July 22, 2011

Boehner Walks …

Filed under: Economy,Taxes & Government — Tom @ 6:46 pm

as he should have.

Letter to colleagues here (server may be busy).

________________________________________

UPDATE, 9:15 p.m.: In an email from MIchael Steel, Boehner spokesperson —

Folks – The White House is misleading reporters tonight by claiming that new revenue in the framework that was discussed would have been generated by letting the current tax rates expire. That is simply false. Under the framework, a CEILING was offered by the White House that would generate $800 billion in new revenue over ten years. This would be done through comprehensive tax reform that would clear out deductions, credits, and loopholes in the system – and spur economic growth.

After the gang of six plan came out, the White House moved the goal posts and insisted on $400 billion more in higher taxes – a 50% increase in revenue – and wanted that to be the FLOOR instead of the ceiling. The President acknowledged this in his remarks tonight. “Letting tax cuts expire” was never part of the tax reform agreed to. Please let me know if you have any questions. – steel

Summary of the White House ‘walk backs’ during discussions of the ‘framework.’:

TAXES

· The White House agreed to a revenue total that would set a ceiling of about $800 billion in new revenue over ten years that could be generated through economic growth and efficiencies in our tax system (not tax hikes).

· After the ‘Gang of Six’ plan was released, and in the wake the reaction from Hill Democrats, they moved the goal posts and insisted on $400 billion more in higher taxes – a 50% increase – and wanted that to the floor instead of the ceiling.

· At the same time, they struck principles of tax reform that were already agreed to, including
o a protection against tax hikes on small businesses
o and a guarantee that there were would be only 3 tax rates and highest one would be below 35%

SOCIAL SECURITY

· There was an agreement to change the way government calculates inflation that would significantly extend Social Security’s solvency

· The White House moved off of a previously agreed to solvency target, suggesting a weaker level with 25% less in savings

________________________________________

UPDATE, 9:20 p.m.: BOOHOO, OUCH; What a crybaby

President Obama unleashed a tirade of frustration, anger and disappointment toward Republicans Friday after House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) announced he was withdrawing from negotiations with White House.

The president, in possibly his most emotional and stern appearance to date, said in no uncertain terms that he is summoning congressional leaders to the White House on Saturday morning.

“I want them here at 11 o’clock tomorrow,” Obama said. “We have run out of time, and they are going to have to explain to me how it is we are going to default.”

Obama’s fury toward Boehner was on full display as he several times accused the Speaker of walking away from the talks.
“I’ve been left at the altar now a couple of times,” Obama said.

The president was angry on a number of counts, but he seemed especially miffed by Boehner’s refusal to communicate with him on Friday before he walked away from the table.

Obama said he had a “cordial” relationship with Boehner “up until sometime today when I couldn’t get a phone call returned.”

Wahhhhh.

Share

6 Comments

  1. so what if he walked! Boehner still voted for TARP which shows he is not worth keeping. Tarp was Jean Schmidts and John Boehners defining moment. Here read this and see its links and then try to defend.

    http://urbansurvival.com/week.htm

    Bernie’s Bombshell
    (Snowflake, AZ)  Oh oh, Senator Bernie Sanders (Vermont’s lucky) has issued a major statement on how the Fed engineered $16 trillion to bail our not only US but also foreign banks.  His website reports in part:
     
    “The first top-to-bottom audit of the Federal Reserve uncovered eye-popping new details about how the U.S. provided a whopping $16 trillion in secret loans to bail out American and foreign banks 

    Link:    
    http://sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=9e2a4ea8-6e73-4be2-a753-62060dcbb3c3

    and businesses during the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. An amendment by Sen. Bernie Sanders to the Wall Street reform law passed one year ago this week directed the Government Accountability Office

    Link:
    http://sanders.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/GAO%20Fed%20Investigation.pdf

    to conduct the study.
     
    “As a result of this audit, we now know that the Federal Reserve provided more than $16 trillion in total financial assistance to some of the largest financial institutions and corporations in the United States and throughout the world,” said Sanders. ”This is a clear case of socialism for the rich and rugged, you’re-on-your-own individualism for everyone else.”
     
    Among the investigation’s key findings is that the Fed unilaterally provided trillions of dollars in financial assistance to foreign banks and corporations from South Korea to Scotland, according to the GAO report. “No agency of the United States government should be allowed to bailout a foreign bank or corporation without the direct approval of Congress and the president,” Sanders said.
     
    The non-partisan, investigative arm of Congress also determined that the Fed lacks a comprehensive system to deal with conflicts of interest, despite the serious potential for abuse. In fact, according to the report, the Fed provided conflict of interest waivers to employees and private contractors so they could keep investments in the same financial institutions and corporations that were given emergency loans.
     
    For example, the CEO of JP Morgan Chase served on the New York Fed’s board of directors at the same time that his bank received more than $390 billion in financial assistance from the Fed.
     
    Moreover, JP Morgan Chase served as one of the clearing banks for the Fed’s emergency lending programs. In another disturbing finding, the GAO said that on Sept. 19, 2008, William Dudley, who is now the New York Fed president, was granted a waiver to let him keep investments in AIG and General Electric at the same time AIG and GE were given bailout funds.
     
