Boehner: Debt deal will include new tax revenues

Updated 5:41 p.m. Eastern Time

House Speaker John Boehner addressed one of the biggest sticking points for the 12 member Congressional "supercommittee" today, acknowledging that any bipartisan agreement will need to include some new tax revenue.

"I think there is room for revenues, but I think there clearly is a limit to the amount of revenues that are available," Boehner told reporters.

The comment was significant because Boehner and other Republican leaders have repeatedly insisted that tax increases are off the table, and most Republicans in the House and Senate have signed a "taxpayer protection pledge" vowing not to raise taxes.

That pledge was devised by Americans for Tax Reform, an advocacy group run by Grover Norquist, whom Boehner dismissed as "some random person in America" when he was asked about Norquist today. Later in the day, Boehner revised his comments.

"What I was attempting to do," he said, grinning, "was to suggest that Mr. Norquist, like millions of Americans, believes that raising taxes is not good for our economy."

Boehner insisted that Republicans would only compromise on tax revenue if Democrats were willing to take significant and painful steps to shore up Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. "Without real reform on the entitlement side, I don't know how you put any revenue on the table."

He said any new tax revenue would not come from raising rates but from overhauling the tax code, sweeping out loopholes and deductions in order to reduce individual and corporate rates.

"I do think that our efforts to have a flatter, fairer tax system, with our targets being 25 percent top rates for corporations, 25 percent top rates for individuals, is achievable. That means you clean out all the garbage. I think it's very important that it get done," Boehner said -- either by the supercommittee or by the relevant Congressional committees over the next year.

After meeting almost every day for weeks, the supercommittee has appeared stalled in recent days, as members huddle with their respective party leaders to determine their next move. "Expectations for the success of the Supercommittee are low," said a pessimistic House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD) earlier this week.

But today, Boehner expressed confidence the group would meet its goal of $1.2 trillion in debt reduction.

"I didn't agree to set this thing up with any idea that it wouldn't succeed," he said. "And I've been clear with everyone through this process that we have to meet the goal. I'd love to exceed the goal. But we have to meet the goal and I'm going to put every effort in to make sure that we do."

So what's holding up the talks? "It's the same conversation that's been going on all year," Boehner said. "They want more revenue than what we're willing to give, and they're not willing to do as much entitlement reform as we'd like to do." He indicated that he has been heavily involved in the minutiae of debt negotiations. "There's all kinds of discussions and permutations and models. I've seen more models than I can count about how you can do this. A lot of possibilities."

He was unwilling to list specific entitlement reforms under consideration, such as raising the retirement age, except to express support for switching to a new measurement of cost-of-living increases, often referred to as the chained CPI. "There's been some discussion about moving to one inflator that certainly has some merit that people have talked about," he said.

Boehner's comments about Norquist indicate that the anti-tax crusader -- and his pledge -- may be a thorn in Boehner's side as he attempts to negotiate this debt deal with Democrats. "My biggest regret I've had this year is that the President and I weren't able to come to an agreement on solving our...deficit and debt problems," Boehner said.

Norquist told CBS News he was confident Republicans would stick to their guns and reject any deal involving tax revenue increases.

"I understand that the (Democrats) are desperately trying to grasp at every straw that Republicans will raise taxes," Norquist said. "The Republicans are not going to raise taxes."

[starman5409]

Republican Actions??????? What actions????? The only things the Republicans are doing is what they always do - NOTHING. Keep blocking congress and the president, and at the next election, there won't be one single Republican left in office.

[noloyalisti]

Everything the Bonehead Republicons do are designed to take back power and continue their rape and pillage of the 99% for their corporate masters.

Well the 99% have woken up to these sold out villians and will take out Bonehead, all the Republicons and any Dems that don't meet the demands.

[noloyalisti]

This Top 1% Bonehead from the slimy, lying, cheating Republicon Party of No is now talking about TAX INCREASES. I'm sure this bozo from the Reverse Robin Hood Party of the 1% means we need to tax the poor more to give to the rich.

Anyone who votes for these scummy Republicons must be brain damaged.

[afmcalax]

Why would any voter vote for a candidate, either Democrat or Republican, that has already signed off on how they will vote on certain issues with a person that holds no elective office and does not even reside in their state? Norquist should not have veto power over duly elected officials. They should vote what is best for the country; not what is good for Norquist. People that sign pledges with no wiggle room for reality; do not deserve to be elected officials tasked with running the government and making compromises when needed.

[canislupus16]

Maybe Bonehead is starting to pay attention to the polls. I can't wait to see the composition of the House after November 2012. You win some, you lose some. The Republicans had a great opportunity to do the right thing, many right things, and they blew it.

[dire_ce]

Interesting that he will only talk about tax increases if hard decisions are made for medicare, medicade, and social security. So once again he will only be willing to listen when the 99% take another hit. He wants to talk about cutting entitlements that can bring in revenue...well imagine how much revenue would become available if those serving only one term in government are not allowed to take their taxpayer funded medical benefits for life with them? Think about it, if you work for a company and are fired you get no severence (like big bank execs do), you get no health coverage for 1 minute (unless you pay overpriced COBRA payments on your own)much less for life so why should taxpayers pay for their extended benefits? If an elected official is voted out after only one term it's because THEY DIDN'T DO THEIR JOB AND WERE FIRED!!!

Notice how NO ONE in washington is talking about eliminating this entitlement why, because no matter what party they belong to they are all selfish and only worry about themselves. Our founding fathers gave up so much, including their business, income, etc to fight to allow this country to remain free of soverign rule yet these clowns in washington wouldn't give up one nickle if asked to in order to serve their citizens!

The american public should be allowed to vote on whether this entitlement should remain for one term officials at the 2012 election.

[anonymous010]

"Without real reform on the entitlement side, I don't know how you put any revenue on the table."

*sighs* At least this is a crack in the BS facade of the Republicans. It still shows how unwilling to compromise they are - they want Democrats to make huge sacrifices before they're willing to give up even a little. I hope they're all voted out of office in the next cycle because they are NOT representing this nation's best interests.

[RunsWithWolves]

Boehner is lying. Either that or the Repubs may actualy be paying attention to the polls. Nah.........if they were paying attention to the polls, there would already be sizeable tax increases on the wealthy.
Repubs sense they may be in some serious trouble with voters now.

[konr22]

Chevyhotrod - You're dreaming. The majority of Americans supported Obamacare and many who didn't support it. Didn't support it because it didn't include the "public option". It's funny you really think the majority of Americans were on the side of the insurance companies ?

[167irishboy]

VOTE OUT ALL REPUBLICANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[todaypost]

yes, No one voted for Norquist. vote out all who are controlled by Norquist.

[P0ST1ING_AWAY]

by RobAla November 4, 2011 7:22 AM EDT
arthanyel: I want the bloated and wasteful federal government to begin to use public money in an efficient and affective manner BEFORE the public is asked to supply it with more hard earned money off the tables of Americans. This should come first, before we begin talking about any tax increases on American citizens. This makes me sick.
================================================
Robster:
Mail your queen (well, one of them) Michelle Bachmann and
tell her you want her to IMMEDIATELY stop feeding at the
public trough. Start with cutting her farm subsidies ......