New Democrats keep merger door open (Reuters)

VANCOUVER (Reuters) – The New Democrat Party kept the door open on Sunday to a possible merger talks with the struggling Liberals, a party they leapfrogged over to become the main opposition in a May 2 election.

But New Democratic leader Jack Layton said the left-leaning party is in no rush to talk to the Liberals, and needs to concentrate on proving to voters it is now ready to replace the Conservatives as government.

New Democrats held a weekend convention in Vancouver following the election that gave the NDP the best showing in its 50-year history. It also boosted the Conservatives into a majority government status at the expense of the Liberals.

Delegates rejected a call by some party members to block the NDP from even discussing a merger with the once powerful Liberals, whose future has been thrown into chaos by its worst-ever election showing.

"There is, of course, no proposition to do that (merger), but the idea of encouraging Liberals to come and join with us, we're wide open to that," Layton told reporters.

The idea of a merger has also divided the Liberals, who decided this weekend to delay picking a new permanent leader for up to two years as they discuss how to rebuild the party's fortunes.

Although the NDP jumped over the Liberals to become the Conservatives' main opposition, many of its gains came in Quebec at the expense of the separatist Bloc Quebecois that saw its support evaporate in the May election.

Delegates in Vancouver also decided to postpone a vote on whether to drop the NDP's long-standing use of the word "socialism" from its constitution, a reference that reflects its link with Canada's union movement.

A Conservative Party official said the debate showed the NDP was divided over how to take advantage of its election success, but Layton dismissed that allegation.

"Some people perhaps feel that the selection of one adjective versus another is a monumental matter ... There was no disagreement on the values, it was about the nature of the label," he said.

Layton told delegates the NDP needs to use its new stature to push issues such as protecting the public health care system, aid to senior citizens and helping small businesses.

He said the NDP will also have to strengthen its fund-raising abilities. The Conservatives say they will use their new majority status to end the public financing the opposition parties have traditionally relied on.

(Reporting Allan Dowd, Editing Chris Wilson)

Yahoo! News

Democrats Join Threat to Hold Up Debt Ceiling Vote Without Spending Cuts

Reuters

In this June 12, 2010 photo, Sen. Mark Pryor speaks at a media conference at a command center near Caddo Gap, Ark.

President Obama is starting to feel pressure from his own party to tie spending cuts to a vote to raise the debt limit, even as the administration expresses confidence that Congress will ultimately raise the cap. 

The latest moderate Democrat to draw a line in the sand is Sen. Mark Pryor, D-Ark., who told members of a local political group Wednesday that he'll need to see a commitment to cut spending and overhaul the tax code in order to vote to raise the $14.3 trillion cap. The government is expected to reach that ceiling by mid-May. 

"What I've told anyone who will listen to me in Washington, including my leadership, is that I'm not going to vote for that unless there is a real and meaningful commitment to debt reduction," Pryor told the Political Animals Club at its monthly meeting at the governor's mansion. 

Pryor said he believed the upcoming vote on the debt limit would prove whether lawmakers in Washington have the political will to begin addressing government spending. Meanwhile, three Democrats and three Republicans in the Senate are trying to strike an agreement by early May that would call for spending cuts, as well as changes in the tax code, over the next decade. 

Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner suggested in interviews last weekend that bipartisan congressional leaders have assured the White House they would vote to raise the limit absent a deficit-reduction agreement. Geithner described such an agreement as necessary, but argued that it should not be tied to the debt vote as the possibility of not raising the cap is too fraught with financial risk. 

Republicans, though, continue to demand some semblance of a commitment to cut spending as a condition for their support. And a handful of Democrats have started to tiptoe over to their side. 

After Obama outlined a deficit-reduction plan a week ago, Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., said he needs to make sure the government is not paying for a "blank check" with borrowed money. 

"So let me also continue to be clear about my position on the debt ceiling," he said in a statement. "I strongly believe we must adopt a long-term, responsible and realistic fiscal plan that reflects our values and defines priorities, or I will vote against raising the debt ceiling." 

Reps. Mike Ross, D-Ark., and Dan Boren, D-Okla., leaders of the fiscally conservative Blue Dog Coalition in the House, also suggested in an interview with Fox News two months ago that members of their group would balk at the vote unless they see "significant cuts." 

"We can't default on our loans," Ross said at the time. "There's going to be a compromise, though." 

Administration officials and Democratic congressional leaders have warned of catastrophic consequences if Congress fails to raise the ceiling. The Treasury Department could avoid hitting the ceiling for several weeks beyond the projected mid-May deadline by employing some last-resort measures, but officials warn that eventually benefits payments would stop and the country would default. 

A number of Democrats in the rank-and-file have echoed those concerns. Dozens of House members have signed on to a letter from Rep. Peter Welch, D-Vt., calling for a "clean extension of the debt ceiling." 

"The debt ceiling vote is about one thing -- affirming that America pays its bills," they wrote, noting that the vote would not automatically authorize new spending, but rather allow the country to pay off existing obligations. 

Pryor, though, said the debt ceiling vote would have to coincide with a plan that includes spending cuts, major tax code changes and efforts to grow the nation's economy. He said every program will have to experience some cuts. 

"Everybody's going to have a cut, no matter how worthy your program is or how much wise you'll be with the money or the great things you'll do. Get ready, because everything's going to get cut," Pryor said. 

Pryor also faulted both parties for their approach to tax policy. 

