John Boehner faces uphill fight to pass his debt plan

AP Photo/Susan Walsh

The good news for House Speaker John Boehner and House GOP leadership is that only a handful of members have come forward saying they absolutely will not vote for the new debt reduction plan. Most members said Monday that they are waiting to comb through the legislative details before making a final judgment.

But from talking to members, the freshmen and fiscal conservatives have three major concerns with Boehner's plan to give the president a debt limit increase in two phases. Around $1 trillion now and another $1.5 trillion after Congress passes a package of bigger cuts at the end of this year. They want a balanced budget amendment, they don't trust that the Joint Committee will effectively slash spending and they see the immediate spending cuts -- just $24 billion in FY 2012 -- as too low.

The first concern is that members do not want to wait until the fall to vote on a balanced budget amendment to the constitution. Their preferred legislation, Cut, Cap and Balance, would make the debt limit increase contingent on Congress sending balanced budget amendment to the states. So not only would there need to be a vote, it would need to get the 2/3 in both the House and Senate to be sent to the states.

Obama takes debt case to American people
Boehner: Obama created the "crisis" atmosphere

Boehner's plan, as it stands now, only requires that Congress vote on a balanced budget amendment in the fall. It does not have to pass. It just has to come up in both chambers for a vote. Senior GOP aides said that this will give members time to mount a public campaign to rally support around a balanced budget amendment so that it could actually pass.

But 39 House GOP members signed a pledge that they would not raise the debt ceiling without sending a balanced budget amendment to the constitution to the states. And Boehner can only afford to lose 23 Republicans if he has to pass the measure on a party line vote. He may pick up some votes from the 25 fiscally conservative Blue Dog Democrats, but just 5 crossed the line last week to support Cut, Cap and Balance.

Boehner: I didn't want "mano-a-mano" with Obama
No blood spilled in dueling debt speeches
Schieffer: Party leaders unable to lead on debt

One option House leaders are considering to try to bring members around would make passage of the debt limit plan contingent on both the House and Senate taking up a balanced budget amendment as early as this week. One leadership aide said that it would give members the option of voting to support the balanced budget amendment. If that failed, then leaders would know which members to target to try to drum up support when a vote happens again in the fall. Leadership would have to choose among competing balanced budget proposals, however, which could backfire on Republican leaders trying to unify the conference.

Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, who signed onto the pledge and sponsored the Cut, Cap and Balance Bill said that a simple vote on a balanced budget amendment is not enough for him.

"I'm as no as you can possibly be, but I still hold out hope that Cut, Cap and Balance could lead to something productive" he said. "I mean, I did something I didn't think I'd ever do and that is vote to raise the debt ceiling. Totally contingent upon a balanced budget amendment being sent to the states."

Transcript: Obama's remarks on debt fight
Transcript: Boehner's remarks on debt fight
CBSNews.com special report: America's debt battle

The second issue that's been raised by fewer members, but is full of landmines, is the joint committee that Boehner's bill would create. Senior GOP leadership aides described it as a 12-member committee, equally divided between the parties from both the House and Senate. It would have broad jurisdiction over the next six months or so to devise a plan to further reduce the deficit. They could tackle tax and entitlement reforms and pass a package with a simple majority of the 12 members. A package with at least $1.6 trillion in savings would then be sent to the House and Senate for an up or down vote.

Tea Party freshman Rep. Tim Huelskam, R-Kan., put out a statement slamming the plan.

"If past is prologue, after 17 deficit reduction commissions since 1982, then we can anticipate these newly-promised cuts will be unlikely to materialize," he said.

Other members worry that the committee could embrace tax increases given there is no language in the Boehner plan explicitly barring that from happening. Rep. James Lankford, R-Okla., said there was some comfort in knowing that "if it's tax increases and it comes back towards this House this House still has to approve it so it's not this joint commission working on its own and they become force of law."

The third concern among members, and the one that leadership will likely have to work hardest to overcome, is that the Boehner plan does not do enough to cut spending immediately according to members. It would cut $24 billion in the next fiscal year in non-defense discretionary spending and then cap spending over the next ten years.

"I think you have to have real spending cuts this year" said Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas. "It can't be in the out years. There has to be substantial progress this year."

Barton also signed the pledge and in addition to higher spending cuts in the near-term, he wants a chance to vote on a balanced budget amendment. Despite those concerns, he said he is open to the Boehner plan.

"Give the Speaker credit for putting something out there that's substantive when the President is still talking sound bites." Barton said.

