Obama, GOP leaders lay down markers on budget deal

WASHINGTON (AP) - Taking little time to celebrate, President Barack Obama is setting out to leverage his re-election into legislative success in an upcoming showdown with congressional Republicans over taxes, deficits and the impending "fiscal cliff." House Speaker John Boehner says Republicans are willing to consider some form of higher tax revenue as part of the solution - but only "under the right conditions."
All sides are setting out opening arguments for the negotiations to come.
Even before returning to Washington from his hometown of Chicago, Obama was on the phone Wednesday with the four top leaders of the House and Senate - Boehner included - to talk about the lame-duck Congress that convenes just one week after Election Day.
Without a budget deal to head off the fiscal showdown, the nation faces a combination of expiring Bush-era tax cuts and steep across-the-board spending cuts that could total $800 billion next year. Economists have warned that could tip the nation back into recession.
Vice President Joe Biden, flying to his home in Delaware from Chicago, told reporters aboard Air Force Two that the White House was "really anxious" to get moving on the problem. He said he'd been making a lot of calls and "people know we've got to get down to work and I think they're ready to move." He didn't identify whom he'd been speaking with but predicted the "fever will break" on past legislative gridlock after some soul-searching by Republicans.
The White House held out this week's election results as a mandate from voters for greater cooperation between the White House and Congress. At the same time, it reiterated Obama's top priorities: cutting taxes for middle-class families and small businesses, creating jobs and cutting the deficit "in a balanced way" - through a combination of tax increases on wealthier Americans and spending cuts.
Obama told the congressional leaders he believed "the American people sent a message in yesterday's election that leaders in both parties need to put aside their partisan interests and work with common purpose to put the interests of the American people and the American economy first," the White House said in a statement.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., channeled Obama in calling for a quick solution to the fiscal showdown and saying that asking "the richest of the rich" to pay more should be part of the equation. He added that he'd "do everything within my power to be as conciliatory as possible" but added, "I want everyone to also understand you can't push us around."
"Waiting for a month, six weeks, six months, that's not going to solve the problem," Reid said on Capitol Hill. "We know what needs to be done. And so I think that we should just roll up our sleeves and get it done."
Former Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle said the postelection congressional session offers a good chance to reset the dynamics between the White House and congressional Republicans in search of compromise.
"I think there's the urgency of the matter that probably goes beyond anything we've seen to date," he said. "The urgency of the repercussions of driving off the cliff are so grave that I can't imagine that failure is an option."
Both Biden and Reid pointed to election exit poll results showing that most Americans support higher taxes on the wealthy.
Biden said there was "a clear sort of mandate about people coming much closer to our view about how to deal with tax policy," adding that "there's all kinds of potential to be able to reach a rational, principled compromise."
Boehner, for his part, said that for Obama to get support for new revenues, "the president must be willing to reduce spending and shore up the entitlement programs that are the primary drivers of our debt."
"We aren't seeking to impose our will on the president; we're asking him to make good on his 'balanced' approach," the Ohio Republican said on Capitol Hill.
The reference to a balanced approach to deficit reduction reflected Obama's campaign-long call for higher taxes on incomes above $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for couples. That was something Boehner made plain he opposes.
The House speaker said conditions on higher taxes would include a revamped tax code to make it cleaner and fairer, fewer loopholes and lower rates for all, adding that "we're closer than we think to the critical mass needed legislatively to get tax reform done."
Boehner did not specify what loopholes House Republicans might consider trimming.
Obama spent a rare morning off Wednesday at his home on Chicago's South Side, then stopped off at campaign headquarters to meet privately with staff and thank them for their work in the long, grueling campaign. Workers climbed on top of desks to get a good look at the president.
Then Obama and his family flew back to Washington together on Air Force One. The president appeared to be in a good mood, racing younger daughter Sasha up the steps, then calling out "Come on slowpokes" to wife Michelle and older daughter Malia.
All sides are setting out opening arguments for the negotiations to come.
Even before returning to Washington from his hometown of Chicago, Obama was on the phone Wednesday with the four top leaders of the House and Senate - Boehner included - to talk about the lame-duck Congress that convenes just one week after Election Day.
Without a budget deal to head off the fiscal showdown, the nation faces a combination of expiring Bush-era tax cuts and steep across-the-board spending cuts that could total $800 billion next year. Economists have warned that could tip the nation back into recession.
Vice President Joe Biden, flying to his home in Delaware from Chicago, told reporters aboard Air Force Two that the White House was "really anxious" to get moving on the problem. He said he'd been making a lot of calls and "people know we've got to get down to work and I think they're ready to move." He didn't identify whom he'd been speaking with but predicted the "fever will break" on past legislative gridlock after some soul-searching by Republicans.
