April 24, 2024

You are here: Home / Archives for john a boehner

Senate Nears Approval of Measure to Punish China Over Currency Manipulation

October 7, 2011 by Leave a Comment

After eight years, that campaign is on the verge of a breakthrough, as the Senate appeared ready Thursday to approve a get-tough approach that had stalled numerous times before: a bill to punish China with high tariffs on some exports if it fails to adopt a market-driven exchange rate.

Economists say China’s artificially cheap currency has cost the United States jobs and billions in lost trade. But opponents of tariffs, including major manufacturers doing business in China, warn that penalizing China could start a trade war that would hurt American businesses even more.

“We’re already in a trade war,” Senator Charles E. Schumer, the New York Democrat who has led the push for tariffs, said in an interview. “We can’t afford to just do nothing. This is a message to China that the jig is finally up.”

The American jobless problem have combined to give the tariff proposal newfound momentum, as the Senate spent much of the afternoon Thursday debating it.

Supporters, casting the measure as a way to spur job growth, were confident the Senate would approve it. Even the measure’s fiercest opponents were grudgingly predicting passage in the Senate, and probably the House.

But 11-hour resistance by leading Republicans has clouded the outcome in the House, where the speaker, John A. Boehner, this week called the tariff plan “dangerous,” and it is unclear if the issue will even come up for a House vote.

China itself voiced strong objections this week and charged that meddling by the United States in Chinese currency violated world trade protocols. The Chinese Embassy has retained one of Washington’s most powerful lobbying shops, Patton Boggs, to represent its interests for $420,000 a year.

Lobbyists for General Motors, Caterpillar, steel producers, textile manufacturers, toy makers, poultry farmers and other businesses have also weighed in, supporting or opposing the tariffs depending on their own business relations with China.

Generally, large manufacturers like Caterpillar that operate in China have opposed it, warning of a backlash. Smaller businesses, like a tube maker in Ohio or a ceramics maker in upstate New York, have supported tariffs because they say China has artificially lowered its prices and gained an unfair edge.

While the Chinese renminbi has risen 6 percent against the dollar since China loosened currency controls last year, economists say it is still vastly undervalued. Meanwhile, China’s trade surplus with the United States stands at $273 billion — more than triple the gap a decade earlier.

In Senate testimony this week, the Federal Reserve chairman, Ben S. Bernanke, went so far as to link China’s undervaluing of its currency to the slow economic recovery worldwide.

“The Chinese currency policy is blocking that process,” Mr. Bernanke testified. “And so it is to some extent hurting the recovery process.”

The Obama administration, however, has been noncommittal about the tariff proposal.

At a news conference on Thursday, President Obama would not say whether he would veto the bill it if it passed, but he raised concerns.

On the one hand, he said, “China has been very aggressive in gaming the trading system to its advantage,” and “it is indisputable that they intervene heavily in the currency markets.”

But he cautioned that he did not want to see the World Trade Organization strike down any steps the United States might take. “Then suddenly U.S. companies are subject to a whole bunch of sanctions,” Mr. Obama said.

Both supporters and opponents of the tariffs see the outcome as hugely significant financially and politically.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/07/business/senate-nears-approval-of-measure-to-punish-china-over-currency-manipulation.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Filed Under: Global Business Tagged With: , ,

Obama Deficit Plan Cuts Entitlements and Raises Taxes on Rich

September 19, 2011 by Leave a Comment

The plan, which Mr. Obama will lay out Monday morning at the White House, is the administration’s opening move in sweeping negotiations on deficit reduction to be taken up by a joint House-Senate committee over the next two months. If a deal is not struck by Dec. 23, cuts could take effect automatically across government agencies.

Mr. Obama will call for $1.5 trillion in tax increases, primarily on the wealthy, through a combination of closing loopholes and limiting the amount that high earners can deduct. The proposal also includes $580 billion in adjustments to health and entitlement programs, including $248 billion to Medicare and $72 billion to Medicaid. Administration officials said that the Medicare cuts would not come from an increase in the Medicare eligibility age.

Senior administration officials who briefed reporters on some of the details of Mr. Obama’s proposal said that the plan also counts a savings of $1.1 trillion from the ending of the American combat mission in Iraq and the withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan.