    One reason the Fed did not make Dudley sell his holdings, according to the audit, was that it might have created the appearance of a conflict of interest. To Sanders, the conclusion is simple. “No one who works for a firm receiving direct financial assistance from the Fed should be allowed to sit on the Fed’s board of directors or be employed by the Fed,” he said. ”
     
    If this hasn’t raised your blood pressure high enough, how about clicking over to the offishul GAO report which suggest that “…opportunities exist to strengthen polices and processes to manage emergency assistance…”
     
    A nice way of explaining we’ve been screwed again by the privately controlled not really Federal Reserve and it’s about the most disgusting account of financial raping and pillage as you’ll find.
     
    Yet, Congress, on the corporate dole, especially with the growing “throw the bastards out” cries increasing around the country, is unlikely to do anything more than weasel and waffle.  But, come to think of it, why am I not surprised?
     
    Gold star for Sanders for being forthright..bit he’s got 99 colleagues left to work on….
     
    Now to see how the financial universe REALLY works,  couple in this next story…
     
    TARP and the Great Circular Reference
    We’re all supposed to be happy as hell that banks are paying back their TARP money, right?  All the hype and hoopla about what a grand and glorious thing this is just won’t stop.
     
    Except according to this article here, the way theses banks have paid back the ‘right pocket’ is by borrowing from the left! 

    http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daniel-gross/banks-pay-back-tarp-funds-borrowing-treasury-205658852.html
     
    You got it:  Take TARP money, they borrow more money from the Fed, then pay back TARP (cue the spin machine to rerun Happy Days) and while the public attention is distracted, they borrow from el Fed and pretend the situation is fixed.
     
    Ah, the foxes are still in the hen house just the same.  But, I repeat myself too much. We need some financial Charmin to clean such bs happy talk up…

    Depressions are like enemas for the rich and it may be getting on time for one to clean up the malinvestment, now being papered over with promissory notes which indenture our children and their children, too….
     
    Is repudiation of debt to manipulative dishonest scum a bad thing?  A good ponder for the weekend, for sure. 

    Got gold?  More critical: Got a plan to click out with gains before it gets called this time around as it may be?

    Comment by Greg — July 22, 2011 @ 6:58 pm

  2. I would like to see Boehner acknowledge that hitting the debt ceiling is not nearly as fatal or catastrophic as Obama states. We still have tax revenue coming into the Treasury to pay the bills, and it’s always up to Obama to decide what bills to pay anyway (Congress just appropriates the money). Make him choose to not pay interest on the debt and thus default. It baffles me why nobody talks about that strategy.

    deskbox

    Comment by deskbox — July 22, 2011 @ 10:10 pm

  3. Compare Boehner’s cordial form of disagreement versus Obamas whining, demagoguery and name calling. Quite a contrast.

    Comment by zf — July 23, 2011 @ 1:45 am

  4. #1, Yes, Boehner voted for TARP, so did a lot of people who should have known better but panicked. One bad vote is not a reason to throw the guy out.

    Also, the website you link to I have a lot of problems with, besides the fact that it appears to be a socialist website and the excerpt you quote is loaded with class warfare demagoguery. The website conveniently forgets to mention that many banks and institutions were FORCED to take bailout funds by Paulson to begin with. TARP is the governments baby, not the “evil corporations.”

    First off, the fact that foreign banks and such borrowed from TARP is now new or even hidden information. It was widely reported and condemned in many places. The same with the use of borrowing from the treasury to help pay off the TARP loans.

    Second, people who worked for banks and financial institutes being in government is NOT a conflict of interest. It’s called having people in government who actually know how the real world works and have experience in running things. The website falsely implies that these people were working for their companies at the time of the bailout, which is not the case. In fact, funny enough, that website calls one thing that was done that AVOIDIED a conflict of interest a conflict of interest! The one guy who would benefited from SELLING his stock in AIG and GE at the time of the bailout, not from keeping it as he did despite what the economic illiterates at that website say.

    Third, the lauding of Bernie “global warming deniers are like holocaust deniers” Sanders makes me sick. Bernie Sanders is not some pure crusader, but a flaming hypocrite. His ranting about how TARP was misused is purely to cover up the fact that he supported it. It’s a sad attempt to look outraged, when in fact the very things Sanders decries were created by a Bill he said YES to. Sorry, Bernie, you faux outrage notwithstanding, your vote crated the very situation and mess you now pretend to decry.

    Speaking of Sanders, he is one of the biggest proponents of ‘green” policies and Cap and Trade. Those “green” policies and especially Cap and Trade screw over the public and only benefit “alternative energy” companies and even companies like GE who know how they can milk the “Cap and Trade” scheme. Tell that to the morons at urbansurvival.com who think Bernie Sanders is some pure anti- evil corporation crusader who Vermont is “lucky” to have.

    Comment by zf — July 23, 2011 @ 2:38 am

  5. In fact, our own Tom covered this before on this very site:

    http://www.bizzyblog.com/2011/04/07/where-did-the-fed-foreign-lending-story-go/

    Comment by zf — July 23, 2011 @ 3:47 am

  6. Correction: Sanders didn’t vote Yea for TARP, BUT he has and continues to support TARP like thinking and legislation. He’s still a hypocrite for that and other reasons.

    Comment by zf — July 23, 2011 @ 4:22 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.