- Marco Rubio: U.S. at social, moral crossroads
- ‘We’re coming for you, Barack Obama’: Top U.S. official discloses threat from ISIL
- White flags baffle NYPD: ‘We’re lucky it wasn’t a bomb’
- N.Y. Gov. Cuomo’s office interfered with, pressured corruption commission: report
- Brit lawmaker: I would fire on Israel if I lived in Gaza
- VA apologizes to forgotten Marine veteran locked in Fla. clinic, forced to call 911
- U.S. social and economic trends on worrisome track, survey finds
- McDonald nomination unanimously referred to full Senate
- Chuck Norris honorary chairman of NRA voter registration campaign
- GOP outraged Obamacare investigators able to get coverage with fake IDs
Negotiators already stake out positions on budget
Show willingness to revisit the sequesters
Question of the Day
No tax increases, no major cuts to Social Security or other entitlements, and no big jump in federal spending. As House and Senate negotiators meet Wednesday to try to hammer out a unified 2014 federal budget, what's most striking is how many options they've already ruled out.
Democrats and Republicans have both rejected a "grand bargain," which ties together tax increases with cuts to entitlement programs such as Social Security. And without a more ambitious bargain, neither side is ready to give in to the other side on tax rates or spending levels.
In fact, about the only area of common ground is a willingness to revisit the sequesters, or across-the-board automatic budget cuts, that began earlier this year and are slated to trim spending for the rest of this decade.
"We made a mistake, Congress did, by enacting sequestration," Sen. Tom Harkin, Iowa Democrat, said Tuesday as he hosted voters on Capitol Hill who said the sequester cuts had hurt them. "Its time to fix that mistake."
The budget was supposed to have been passed seven months ago. It wasn't, so the federal government is operating on stopgap funding for fiscal year 2014, which began Oct. 1.
Leaders have set a deadline of mid-December for getting a new budget written, but some lawmakers want to see it done by Thanksgiving, which would give the spending committees more time to convert the budget blueprint into specific appropriations bills.
The budget negotiators held their first meeting late last month and drew lines on what they could accept.
House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, Wisconsin Republican, has already ruled out any increase in taxes, warning any attempt by Democrats to demand higher taxes would undermine the negotiations from the start.
"If we look at this conference as an argument about taxes, we're not going to get anywhere. The way to raise revenue from our perspective is to grow the economy, to get people back to work," he said during the negotiators' first meeting on Oct. 30.
Meanwhile his Democratic counterpart, Senate Budget Committee Chairwoman Patty Murray of Washington state, said that while she is open to some minor cuts to entitlement programs, she is not willing to talk about major ones that would create hardship for ordinary Americans.
Despite the tough talk, Marc Goldwein, a senior policy director for the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, said he doesn't believe anything is truly off the table.
"I don't think anyone has said, 'This particular policy under the circumstances is not up for negotiation,'" he said. "They have started to set expectations to find a one- or two-year plan, but that doesn't mean they couldn't do something bigger."
Still, he said the most likely area of agreement will be on sequester cuts.
"They all agree that the [sequester is] not the best way to cut spending," Mr. Goldwein said. "I suspect they won't try to replace all $105 billion of sequester, but they might try to replace half, a third, two-thirds, depending on what savings they can identify."
Other options where there might be some agreement include closing tax loopholes, said Joel Friedman, vice president for federal fiscal policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
"Both sides acknowledge there are these loopholes in the code that should go," he said. "In the context of a smaller deal, identifying one or two for a solution seems reasonable."
However, even that possible point of agreement isn't without challenges.
Chris Edwards, editor of DownsizingGovernment.org at the Cato Institute, said the two parties can't even agree on what constitutes a "loophole" — which means negotiators will have a tough time agreeing on whether to get rid of them.
"That's a real hurdle — it's that Democrats' basic understanding of tax policy is just fundamentally different from Republicans," Mr. Edwards said.
© Copyright 2014 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
About the Author
Jacqueline Klimas covers Capitol Hill for The Washington Times. She can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.
- Women entrepreneurs tell Senate they face funding discrimination
- McDonald nomination unanimously referred to full Senate
- McDonald promises to choose hard right over easy wrong at VA
- VA secretary nominee faces Senate grilling, full plate if approved
- Rep. Gregory Meeks: European nations should sanction Russia
Latest Blog Entries
- Miss. GOP chair: Huckabee distracting from GOP's reasonable pro-life stance
- Commerce Secretary 'optimistic' about U.S.'s economic standing worldwide
- Less than half of registered voters would re-elect their congressman, poll finds
- Half of registered voters in Va. would re-elect Sen. Mark Warner
- 2013 was second most polarizing year of Obama's presidency
TWT Video Picks
The subsidies are a hit with patients who don't exist
- CARSON: Costco and the perils of mixing politics and business
- House task force to recommend National Guard on border, faster deportations
- Democratic Sen. John Walsh plagiarized War College master's thesis: report
- 'We're coming for you, Barack Obama': Top U.S. official discloses threat from ISIL terrorists
- Obama orders Pentagon advisers to Ukraine
- Netanyahu's Wikipedia page replaced with giant Palestinian flag
- David Perdue defeats Jack Kingston in Georgia Republican Senate primary runoff
- Hezbollah warring in Syria could join fight against Israel
- Despite rhetoric, gun prosecutions plummet under Obama
- DEACE: How to go from civil rights icon to bigot in one quote
Obama's biggest White House 'fails'
Celebrities turned politicians
Athletes turned actors
20 gadgets that changed the world
Fighting in Iraq