In laying out his proposal, aides said, Mr. Obama will expressly promise to veto any legislation that seeks to cut the deficit through spending cuts alone and does not include revenue increases in the form of tax increases on the wealthy.

That veto threat will put the president on a direct collision course with the House speaker, John A. Boehner, who said last week that he would not support any legislation that included revenue increases in the form of higher taxes.

Mr. Obama’s proposal is certain to receive sharp criticism from Congressional Republicans, who on Sunday were already taking apart one element of the proposal that the administration let out early: the so-called Buffett Rule. The rule — named for the billionaire investor Warren E. Buffett, who has complained that he is taxed at a lower rate than his employees — calls for a new minimum tax rate for individuals making more than $1 million a year to ensure that they pay at least the same percentage of their earnings as middle-income taxpayers.

That proposal, which was disclosed on Saturday, was met with derision Sunday by Republican lawmakers, who said it amounted to “class warfare” and a political tactic intended to portray his opponents as indifferent to the hardships facing middle-class Americans.

Representative Paul D. Ryan, chairman of the House Budget Committee and a leading proponent of cutting spending on benefit programs like Medicare, said the proposal would weigh heavily on a stagnating economy.

On “Fox News Sunday,” Mr. Ryan said it would add “further instability to our system, more uncertainty, and it punishes job creation.”

“Class warfare,” he said, “may make for really good politics, but it makes for rotten economics.”

Administration officials said Sunday night that they were not including any revenue from the Buffett Rule in Mr. Obama’s overall $3 trillion proposal, adding that it was more of a guiding principle the president will adopt as budget negotiations with Congress advance.

Mr. Obama has been citing Mr. Buffett as he promotes his separate $447 billion jobs-creation plan. He proposes to offset the cost of that plan and to reduce future budget deficits through higher taxes on the wealthy and on corporations after 2013, when the economy will presumably be healthier.

Nonetheless, Republicans made clear on Sunday that higher taxes on the wealthy were not acceptable to them. Appearing on the NBC program “Meet the Press,” Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, said “it’s a bad thing to do in the middle of an economic downturn. And of course the economy, some would argue, is even worse now than it was when the president signed the extension of the current tax rates back in December.”

Under Mr. Obama’s proposal, $800 billion of the $1.5 trillion in tax increases would come from allowing the Bush-era tax cuts to expire. The other $700 billion, aides said, would come from a combination of closing loopholes and limiting deductions among individuals making more than $200,000 a year and families making more than $250,000.

Mr. Obama’s plan will hover over Congressional budget-cutting negotiations that are under way over the next two months. A bipartisan Congressional committee is charged with coming up with its own cuts by Dec. 23; otherwise $1.2 trillion in cuts to defense and entitlement programs will go into effect automatically in 2013.

Mr. Obama, however, is challenging the Congressional committee to go well beyond its mandate. “He’s showing them where they could find the savings,” one administration official said.

Liberal-leaning organizations were rallying behind Mr. Obama’s proposals on Sunday.

“The report that the president is planning to ask millionaires and billionaires to pay taxes at a higher rate than their secretaries pay is welcome news that will be wildly popular with voters,” said Roger Hickey, co-director of the Campaign for America’s Future, a progressive center, in a statement. “We applaud the president for heeding the advice from progressives that he go big on his jobs plan.”

The Obama proposal has little chance of becoming law unless Republican lawmakers bend. But by focusing on the wealthiest Americans, the president is sharpening the contrast between Republicans and Democrats with a theme he can carry into his bid for re-election in 2012.

Mr. Obama’s proposal is also an effort to reassure Democrats who had feared that he would agree to changes in programs like Medicare without forcing Republicans to compromise on taxes. Indeed, Mr. Hickey warned in his statement that the president should not raise the Medicare eligibility age, advice that Mr. Obama, so far, seems to have heeded.

Brian Knowlton contributed reporting.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=545e46e71c19b75ff033f857729f58bf

Filed Under: Business News Tagged With: , ,

Amid Criticism on Downgrade, S.&P. Fires Back

August 6, 2011 by Leave a Comment

In an unusual Saturday conference call with reporters, senior S. P. officials insisted the ratings firm hadn’t overstepped its bounds by focusing on the political paralysis in Washington as much as fiscal policy in determining the new rating. “The debacle over the debt ceiling continued until almost the midnight hour,” said John B. Chambers, chairman of S. P.’s sovereign ratings committee.

