Politics

December 28, 2012

Obama, Senate leaders on verge of deal to avoid 'fiscal cliff'

But questions remain about the House action if the deal passes the Senate.

By LORI MONTGOMERY PAUL KANE The Washington Post

WASHINGTON – President Obama and Senate leaders were on the verge of an agreement Friday that would let taxes rise on the wealthiest households while protecting the vast majority of Americans from historic tax increases due to hit in January.

click image to enlarge

President Obama speaks to reporters in the Brady Press Briefing Room at the White House in Washington on Friday after meeting with congressional leaders regarding the fiscal cliff.

The Associated Press

Related headlines

The development marked a breakthrough after weeks of paralysis. After meeting with Obama at the White House, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said they would work through the weekend in hopes of drafting a "fiscal cliff" package they could present to their colleagues Sunday afternoon.

As the Senate began haggling over critical details, the emerging deal faced an uncertain fate in the House, where Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, failed just one week ago to persuade his adamantly anti-tax caucus to let taxes rise even for millionaires.

Still, on Friday, Obama pronounced himself "modestly optimistic" at a brief news conference at the White House. The ordinarily dour McConnell said he was "hopeful and optimistic." And Reid immediately began preparing Senate Democrats for what could be a difficult vote.

"Whatever we come up with is going to be imperfect. Some people aren't going to like it. Some people will like it less," Reid said on the Senate floor before dozens of silent and attentive senators from both parties. But "we're going to do the best we can for ... the country that's waiting for us to make a decision."

According to people briefed on the talks, the developing package would protect nearly 30 million taxpayers from paying the alternative minimum tax for the first time and keep unemployment benefits flowing to 2 million people who otherwise would be cut off in January.

The deal also would likely halt a steep cut in Medicare reimbursements due to hit doctors in January and preserve popular tax breaks for both businesses and individuals, such as those for research and college tuition.

But the two sides were still at odds over a crucial issue: how to define the wealthy. Obama has proposed letting tax rates rise on income over $250,000 a year. Senate Republicans have in recent days expressed interest in a compromise that would lift that threshold to $400,000 a year, an offer Obama made to Boehner before the speaker abruptly broke off negotiations last week.

In addition to its political appeal, the $400,000 threshold has practical benefits, Republican aides said: It would limit tax increases to the top tax bracket rather than the top two brackets. And it would avoid a quirk of the tax code that would cause rates to rise more dramatically for those earning between $250,000 and $400,000 than for households with much larger incomes.

The two sides also had yet to agree on another politically sensitive issue: how to tax inherited estates. Republicans -- and many Senate Democrats from states with large family farms -- want to maintain the current tax structure, which exempts estates worth up to $5 million and taxes those above that level at 35 percent. Obama has proposed a $3.5 million exemption and a tax rate of 45 percent, a proposal that is far more acceptable to liberal Democrats.

There was also no agreement on how to handle roughly $100 billion in automatic spending cuts that are scheduled for the Pentagon and other federal departments in the fiscal year that ends in September.

At the White House meeting, where Boehner and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., joined Obama and the Senate leaders, Boehner insisted that House Republicans would refuse to delay or cancel the cuts, known as "sequestration," without fresh spending cuts to replace them. Democrats would find that proposition hard to accept.

(Continued on page 2)

Were you interviewed for this story? If so, please fill out our accuracy form

Send question/comment to the editors




Further Discussion

Here at PressHerald.com we value our readers and are committed to growing our community by encouraging you to add to the discussion. To ensure conscientious dialogue we have implemented a strict no-bullying policy. To participate, you must follow our Terms of Use.

Questions about the article? Add them below and we’ll try to answer them or do a follow-up post as soon as we can. Technical problems? Email them to us with an exact description of the problem. Make sure to include:
  • Type of computer or mobile device your are using
  • Exact operating system and browser you are viewing the site on (TIP: You can easily determine your operating system here.)


Blogs

More PPH Blogs