Okay, maybe he didn’t take it *quite* that far. But taking a break from his earlier position, House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) has signaled that he would vote for President Obama’s plan to extend the Bush tax cuts only for the middle class. But then he added a big “if.” Boehner said he would vote for the plan “if” it were the only option available to House Republicans (spoiler alert: it is).
Boehner and the President have found little to agree on over the past year. At the top of their list of disagreements? Those darn tax cuts. Earlier, Boehner and House Republicans had indicated that they would only support a tax package which included tax cuts for all Americans. However, Boehner, has now switched positions, saying that he would not block the cuts for the middle class.
This isn’t to say that Boehner is happy about it. Over the weekend, he referred to Obama’s proposal as “bad policy” and then went on record as accusing the President of “class warfare.” He told CBS’ Face the Nation:
I want to do something for all Americans who pay taxes. If the only option I have is to vote for some of those tax reductions, I’ll vote for it.
Hardly a ringing endorsement. But it’s movement. And with polls revealing an increasing disenchantment with the stonewalling in Congress, somebody had to budge. Score one for Boehner. That change in position is bound to help the GOP this fall. Most voters blame the Democrats for the current mess – and they’re not doing much to change it.
Of course, now the real fun begins. The November elections are just weeks away…
Just read an article saying the House will still oppose it. I just hope that they don’t hold the tax cuts for the middle class hostage in order to make a political point/blame the administration for “raising taxes on the middle class”. We’ll see.
Are there no men left in the Republican party? where the hell did the leaders go? Give me some strong woman and vote her in as the Speaker of the House and put Boehnor and the rest of the Rino’s in the back of the bus.
@bargal
For four sentences about politics, that’s awfully focused on gender. Leaders aren’t necessarily men, replacing a man with a woman doesn’t necessarily mean your world will become better, and people who vote *once* with Obama are not Republicans In Name Only.
I agree that something is wrong with the party, but to me, it’s the people who want all their representatives, regardless of state, to be lock-step against someone, instead of united for something.