would have been a good thing or not. I voted for the guy, and I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that mostly he’s going to do the best that can be done under the circumstances.
I hope.
you can’t bluff if you’re not willing to go thru.
Of course you can. Haven’t you ever played poker? Bluffing is defined as bidding when you can’t actually hope to win by calling.
Obama might have HOPED for this outcome, but if the R’s had taken him up on anything close to his proposal, he would’ve signed off.
And you’re basing this on…what? The last time it looked like Boehner might take Obama up on an offer that included chained CPI – this was in July 2011 – Obama responded by upping his demand on tax increases from $1 trillion to $1.4 trillion, scuttling the possible deal. Then, when that they ultimately settled on another deal (the sequester and Supercommittee), it specifically excluded all Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid benefits.
well, Joe, yes I have played poker … for almost 50 years. And if you really bluff with nothing more than a very few times … you lose — especially when your bluff is the same thing you bluffed on before.
I think the chained CPI was a real offer. I think the upping to 400K was a real offer. I think Obama wanted Boehner to be able to do it. I don’t think he’s particularly upset that Boehner couldn’t.
Luck plays a part in all negotiations and games. Obama is lucky in his opposition. They are bad mannered children, fools and poltroons. You don’t need multi-chess to make them look bad.
They are bad mannered children, fools and poltroons. You don’t need multi-chess to make them look bad.
Heh. Then maybe you should retire that ridiculous metaphor?
And if you really bluff with nothing more than a very few times … you lose
We’re up to twice, in four years of his presidency, that he’s bluffed like this with the Congressional GOP.
speaker’s pay
trappings of power
pride
arrogance
connections with corporate power for the time after he leaves Congress
If the guy ever had a clue,
Now might be the best time for him to implement #5
“He had a stupid plan which, as best as I can understand it, had no other purpose than trying to demonstrate that the Republicans weren’t trying to protect millionaires from tax cuts hikes. Why that was so important is unclear.”
I think you just answered your own question. He knew he wasn’t going to get anything really passed (by both houses, I mean), so he tried to get on record a house bill demonstrating that the Republicans aren’t trying to protect the millionaires — so he would have at least some benchmark and some credibility when the post-cliff bill is debated. That he couldn’t get his own caucus to vote for it makes him looks like the clown that he is, but hey, he tried, he didn’t MEAN for it not to pass. It was a very unimpressive attempt at Hail Mary that failed.
He doesn’t resign probably because he doesn’t care, as long as he gets his salary and perks and his daily dose of Jack Daniels.
The president has no incentive to bargain with Boehner anymore…. The administration has now been through this process twice with Boehner. If they are going to cut a deal now, it is going to have to be on Nancy Pelosi’s terms and designed to win with only a sliver of Republican votes.
I think the administration is still going to have to deal with Boehner — or someone — to get even that sliver of Republican votes. I think the next vote to end the crisis will find the House Republicans acting even more hardcore. That’s what they do. That’s who they are
I think the administration is still going to have to deal with Boehner — or someone — to get even that sliver of Republican votes.
Good call.
Remember, the House Democrats voted against the Iraq AUMF by a landslide, but the rump that went with the President included most of the Democratic House leadership.
Another similarity – the opposition back then, that voted against the President, was led by the #2, Nancy Pelosi.
The only thing Boehner can due is purge all those who disagree with him. I mean Rep. Huselkamp…a farmer from Kansas..was talking smack about Boehner.
Anyway, it appears Obama should not deal anymore and ask for what he wanted in the first place.