opinion web
Conservative Opinion General Opinion
Joe Conason
Joe Conason
12 Feb 2016
What Does Sanders Really Believe About Clinton?

When they debate, the Senator from Vermont usually refers to the former secretary of state as his "friend" &#… Read More.

11 Feb 2016
The Guest of Honor

Joe Conason is off this week. The following column is by Mark Shields. Tell me Paris Hilton will be this year'… Read More.

29 Jan 2016
Is There Only One True Progressive?

In our polarized politics, the Democratic Party is trending leftward — not as sharply or as rapidly as … Read More.

Arithmetic For Republicans: Why Boehner's 'Offer' Just Doesn't Add Up


If President Obama honestly wants to negotiate an agreement with Republicans before the year-end fiscal deadline, he must be deeply frustrated. And if he doesn't really want to negotiate with them, then he should be delighted, for the same reason: Their latest "offer" laid before him by House Speaker John Boehner demonstrates again their refusal to reveal their true intentions — and their inability to do simple arithmetic.

Consider their treatment of Medicare, the popular social insurance program for seniors that Republicans have always despised. They have just emerged from a long national campaign in which they repeatedly and falsely claimed to "protect" Medicare from the president — whom they accused of wanting to slash $716 billion from the program — but now they complain that he won't cut it enough. The Obama cuts were mythical, but the Boehner budget proposal includes at least $600 billion in Medicare and Medicaid reductions.

Worse still, the Republicans propose to perform this crude surgery on Medicare without the slightest explanation of where they would cut. Washington rumors suggest that they would achieve some of those cuts over the next 10 years by raising the eligibility age by two years to 67 and by increasing premiums for more affluent beneficiaries.

As Robert Greenstein of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities pointed out on Tuesday, however, those changes would not begin to achieve the savings required by the Boehner proposal.

The same problem undermines the other aspects of Boehner's proposal, which includes $600 billion in additional unspecified cuts.

Either their arithmetic doesn't work — or, as Greenstein worries, they mean to inflict severe cuts in health and other services that would harm elderly and poor Americans, but want to conceal those consequences from the public.

Yet there is an even deeper problem with Boehner's arithmetic. The Republicans are fighting to extend all the Bush tax cuts to the wealthiest two percent along with everyone else — but their alternative proposals are utterly inadequate to compensate for the $1.3 trillion in revenues lost by continuing those cuts for the rich. To "offer" $800 billion in new "revenues" obtained by eliminating deductions rather than raising rates simply doesn't work, as a matter of basic math. It isn't nearly enough money.

If Republican leaders cannot do the arithmetic, then it is impossible to negotiate with them. If they can do the arithmetic but insist on falsifying the answers, then it is both unwise and impossible to negotiate with them.

Unless and until the Republicans start talking about real numbers that can actually add up, there is nothing to be gained from pretending to negotiate. Nor should the president start negotiating with himself, as he has sometimes done in the past. Instead, he ought to make sure that the opposition understands what will happen when they fail to act responsibly. After Jan. 1, he will bring them an offer they cannot refuse to restore cuts for the 98 percent — and they will be held accountable for any consequences caused in the meantime by their stalling.

To find out more about Joe Conason, visit the Creators Syndicate website at



3 Comments | Post Comment
Mr. Conason, you are an ass. Presdient Obama's proposal offered $1 of spending cuts for every $4 of tax increase. This is the balanced approach the President favors. What is your math? Why do Republicans have to make up $1.3 trillion in revenue? By making the so called "Bush tax cuts" permanant for all, collecting $800 billion by closing loopholes, and cutting an additional $1.2 trillion (by your own article) that seems pretty balanced to me. Why does Presidents Obamas math work better than Republican math?
Comment: #1
Posted by: david
Thu Dec 6, 2012 11:07 AM
The difference between liberals and conservatives is that conservatives believe you are lucky to have been born in America, the greatest country in the world, suck it up and make something of yourself. Liberals believe the same thing except the realize that people sometimes get a raw deal in a life and need some help for a while. We all wish that an inefficient federal beaucracy wasn't the venue but we all know nobody else is going to do it.
Comment: #2
Posted by: Steve Powers
Sat Dec 8, 2012 8:16 AM
As usual, our "conservative" respondents miss the forest for the trees. The GOP has brought us to the brink of catastrophe and now hopes to blame their total failures on "liberalism". There is nothing conservative about the republicans agenda. If its a matter of guns and butter, clearly, the nation that spends more than the entire world combined on defense maybe they should reconsider their priorities. If its a question of values, perhaps they should reconsider what "the Christian thing to do", really means. If its a question of growth, perhaps they might consider giving a leg up to those who don't already possess all the means required to achieve it. Republicans have failed to bring safety, prosperity or even real Christian values, (aside from a disconcerting obsession with sex). The Boehner budget was a clear profile in cowardice, totally failing to propose any real means of delivering on their policy goals, hoping that by saying the words, "cutting spending", they could avoid the real consequences of defining the actual cuts. Thus, conservatives have failed to lead and refuse to follow, now that the election is over can you please just get out of the way?
Comment: #3
Posted by: Norm W.
Sat Dec 8, 2012 9:35 AM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right: comments policy
Joe Conason
Feb. `16
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
31 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 1 2 3 4 5
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Mark Shields
Mark ShieldsUpdated 13 Feb 2016
Susan EstrichUpdated 12 Feb 2016
Marc Dion
Marc DionUpdated 12 Feb 2016

4 Mar 2015 Is This a Scandal -- Or a 'Scandal'?

18 Oct 2013 Peterson Study: Tea Party Extremism Cost Millions of Jobs, Risks Millions More

18 Mar 2010 Right Wing Gone Wild