The White House held out this week's election results as a mandate from voters for greater cooperation between the White House and Congress. At the same time, it reiterated Obama's top priorities: cutting taxes for middle-class families and small businesses, creating jobs and cutting the deficit "in a balanced way" - through a combination of tax increases on wealthier Americans and spending cuts.
Obama told the congressional leaders he believed "the American people sent a message in yesterday's election that leaders in both parties need to put aside their partisan interests and work with common purpose to put the interests of the American people and the American economy first," the White House said in a statement.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., channeled Obama in calling for a quick solution to the fiscal showdown and saying that asking "the richest of the rich" to pay more should be part of the equation. He added that he'd "do everything within my power to be as conciliatory as possible" but added, "I want everyone to also understand you can't push us around."
"Waiting for a month, six weeks, six months, that's not going to solve the problem," Reid said on Capitol Hill. "We know what needs to be done. And so I think that we should just roll up our sleeves and get it done."
Former Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle said the postelection congressional session offers a good chance to reset the dynamics between the White House and congressional Republicans in search of compromise.
"I think there's the urgency of the matter that probably goes beyond anything we've seen to date," he said. "The urgency of the repercussions of driving off the cliff are so grave that I can't imagine that failure is an option."
Both Biden and Reid pointed to election exit poll results showing that most Americans support higher taxes on the wealthy.
Biden said there was "a clear sort of mandate about people coming much closer to our view about how to deal with tax policy," adding that "there's all kinds of potential to be able to reach a rational, principled compromise."
Boehner, for his part, said that for Obama to get support for new revenues, "the president must be willing to reduce spending and shore up the entitlement programs that are the primary drivers of our debt."
"We aren't seeking to impose our will on the president; we're asking him to make good on his 'balanced' approach," the Ohio Republican said on Capitol Hill.
The reference to a balanced approach to deficit reduction reflected Obama's campaign-long call for higher taxes on incomes above $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for couples. That was something Boehner made plain he opposes.
The House speaker said conditions on higher taxes would include a revamped tax code to make it cleaner and fairer, fewer loopholes and lower rates for all, adding that "we're closer than we think to the critical mass needed legislatively to get tax reform done."
Boehner did not specify what loopholes House Republicans might consider trimming.
Obama spent a rare morning off Wednesday at his home on Chicago's South Side, then stopped off at campaign headquarters to meet privately with staff and thank them for their work in the long, grueling campaign. Workers climbed on top of desks to get a good look at the president.
Then Obama and his family flew back to Washington together on Air Force One. The president appeared to be in a good mood, racing younger daughter Sasha up the steps, then calling out "Come on slowpokes" to wife Michelle and older daughter Malia.
1. All tax loopholes first need to be closed...and people who try to hide their fortunes need to be penalized to the harshest extent of the LAW!
2. Bush's tax cuts need to be eliminated and tax cuts without full means of showing where cuts for said tax cuts will be accounted for TODAY not 20 years from now or they cannot happen / be enacted!
3. Companies who keep money out of the country to mask taxes on profits need to be taxed on that foreign currency ... you are based in the US you have all your profit to pay taxes on period! cost of doing business in the USA! Don't' like it your goods will not make it to the customers here...maybe we will then make more stuff ourselves again!
4. The deficit on the next budget needs to be ZERO and a mandatory surplus must be present on every year!
5. Trade deficit must go! Countries such as china need to take in more of our goods and no longer be allowed to do things tariff FREE!
Â
...That should get you ladies started... now start today, NOT six months from NOW you have a lot of catching up to do! Chop Chop!
Yes, the democrats won the presidency and the senate. Yes, the republicans won the house.Â
Â
The issue is not one party being selfish, but that there are two Americas.Â
I honestly have just a little less respect for each and every one of you who didn't vote 3rd party or no candidate at all. Every four years everyone mindlessly perpetuates the very things they whine about on here. If you can't see that democrat and republican are two sides of the same coin, you have a lot of reading up to do. Turn off CNN. Turn off Fox News. Get a mind of your own. Vote sensibly.Â
 @jowsuf "a little less respect for each and every one of you who didn't vote 3rd party or no candidate at all"
And why do you have so little respect for someone who just happens to not agree with you? Do you really think that everyone should think like you do? The fact is, every one in this country - including you - is free to think as they wish, and should not be subject to disrespect from anyone. That is what makes this nation so great.
 @OrcasThunder It isn't the fact that they disagree with me, it's that everyone votes for people who clearly don't address or change the very things they're always screaming about on here. Believing what a campaign commercial or political pundit says is the pinnacle of ignorance.