A Republican leadership aide said that the $24 trillion in savings would look a lot bigger if they hadn't already slashed spending this year as part of this year's budget bill. But expect to start hearing members compare the savings in FY 2012 to what President Obama actually proposed to spend which will make the savings look larger.

Boehner and his leadership team will have a short period of time to ease members concerns before the package is expected to come to the floor on Wednesday. One leadership aide was confident that if they can get the votes to pass the Boehner plan, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's plan would not have a chance. If the House passes the measure "the Senate will pass it and the President will sign it" the aide said.

From CBS MoneyWatch.com:

With 2 Sides Far Apart on Debt Ceiling Debate, Wall Street Shrugs (For Now)
Debt Ceiling Deal: Damned if They Do, Damned if They Don't
Federal Budget Gridlock: 5 Moves to Protect Your Money

15 Photos

War of words over the debt

[VicenteRodolfo]

Reuter's banned me for saying this: The TEA party have corrupted the GOP just to get audience! Boehner's a bumbling idiot boxed in by his TEA party. This TEA party is the extreme Democratic bigots who became Republican's in name only and lay dormant for a few years. Most of the extreme radicals of this movement are from the south. In the news is was said that "Whites" are more prone to vote TEA/GOP and The other 98% were more aligned with Democratic values. Boehner is crippled by the TEA party movement and any and all TEA/GOP-ers should scheduled themselves for a rectal encephalectomy so that they can see the real world.

[RobAla]

Just because President Obama calls taxing Americans more "balanced", it does not make it so. It is destructive to the private sector businesses, the real source of jobs. There is nothing "balanced" about maintaining a bloated federal government at the expense of even fewer jobs in the private sector. This is about as loop sided as it gets.

[RobAla]

Boehner is right, and President Obama is wrong.

Usually, when Washington talks about cuts to government spending, it is only talking about cuts to the automatic increases in federal government spending. Most federal programs have built in 7-8% increases, which is about twice the inflation rate (around 3%). I have a novel idea. Whey can't we just do the following?
1) Have no (that means 0%) increases in federal spending unless we reach a balanced budget and can afford it.
2) Have no tax increases.
3) Look for government waste and get rid of it.

I wonder how long it would take to bring federal spending under control without increases in taxes and any REAL cuts to the federal government. Has either political party done any analysis along these lines? If not, why not?

We have 2 main problems:
1) A staggering $14.4 trillion national debt, which we are adding $1.5 trillion to in deficit spending each year. How long can we keep this insanity up? This has to stop.
2) We have been maintaining a horrible 9% unemployment rate. It is absolutely irresponsible to further damage jobs in the private sector by increasing taxes. The President and many Democrats in the Senate want to feed the federal government by higher taxes on businesses and investors, which will certainly cost Americans more jobs in the private sector.

Enough of this lousy policies and bad economics! No additional taxes! It is time for the bloated federal government to be put on a diet. Why not just bring the expansion of the federal government to ZERO growth, cut waste, and leave the taxes where they are?

With a staggering $14.4 trillion national debt, and adding to it $1.5 trillion each year, it has to be obvious to even the village idiot that Washington politicians have irresponsibly lost total control of rational fiscal thinking. It light of this, how can anyone in their right mind be against a Balance Budget Amendment to the US Constitution that forces this irresponsible bunch of yahoos to control federal spending?

[010sonny]

Lets observe where, this political adventure, on our debt ceiling is going. I'll make a prediction as to how this will unfold. There will be no agreement and will continue to evolve. Now Boehner has a decision to make. {1} Are the cuts and the revenue increases worth pursuing or not. If they are then he will need to take all of the matured republicans, gather them up and dress up as Indians and go to the House and throw all the Tea out unto he waters of oblivion. Emulating our forefathers. Then go back and EGADS communicate with the democrats and come to terms. That would salvage the republican party for 2012. Illusion of leadership they will be able to sucker in more of the weak-minded to vote for them. Increasing odds of winning something.
{2} "OR" take it back for a clean debt ceiling raising and discuss these issues at a later debate and take his chances there. "OR"
{3} bring on the default hoping Obama and democrats to cave.

{1} Possible as Tea have been a discredit to his leadership.
{2} Likely to be, both save face, although he will lose this hand and be the jest of the Tea Baggers. Prognosis for Tea 2012 low and replacements may be more in line with politics.
{3} Not likely. Obama could play this card to further decimate republican creditability. By taking the reigns of our financials and heroically saving the nation from default. All republicans could do then is rhetoric of dictator, socialism, and so on. That will play as redundant, from the party of "No" leadership.
SOOOO after a week of more grand posturing from both sides to have their warriors identifying themselves and what they stand for they will decide on number {2}
Anyone for {1} or {3}?

