Boehner: spending curbs, no tax hikes for debt deal

WASHINGTON Mon Jul 11, 2011 11:23am EDT

Speaker of the House John Boehner speaks about the jobs numbers during a news conference in the Capitol in Washington July 8, 2011. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

Speaker of the House John Boehner speaks about the jobs numbers during a news conference in the Capitol in Washington July 8, 2011.

Credit: Reuters/Kevin Lamarque

Related Video

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - John Boehner, the top Republican in Congress, told White House talks on Sunday that budget cuts must exceed the amount by which the debt ceiling is raised and said any deal must exclude tax hikes.

An agreement that builds on the work of a group led by Vice President Joe Biden show most promise, an aide to Boehner said on Sunday after negotiations at the White House that lasted about 75 minutes.

"The Speaker told the group that he believes a package based on the work of the Biden group is the most viable option at this time for moving forward," the aide said.

Boehner told Sunday's session that Republicans consider as "fundamental principles" that spending cuts should exceed the amount they will agree raise the debt ceiling, and that any deal will restrain future spending and include "no tax hikes."

(Reporting by Laura MacInnis and Caren Bohan)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see
Comments (53)
TheNewWorld wrote:
A word of advice to Beohner. Holding the US economy hostage to push your ideology is going to backfire on you. If no deal is reached, the Republicans will be blamed for the ensuing mess. These are the same Republicans who passed debt limit increases multiple times while Bush was president. You also increase the budget deficit from nearly zero (none on paper through a little accounting ingenuity) to 600 billion plus. And all of this was considered necessary 4-6 years ago.

I have a memory, and while I don’t think the Democrats are better, I am not going to fall for the Republican grand standing either.

Jul 10, 2011 9:45pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
EdNYC wrote:
Elections have consequences, 2008.

Nancy and the gang were elected in 2008. From that election we had Obamacare and what was mostly an $800 BILLION dollar (plus) public labor union support package shoved down out throat.. err.. ‘passed’.

Elections have consequences, 2010.

Now Obama and Nancy need to hear the will of the people that elected the House in 2010. They, not the Republicans, are the ones who have 10 days to get in line.

I hope they can figure it out to get it done in time.

It will be a shame if they don’t.

Jul 10, 2011 9:47pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
inverse137 wrote:
Boehner is such a weiner.

Some brain dead neo-con is going to have to explain to me how you dig your way out of $14 TRILLION ( you know, with a T) debt without increasing revenue (you know…raising taxes.)

And NO, Reagonomics, I mean supply side economics, I mean Bush-Grow-your-way-out-of-it-enomics DOES NOT WORK.

Want to know what corporations do when you lower their tax rates to encourage growth (i.e job creation)? They 1) pay undeserved executive bonuses, 2) strip, steamline and “make more efficient” (read: lay people off) to facilitate #1 AND 3) horde cash to facilitate #1.

Your misguided dream of low corporate taxes does not work. Do I need to explain that to you again?

How are those job creations coming along with low corporate taxes? Oh, that’s right…jobs aren’t being created but corporations have record cash reserves. Cash in the bank is cash not working for you OR cash being put back into the company to grow (or, for our needs…CREATE JOBS.)

Any company not increasing their workforce by 10% should not be enjoying reduced taxes.

Jul 10, 2011 9:56pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.