@OrcasThunder "But given the list of 3rd party options, how do THEY address the things that I care about? The answer is that not one of them offered as broad a range of ideas on the issues we face as either Obama or Romney."
I found information to the contrary. You didn't read enough if you didn't find it as well. I said I wouldn't take the bait, but come on. You're grasping at straws. Just stop.
Â
 @jowsuf Hey, I am not the one who made the absolute statement that if I didn't find what I was looking for in the 3rd party candidates, I wasn't "looking hard enough". That's pretty much what "judgmental" means...
 @OrcasThunder I found my answers. You didn't find what you were looking for. You found them elsewhere. Either way, no judgement was made, and you're trying very hard to be offended, for what I can only guess is a reason to keep arguing because you disagree with me. I'm not taking the bait. I've laid out my opinions, so you should have no reason to keep prattling on. After all, I'm free to think as I wish, and should not be subject to disrespect from anyone, yes?
 @jowsuf "Logic then dictates you didn't read enough."
Hardly.
That same argument is tried by religious people who insist that all the answers are in the holy books..it simply isn't true.
What it is is self serving and and arrogant - maybe I just found what I wanted somewhere else.
Â
 @OrcasThunder You didn't find the information you were looking for in 3rd party candidates. I did. Logic then dictates you didn't read enough. That isn't a judgement. The bottom line is, 3rd party candidates aren't allowed the same exposure as the two main parties. We all know what we COULD do, but if one candidate doesn't have the same privileges as others, they will not have the same opportunities to reap the same rewards.
 @jowsuf "If you didn't see that, you didn't read enough"
O.
K.
Â
Not being judgmental there, are you?
It costs very little to buy a domain and create a website, and even post on YouTube and the other sites that allow getting the word out - there are so many out there that cover every aspect of life in America, so why not run a political campaign completely on the web? Hold your own debates and raise funds all on the internet. With the low costs of web advertizing how hard would it be to get your face on every Google search?
The fact is, there are ways to get people to notice you - in fact, for some people, the hard part is to keep people from focusing on you...
There is an election coming up in 2016, time to get started...
 @OrcasThunder I'd be willing to bet if those candidates were allowed to take part in the presidential debates you might not think so. I did my research, and the candidate I chose had clear ideas and plans for all the major issues Obama and Romney campaigned about. If you didn't see that, you didn't read enough, I guess. Just because they aren't on TV bashing each other doesn't mean the information you're looking for isn't out there.
 @jowsuf "it's that everyone votes for people who clearly don't address or change the very things they're always screaming about on here."
But given the list of 3rd party options, how do THEY address the things that I care about?
The answer is that not one of them offered as broad a range of ideas on the issues we face as either Obama or Romney. Their niches - and thus their appeal - were simply too small to run the major functions of the Presidency.
Â
 @jowsuf I honestly have a LOT less respect for you, who object just for objection's sake, and who apparently mindlessly vote 3rd-party (or worse, no candidate), even though there's no viable, better 3rd-party candidate.
 @Rentonese This isn't objection for objection's sake. I did not mindlessly vote 3rd party. I read up on EVERY presidential candidate on the ballot. There ARE other very capable and viable candidates. It is immensely ignorant to claim none of them would be viable choices over a republican or democrat. Mass media exposure and lots of money don't make a good presidential candidate. I voted for the 3rd party candidate of my choice because that person reflected my values and I felt their plan for America was sound, reasonable, viable, American, and would lead our nation in the right direction. I don't vote for candidates that only promote half of what I believe in or declare intentions that they don't follow through with. I don't vote for a "lesser evil." I vote for what I believe would be the best choice for the country I live in, and in my opinion, neither major party candidate fit the bill. That is an informed opinion and a responsible decision as an American.Â
The Republicans must find out what hurt their party the most ----WORK AGAINST THE PEOPLE,
WHINNING,POOR LEADERSHIP, BAD APPLES etc,shape up gang !
Well it's nice to see Boehner open the door of cooperation just enough to stick his nose through it.
I seriously doubt he and his GOP cronies will cooperate without being dragged kicking and screaming.
I went to Faux News to see what their take on the election was. (clearly for entertainment purposes)
It's amazing that instead of taking personal responsibility for losing the election they blame everyone else.
Republicans and Democrats should each create a list of what they want. When they meet, they should highlight areas they agree (hopefully they agree on something). Once those are addressed they should go down their remaining lists and give half of what the democrats want and half of what the Republicans want. The only way to get through this mess is for the Democrats to give the Republicans half of what they want and vice versa.