Another S. P. official, David Beers, added that “fiscal policy, like other government policy, is fundamentally a political process.”

Administration officials at the White House and Treasury angrily criticized S. P.’s action as based on faulty budget accounting that discounted the just-enacted deal for increasing the debt limit.

The agreement set spending caps in the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1 and calls for a bipartisan Congressional “super committee” to propose more deficit reduction — for up to $2.5 trillion in combined savings over a decade.

“The bipartisan compromise on deficit reduction was an important step in the right direction,” the White House press secretary, Jay Carney, said in a statement on Saturday. “Yet, the path to getting there took too long and was at times too divisive. We must do better to make clear our nation’s will, capacity and commitment to work together to tackle our major fiscal and economic challenges.”

The ratings agency put additional pressure on the joint Congressional committee to find additional spending cuts, tax hikes or both to bring down the inexorably rising national debt. 

Still, the posturing on Capitol Hill continued.

“Unfortunately, decades of reckless spending cannot be reversed immediately, especially when the Democrats who run Washington remain unwilling to make the tough choices required to put America on solid ground,” Speaker John A. Boehner, an Ohio Republican, said in a statement.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said the downgrade affirmed the need for the Democratic approach, which would combine spending cuts with tax increases.

The decision, he said, “shows why leaders should appoint members who will approach the committee’s work with an open mind — instead of hardliners who have already ruled out the balanced approach that the markets and rating agencies like S. P. are demanding.”

Even as the ratings agency insisted on Saturday that its move shouldn’t have come as a shock, it reverberated around the world as political and financial leaders scrambled to assess its impact on the already troubled world economy.

China, the largest foreign holder of United States debt, said on Saturday that Washington needed to “cure its addiction to debts” and “live within its means,” just hours after the S. P. downgrade.

While Europeans had girded for a possible downgrade, the news that S. P. had actually yanked the United States’ AAA rating was nonetheless received with a degree of alarm in the corridors of power across the Continent. Finance Minister François Baroin of France questioned the move Saturday, noting that the figures used by S. P. didn’t match those of the Treasury, and overstated the federal debt by about $2 trillion.

Mr. Baroin said he found it curious that neither Moody’s nor Fitch, the two other major ratings agencies, had reached a similar conclusion. Moody’s has said it was keeping its AAA rating on the nation’s debt, but that it might still lower it.

“We have total confidence in the solidity of the American economy,” Mr. Baroin said in an interview on French radio. Nonetheless, he added, the decision confirms that the world’s most developed economies are confronted with the same urgent priorities: to lift growth and reduce public and private debt.

Jackie Calmes, Binyamin Appelbaum, Louise Story, Julie Creswell, Liz Alderman, Jack Ewing and David Barboza contributed reporting.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=16c9a7254b7ed34588b8e68fa6bccf9c

Filed Under: Economy News Tagged With: , ,

Taking a Closer Look at the Result of a Credit Downgrade

July 30, 2011 by Leave a Comment

A downgrade to the nation’s credit would probably increase the cost of borrowing for the federal government and for everyone else. But the Obama administration, House Republicans, some economists and Wall Street strategists have concluded that the economic impact would be surprisingly modest, one reason that negotiations over a “grand bargain” for debt reduction broke down.

The plans being debated instead by House Republicans and Senate Democrats would not reduce the federal debt to a level that most economists regard as manageable, and it seems likely that further efforts will await the results of the 2012 elections.

A compromise between the parties would avert the catastrophic consequences of default, but even if Congress agrees to pay its bills, one of the three credit rating agencies, Standard Poor’s, has said it may remove the United States from its list of risk-free borrowers.

“A downgrade has lots of downsides, but they’re minor in comparison to not raising the debt ceiling on time, so I think the focus is correct at this point,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, a sister company to the rating agency that rates debt securities.

“What’s most important is raising the debt ceiling. That’s the minimum that they need to do to make sure the recovery in fact remains a recovery.”

Asked Thursday whether his plan would avoid a downgrade, House Speaker John A. Boehner said, “That is beyond my control.” He said the legislation, which the House passed Friday on a party-line vote, is “as large a step as we’re able to take at this point in time.”