[010sonny]

Tea flavored republicans demand spending cuts only and no revenue increases. Has anybody else observed the fallacy of that ideology. Simple "TRY IT AT HOME" No spending and No revenue and see what happens. Perhaps you can easily see what will happen. Credit out the window and interest rates galore. Food health soon to follow with security and your cave! Try It.. A day, a week, a month, a year, go ahead try it. Simple solution for stable budget that all are familiar with. 50/50 spending cut/ to /revenue increase.
Imbalance say to 85% spending Cuts to 15% revenue go ahead try it. If you can't do it then how in the world is the nation going to do it.?? That imbalance will lead to termination of competition to the world markets..
Similar to Boehner's speech last night. One liners of nothing. Even lied on national TV. Said the Cap Bill passed on a bipartisan vote!? Guess Fox was handling his Teleprompter. He also failed to mention that the Bill they passed was the same one they voted down a month ago. Bogus bill for a red herring razzle dazzle Boehner nonsense. Did not answerer the questions that Obama raised on where are the cuts to be made and have been made so far. "OR" why not close loopholes and subsides on oil companies that have paid no taxes, received millions in tax returns and demand subsides into the Billions. {Guess who owns these tax free corporations?}
All the while they played Wall Streets futures, on the fuel at the pump, to bloat the price of a gallon of gas to .80 over supply and demand. "OR" why does granny have to pay for it all while they pay nothing??? Yup! and the rest of these Tea flavored republicans demonstrate the same, distract, evade, lies and so on, methods for not addressing the facts!
Just like how they tried to sweep the heroes of 911 under the bus. Evade, distract, lie and so on. http://youtu.be/Knqpgj0x7xY LOL it took a comedian to shame them to do their political responsibilities; http://youtu.be/Knqpgj0x7xY Yeah when 2012 comes around all I have for the republicans false leadership is;
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

[liberalme]

Anyone who has to "run" his speech by Rush Lintabll before speaking is a person I don't want making decisions for MY country BONER---
This guy needs to be tarred, feathered and run out of towm with the rest of the naysayers--This country needs REAL CITIZENS running it not the posturing political prostitutes we have now.

[fxp111]

Given the intransigence of the Tea Party wing of the GOP it has become a no win situation for the country. The rating agencies are really just cover for the obvious. They may or may not change the rating, but everyone knows the problem is the political gridlock caused by the new GOP. A small ideological group has captured a national party and this is the problem. Can the country be run with this situation at hand? Nothing is going to get done, damage is going to be done until at least the next election. As the country falls apart, the voters will now have a choice.

[liberalme]

Actually, I love the Tea Party--they've brought the republicans to their knees with their division.
Now the Republicans have to decide who they really work for: America, Big Corporations or the Tea Party.
Watching them trip over themselves could be entertaining IF it directly affect the rest of us working schmucks.

[liberalme]

My post should read Watching them trip over themselves could be entertaining if it directly DIDN'T affect the rest of us.

[thomasmc1957]

Typical Republican policy: give tax loopholes to billionaires, and tax-breaks to multinational corporations who ship American jobs overseas, then try to pay for it all by taking food and medications away from the elderly poor.

If that isn't DEMONIC, I don't know what is!

[tsigili]

There are always going to be jackasses that refuse to compromise. The GOP seems to be filled with them.

On the other hand, the Dems refuse to compromise too.......but they do so, so they can continue to squander the country's money, and bankrupt us, so we are forced into submission as serfs to the wealthy in the Dem party.

Both parties want to enslave us.....the only difference, is the method.

[ssaintc]

Anyone, including current retirees, who don't think that the cut, cap and balance plan WON'T destroy what's left of our social safety nets is living in cloud cuckoo land.


As soon as it is ratified ( and who knows what misinforme?d Americans will support) and the Republican?s are in control of the congress there will be some crisis which means they must stop paying medicaid and medicare..?.


the next created crisis will end social security because "we have reached our spending limits"

[34sender]

You are behind the times, my friend. Cut Cap and Balance has already been voted down in the Senate.

I do agree with you about the phoney baloney GOP mantra concerning spending (which to date, they are equally if not more guilty of legislating) -- which is nothing more than an attempt to enact their long beloved goal of ending social safety plans that Americans like!

Why do people vote for these GOP phonies? Of yeah -- low information/ high emotionalism / deep seated bigotry... are the "base" people conned by the cons...

[Lindag10]

Sometimes I wonder why the Republicans don't just line up and shoot all us seniors and the disabled and put us out of our misery since they don't want us to have a decent life anyway.