Â
I think most people are missing the fact that the money to get this country back on track needs to come from somewhere. Republicans have a plan that would get that money. The Democrats also have a plan. It's important to realize that the money is not just going to appear. Everyone in this country is going to have to sacrifice at least something. If divided out, the debt equals tens of thousands of dollars for each person. That number is not going to disappear by only taxing the rich and corporate, but is most likely part of the solution. A balanced approach is needed.
Mr Boehner needs to give up his ideas that the wealthy folks wont pay more in taxes. its time. Closing loopholes are great.. as long as those loopholes effect corporations like Big Oil and not the average American who depends on the mortgage deduction. America has spoken and it is clear that we want both sides to work together... and Mr Boehner, that doesnt mean saying "I'll only talk to you if you agree to everything I say."
@EMDF9A Polls show a strong majority of Americans favor higher taxes on the wealthy, and Obama campaigned on the promise that he will push for it. Well guess what, he was just re-elected. If Republicans refuse to budge on this, after the American people just spoke loud and clear, it is political suicide for them.
 @Superman_1967  @EMDF9A I voted for Obama, but it's abundantly clear that this country is still divided considering how close the popular vote was and how the House is still under Republican control. Divisiveness in the country is most likely going to pave the way for a wild ride. I hope I'm wrong of course.Â
 @EMDF9A I somewhat agree with you aside from the argument of leaving the avg. person alone. I think big corporations and wealthy should be a part of the solution, but you and I will ultimately need to help as well. There is too much debt for simply the wealthy and corporate to fix this. Our entitlement programs need to become more efficient and dynamic to changing demographics (if people live longer, maybe we should increase the social security age as just one simple example). If we don't become more dynamic/efficient, we will continue getting further behind and eventually end up like Greece. If we have the funding to give avg. people a $750 child credit instead of $1000, we have to do that (maybe that increases during boom times). We can't just keep providing the same entitlements if the money isn't there which comes back to my dynamic approach. Anyway, that's just my opinion.
 @Paddy  @EMDF9A Regarding your thoughts on the social security age change. For some people this wouldn't be a problem. For others. it really creates a hardship. People who work as firefighters, construction workers, painters, etc. cannot continue to punish their bodies the way they could when they were young. Speaking for myself,  I retired a few months before my 67th birthday. I would have loved to keep working but my old eyes betrayed me and ruled that out.Â
So many of them have worked at their trade for their whole lives and telling them to find another job when they are in their later years is easier said than done.Â
Â
I do agree that cuts need to be made in addition to doing things more efficiently.
 @Paddy  @EMDF9A Unless you happen to know someone in the trades you probably wouldn't think of it.Â
As I see it, the only way to add funding is to increase the monthly deduction and/or raise the cap on when they stop taking deductions. But then, you would also have to increase the payout. So I suppose it would then depend on the population numbers at any given time to know if that would actually add anything. I'll leave it to better minds than mind.Â
Â
 @Darn it!  @Paddy  @EMDF9A You made a very solid point that I hadn't considered. I absolutely think there should reasonable exceptions based on trade (that might be tricky to implement though). My father has worked for the King County Sheriff's office for 30+ years. During that time he has taken some beatings. Even though he now is behind a desk, I realize not everyone has that luxury.
Â
I was just stating an idea. I realize more would need to be done than simply raising the retirement age. There will most likely need to be added funding as well if we want to keep it solvent. Regardless, it's going to be painful to get things back on track and some will suffer more than others. Thanks for pointing that out.
This comment has been deleted
 @the unvarnished truth actually your wrong, there must be both. You must have a consumer base to be able to sell anything you produce. Without the demand, the supply is worthless.
Â
The "entitlements" that we love, aren't there because we want them for free, they need to be paid for. Increased taxation of the wealthiest Americans will help defer that without burdening the majority of American citizens.Things like socialized health care are good things. You walk into a hospital and get the treatment you NEED, rather then the treatment the insurance companies will pay for.Food stamps, another "entitlement", oh yeah lets get rid of this, lets stop feeding the poorest of our citizens, that'll help our budget....NOT! Ending this would create more crime, but then I guess the rich like crime.
Â
SSI, well this is something that needs to be fixed. Currently there is a reported 40% of our workforce on SSI. 40% !?!?!?!? that is a HUGE number. How many of those people are on SSI are healthy enough to work? I know there are many who actually deserve SSI. I know there are many who don't.
Â
There will ALWAYS be people who will abuse the system. I am all for harsh punishments. All for giving a reason to see that you must live with the consequences of your actions. Eliminate waste by enforcement, not by eliminating programs.