President Obama warned Friday morning that the government was at risk of a downgrade, “Not because we didn’t have the capacity to pay our bills — we do — but because we didn’t have a AAA political system to match our AAA credit rating.” But administration officials say that the White House also regards the issue a secondary concern.

Earlier this month, there was widespread alarm in Washington when S P, followed by Moody’s and Fitch, another credit rating concern, warned that the soaring federal debt, and the political standoff over raising the debt ceiling, had placed the nation’s credit rating at risk.

The federal government makes about $250 billion in interest payments a year. Even a small increase in the rates demanded by investors in United States debt could add tens of billions of dollars to those payments. And the credit rating agencies have said other downgrades would follow like dominoes.

For example, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the huge mortgage companies that are backed by the federal government, would be downgraded, raising rates on home mortgage loans for borrowers. Maryland and Virginia, and many local governments near Washington, their economies tied to the government, would also be downgraded. So would New Mexico, because an unusually high proportion of residents depend on federal benefits.

“A default on our nation’s obligations, or a downgrade of America’s credit rating,” 13 financial company chief executives said on Thursday in a letter to the president and Congress, “would be a tremendous blow to business and investor confidence — raising interest rates for everyone who borrows, undermining the value of the dollar, and roiling stock and bond markets — and, therefore, dramatically worsening our nation’s already difficult economic circumstances.”

Still, Washington’s fears of a downgrade have eased for several reasons.

Standard Poor’s warned that it might downgrade the United States in the next three months if the government did not agree on a credible plan to reduce its debts by about $4 trillion — the number used in the talks between Mr. Obama and Mr. Boehner.

But the other two agencies, Moody’s and Fitch, have shown greater patience, saying that progress toward paying down debts did not need to start immediately. That is significant, because a downgrade by a single rating agency matters less than a consensus. Investment managers, for example, may not be required to divest holdings like Treasury securities if they are downgraded only by S P.

Moody’s said on Friday that it would maintain its Aaa rating for the United States so long as the Treasury keeps paying bondholders and Congress passes a long-term deal to extend the debt ceiling. The announcement said that failure to act by Tuesday night, or to meet other obligations, including Social Security payments, would not prompt a downgrade.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=ba9e2a3a99a3f2d975374637dc42bb5e

Filed Under: Economy News Tagged With: , ,

Senate Quickly Kills Boehner Debt Bill

July 30, 2011 by Leave a Comment

Despite a day of frenzied legislative maneuvering and another attempt by President Obama to rally public opinion behind some kind of compromise, the two parties made no visible progress in finding common ground, leaving Washington, Wall Street and much of the nation watching the clock toward a deadline of midnight Tuesday.

Demonstrating the deep partisan divide coloring the budget fight, the House voted 218 to 210 to approve the plan endorsed by Speaker John A. Boehner to increase the federal debt ceiling in two stages. No Democrats supported the measure; 22 Republicans opposed it. The White House condemned it as a “political exercise.”

“To the American people, I would say we tried our level best,” Mr. Boehner said as he concluded a debate that had been abruptly halted Thursday evening when he fell short of the votes for victory. “We tried to do our best for our country, but some people still say no.”

The House vote was the first act of what loomed as a weekend of tense legislative gamesmanship on Capitol Hill.  With Congressional leaders still unable to reach agreement, anxious lawmakers, aides and administration officials seemed to hold their breath, hoping that some compromise could mesh the competing proposals and rise above the increasingly confrontational tactics in Washington.

Aides and lawmakers said back-channel talks across the aisle were not making much progress in the Senate, but they hoped the pace would pick up after the Senate rejection of the House proposal.

That did not take long. Two hours after the House approved its plan, it was convincingly tabled in the Senate by a vote of 59 to 41, and Democrats took steps to move ahead with their proposal.

In an effort to attract some Republican support for his plan, Mr. Reid made a number of changes in his bill. But the Congressional Budget Office found that the overall impact on the deficit was about the same as with his original bill: savings of $2.2 trillion over 10 years.

House Republicans, stung by their inability on Thursday to secure enough votes from conservatives for their own plan to raise the debt ceiling, reconfigured their proposal to win over the holdouts.