"Democrats think that if we can just raise enough taxes on millionaires, we can solve our problems. Republicans think if we never raise another tax for any reason under any circumstance ever again, we'll solve all our problems," Pryor said. "The truth is, the math doesn't add up for either of those positions. What we need is real tax reform. There's a ton of inequity in our tax code." 

Pryor said he believed the debt commission appointed by Obama has provided a guide for lawmakers as they address the issue. That commission issued its recommendations, which included a mix of spending cuts and tax increases, but fell short of the votes needed to forward the recommendations on to Congress. 

Under the commission's recommendations, about $4 trillion would be slashed from the budget over the coming decade -- three-fourths of it through spending cuts and the other fourth from higher taxes. Pryor said he believed the so-called gang of six senators working on a bipartisan compromise is looking at those recommendations as a guide. 

"My sense is they'll take the debt commission's recommendations and they'll overlay that on top of the federal budget," Pryor said. 

Pryor, however, said he's not on board with every recommendation from the commission. For example, he said he wouldn't support the commission's recommendation to eliminate the mortgage interest deduction on federal income tax. 

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Print Email Share Comments Recommend Tweet View ArticleLeave a CommentSort: NewestSort: Oldest Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus. You must login to comment.

View Article

View All Comments

Latest Politics VideosMore »

View the Original article

Democrats, Republicans agree on a budget deal

Budget battle: Who won?STORY HIGHLIGHTSNEW: House approves the extensionNEW: Obama will sign it into law sometime Saturday, an official saysA temporary measure will keep the government funded through April 15The deal calls for $38.5 billion in spending cuts Washington (CNN) -- Democrats and Republicans narrowly averted a partial shutdown of the federal government Friday night, agreeing on a budget deal and a short-term funding extension little more than an hour before the clock struck midnight and time ran out.

The new funding extension, which cuts spending by $2 billion, will last through next Friday, April 15.

The Senate immediately passed the extension on a voice vote. The House of Representatives followed suit early Saturday morning.

A senior White House official told CNN that President Barack Obama is expected to sign the short term continuing resolution into law later Saturday.

And administration and congressional officials made clear that there would be no lapses in government funding.

View the Original article

Boehner: Obama, Democrats didn't lead on budget

But there's no mistaking the rhetoric from the GOP side. Boehner, flanked by his leadership team, said the nation is on the brink of a government shutdown because congressional Democrats and Obama failed to pass a budget last year.

"We are going to fight for the largest cuts we can get," Boehner said, along with the policy proposals dealing with funding for such things as Planned Parenthood and the Environmental Protection Agency. "Cutting spending leads to a better environment for job creation."

Boehner and the House GOP team said they will push for a one-week spending bill that cuts $12 billion from federal spending, but also pays for Pentagon operations. A vote could come as early as Thursday.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said earlier today that Obama would consider a "clean, very short-term" budget bill if that's what it takes to get a long-term deal that pays for government operations for the rest of fiscal year 2011, which ends Sept. 30.

See photos of: Barack ObamaTags:Barack ObamaJohn Boehner .div-wrapper

View the Original article

California Democrats Take Cue From Wisconsin GOP in Fight Over Budget Deal

FoxNews.com

Print Email Share Comments Recommend Tweet

A massive state deficit. A frustrated governor. Uncooperative lawmakers. Sound familiar?

Probably. But this battle is taking place not in Wisconsin, it's in California.

That's where Democratic lawmakers are considering using the same parliamentary tricks they claim Republicans used in Wisconsin, leveraging their majority power to cram down the minority's throat something their governor could not get at the negotiating table.

In Wisconsin, it was about collective bargaining. In California, it's about taxes.

"When you folks say no, no vote, no plan, no," Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown told Republicans. "That's not American. It's not acceptable."

"Give me a break," shot back Republican State Sen. Bob Huff. "They're taxes he's putting out there. He wants our guys to violate core principals to put this up to the people."

California needs $26 billion to balance its budget. Brown wanted roughly half in cuts, half in higher taxes. But he needed four Republican votes to put the tax hike on the ballot. After weeks of negotiation, talks broke down last week.

"Even though we came very close, there are issues that I think are impossible to resolve at this time," Brown told supporters in a You Tube video.

Republicans plan was to reduce spending and change the reward system for state employees.

They wanted:

-- a state spending cap based on population;

-- no state pension higher than the $106,000 -- something more than 500 state employees already have;

-- a 50-50 split on pension contributions from employees and employers, not the 90 percent taxpayers currently pay for most state pensions;

-- all new state employees would receive a 401K, not a state pension; and 

-- an end to seniority in education.

"One of the problems is the Democrats want something right now, the Republicans want something that is going to take a number of years. And frankly there is a lot of distrust between these parties," said economist Christopher Thornberg of Beacon Economics in Los Angeles.

California public employee unions oppose the pension reforms pushed by the GOP, making the package tough politically on Brown.

"I think he can dig in. I don't think this is about power bases or money bases as much as it is about his personal preferences," Thornberg said.

So where does the state go from here?

Democrats are planning to go around minority republicans to extend the temporary tax increase for another five years without the required two-thirds vote. That will be challenged in court.

Brown is barnstorming the state this week, gathering support to put the tax increase on the ballot in November should lawmakers fail.

Meanwhile voters are getting both barrels -- as Brown and the well-funded unions paint a picture of financial Armageddon if California is forced to balance its budget on cuts alone.

Print Email Share Comments Recommend Tweet View ArticleLeave a CommentSort: NewestSort: Oldest Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus. You must login to comment.

View Article

View All Comments

Latest Politics VideosMore »

View the Original article