Skip to main content

U.S. President Barack Obama speaks about the fiscal cliff to members of the media in the White House Briefing Room December 19, 2012.

KEVIN LAMARQUE/REUTERS

President Barack Obama insisted he is optimistic the "fiscal cliff" will be resolved, saying he and Republican House Speaker John Boehner are only a "few hundred billion dollars" apart.

"I've said I'm willing to make some cuts," Mr. Obama said at a news conference in Washington. "What separates us is probably a few hundred billion dollars. The idea that we would put our economy at risk because you can't bridge that gap doesn't make a lot of sense."

The comment came as talks on avoiding some $600-billion (U.S.) in scheduled tax increases and spending cuts – extreme budget austerity that has come to be known as the "fiscal cliff" – appear at risk of hitting another impasse.

Story continues below advertisement

Earlier Wednesday, White House spokesman Dan Pfeiffer said Mr. Obama would veto Mr. Boehner's "Plan B" proposal to protect everyone who earns less than $1-million from tax increases. The White House criticized the initiative as a gimmick that asks far too little of the country's wealthiest people. Mr. Boehner appeared intent on calling a vote on his plan regardless.

"Tomorrow, the House will pass legislation to make permanent tax relief for 98.1 per cent of American people," Mr. Boehner said in an appearance before reporters that lasted less than a minute. "Then the President will have a decision to make. He can call on Senate Democrats to pass that bill, or he can be responsible for the largest tax increase in American history."

The President – who called the news conference to announce that Vice-President Joe Biden will lead an ad-hoc commission on gun violence – said he'd like to finish a budget agreement with Mr. Boehner before Christmas. He also said he would reach out to congressional leaders over the next couple of days in an attempt to get a resolution.

However, Mr. Obama, who earlier this week offered for the first time to curb federal pension benefits, made no further concessions that might breathe life into talks that appeared at risk of running into another impasse.

"I'm prepared to get it done, but they're going to have to go ahead and make some adjustments," Mr. Obama said.

Most forecasters say failure to cushion the full impact of the "fiscal cliff" would cause a recession in 2013. Some $500-billion of the "cliff" is made up of temporary tax cuts that are due to expire. The rest comes from the first instalment of the across-the-board spending cuts that Congress and Mr. Obama agreed to last year as part of the agreement to raise the debt ceiling.

Even though the full force of those measures would only be felt over time, Jan. 1 has emerged as an arbitrary deadline to come up with a budget agreement. That means each side still has a time to hold out for a better deal. The rhetoric in Washington over the last 24 hours suggests politicians intend to use it.

Story continues below advertisement

Remove the bluster, and talks actually appear to be going well.

Mr. Boehner's willingness to call a vote on raising the tax rates of millionaires is a significant concession from a starting position of opposition to higher rates for anyone. Mr. Obama moved to meet him, calling for higher taxes on incomes above $400,000, a marked shift from his campaign pledge to raise the rates paid by households with annual incomes of more than $250,000. Mr. Obama now is seeking revenue of about $1.2-trillion over the next decade, and the latest Republican offer would generate $1-trillion.

The White House also has moved on spending. Mr. Obama this week said he would change the way Social Security and other benefit programs account for inflation, trimming benefits over the next decade by about $130-billion. The administration had stated earlier that it wanted to leave Social Security for another day. As with revenue, both sides are proposing spending cuts in the range of $1-trillion.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Cannabis pro newsletter