The revised plan would raise the debt ceiling for about six months in exchange for $1 trillion in spending cuts. A second installment of $1.6 trillion — expected to be needed in about six months — would hinge on Congressional approval of a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget, a provision added Friday to lure conservatives.

But the revisions only made the measure less acceptable to Senate Democrats, who had made it clear that they would reject the bill as soon as it reached them. “This is the most outrageous suggestion I have heard,” said Senator Richard J. Durbin, the assistant Democratic leader.

Though Mr. Boehner and his allies had secured the votes, the margin of victory was narrow. Lawmakers, aware that the fight was probably not over, did not celebrate with the usual applause, hooping and hollering that erupts when a hard-fought bill goes over the top.

Indeed, an eerie silence settled over the House chamber. Republicans had won, but were in no mood to cheer the prospect of a $2.5 trillion increase in the federal debt limit, a possible fight with the Senate or a default.

Earlier in the day at the White House, Mr. Obama said “any solution to avoid default must be bipartisan. I urge Democrats and Republicans in the Senate to find common ground on a plan that can get support from both parties in the House, a plan that I can sign by Tuesday.”

Mr. Obama urged Republicans in the House and Senate to abandon a bill that “does not solve the problem” and has no chance of passage in the Senate. “There are a lot of crises in the world that we can’t always predict or avoid,” he said. “This isn’t one of those crises.”

In an effort to send a message, House Republicans plan to allow a symbolic vote Saturday on Mr. Reid’s plan to show that it cannot clear the House.

Jackie Calmes contributed reporting.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=20e8305972f909d42af010d494295722

Filed Under: Business News Tagged With: , ,

Gains on Colombia Send Trade Pacts to Congress

May 4, 2011 by Leave a Comment

WASHINGTON (AP) — Progress on a free trade deal with Colombia has cleared the way for the White House to seek Congressional approval of a package of trade agreements that includes pacts with South Korea and Panama, as Republicans have demanded.

Obama administration officials said Wednesday that they expected technical discussions about the agreements to begin Thursday with Capitol Hill aides, the first step in the approval process.

President Obama has made increasing American trade a top goal of his economic agenda. The White House had hoped for quick approval of the largest deal, the South Korean agreement signed last December, but Republican lawmakers threatened to block it unless the White House also completed negotiations with Panama and Colombia.

After months of talks, the administration settled with Panama last month after the Panamanian government passed a law permitting greater tax transparency.

Officials from Washington and Bogotá reached a tentative agreement in early April, when Colombia outlined steps it would take to address American concerns over its high rates of violence involving labor leaders and union members. But the administration decided to wait until April 22, when the first of those steps took effect, before sending the agreement to Congress.

In a letter to lawmakers Wednesday, Ron Kirk, the United States trade representative, said that while Colombia had more work to do, it was effectively putting in place the initial phases of the agreements on labor. Therefore, Mr. Kirk said, the administration felt confident in starting talks with lawmakers.

The House speaker, John A. Boehner, who has long pushed the president to send Congress all three trade deals together, applauded Wednesday’s announcement.

“Now it’s time we move to expand market access for American-made goods in all three of these nations,” said Mr. Boehner, an Ohio Republican.

The administration also said it would act on concerns over access for American beef producers to the beef market in South Korea, an important issue for Senator Max Baucus, the Montana Democrat who is chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, and other lawmakers.

The Agriculture Department will spend more to promote United States beef sales in South Korea and Mr. Kirk will request additional consultations with the South Koreans on opening their market once the free trade agreement takes full effect.

Mr. Baucus has demanded that South Korea allow the United States to export beef from older cows. South Korea is reluctant, partly because of concerns over outbreaks of mad cow disease several years ago.

The South Korea deal would support up to 70,000 jobs in the United States, the Obama administration said.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=a180abdaeab51eb00cd56a95c87fd1aa

Filed Under: Business News Tagged With: , ,

Budget Battle to Be Followed by an Even Bigger Fight

April 3, 2011 by Leave a Comment

Even as the two parties struggled over the weekend to reach a deal on federal spending for the next six months and avert a government shutdown at the end of the week, House Republicans were completing a budget proposal for next year and beyond. It is likely to spur an ideological showdown over the size of government and the role of entitlement programs like Medicaid and Medicare.

The plan, which is scheduled to be unveiled Tuesday, will be the most ambitious Republican effort since the November elections to put a conservative stamp on economic and domestic policy. It involves far greater stakes for Congress and for President Obama — substantively and politically — than the current fight over spending cuts.

The outcome of that fight was still uncertain on Saturday as Congressional staff members assembled new proposals and the White House said that Mr. Obama had called House Speaker John A. Boehner and Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic majority leader, to urge them to find an acceptable compromise. He reminded them that time “is running short.”

The longer-term budget proposal has been led by Representative Paul D. Ryan, a Wisconsin Republican who is the party’s leading voice on budget matters, and will go beyond numbers to provide policy prescriptions.

It will call for deep spending cuts again in 2012, chart a path to reducing the deficit and slowing the growth of the accumulating national debt, and grapple with the politically volatile issue of reining in the cost of entitlement programs, starting with Medicaid, which provides health coverage for the poor.

“We want to get spending and debt under control, and we want to get the economy growing, and we want to address the big drivers of our debt, and that is the entitlement programs,” Mr. Ryan, chairman of the Budget Committee, said in an interview. “We have a moral obligation to the country to do this.”

The efforts of Mr. Ryan, backed by Mr. Boehner and other Republican leaders, are certain to meet serious resistance from the Democratic-led Senate and from Mr. Obama. In many respects, the nasty fight over financing the government for the next six months has been a warm-up for the longer-term budget battle, which could be further inflamed by a debate over raising the federal debt limit.

House Democrats, who are preparing an alternative budget, say the Republican approach would cut off aid to some of the neediest Americans and shortchange education programs vital to staying economically competitive.

“It seems to be the same old, same old,” said Representative Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, the senior Democrat on the Budget Committee. “It is going to be continued big tax breaks for millionaires and big corporate special interests like oil companies and deep cuts in education for kids and health care for seniors.”

“How you get your deficit reduction is important,” Mr. Van Hollen added.

Republicans have been urging Mr. Obama to seize the opportunity provided by a divided government and lead a legislative push to rein in spending on programs like Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security. Emboldened by their election wins and a sense that the public is ready for a new approach, House Republicans say they will push forward on their own and try to draw the president and Senate Democrats into a broader discussion about long-term deficit reduction and the soaring costs of the entitlement programs.

Details of the House budget are being tightly held. But lawmakers and other officials predict serious proposals to change Medicaid and Medicare, with talks continuing about how hard to push for adjustments in Social Security.

“You are going to see major reforms in Medicare and Medicaid; you are going to see a change in the deficit trajectory that is pretty dramatic,” said Representative Tom Cole, an Oklahoma Republican who is on the Budget Committee.

“Ryan isn’t touching the third rail,” Mr. Cole said, employing the expression used to suggest that messing with Social Security and Medicare can be politically fatal. “He is wrapping both hands around it.”

The budget for 2012 and beyond could heighten the partisan tensions surrounding the financing debate for the current year. If Congress cannot settle that issue by Friday, authorization for some government spending will expire and parts of the federal government will be shut down.

Some Republicans had wanted to delay putting forward Mr. Ryan’s plan until this year’s negotiations were completed. They were worried that introducing another set of proposals might confuse the debate and give Democrats two targets to exploit in their effort to persuade voters that Republicans were going too far in slashing programs.

Others argued that the Ryan proposal could help Mr. Boehner gather the Republican votes he needs to get a compromise on 2011 spending through the House. Any deal for the current fiscal year is likely to fall short of what the Tea Party movement and some other fiscal conservatives are demanding, but Republican leaders are already signaling that the big prize is a deep spending cut for next year and a start on reining in the entitlement programs — steps that could involve trillions of dollars over coming decades, as opposed to the tens of billions of dollars on the table in the budget battle for this year.

While Mr. Ryan and top Republican aides would not discuss specifics, there are strong indications that the proposal will draw on deficit reduction plans that Mr. Ryan laid out in his 2010 “roadmap plan” and a second proposal he wrote with Alice M. Rivlin, a director of the Office of Management and Budget in the Clinton administration.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=cdcabcb63ca6b0455e0e0c7283fdb146

Filed Under: Economy News Tagged With: , ,
« Previous Page