Analysis: For Senate leaders, a mission impossible from Obama

U.S. President Barack Obama makes a statement to reporters after meeting with congressional leaders at the White House in Washington December 28, 2012.

Credit: Reuters/Jonathan Ernst

By Richard Cowan

WASHINGTON | Sat Dec 29, 2012 1:02am EST

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Following a Friday meeting with congressional leaders, an impatient and annoyed President Barack Obama said it was "mind boggling" that Congress has been unable to fix a "fiscal cliff" mess that everyone has known about for more than a year.

He then dispatched Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat, and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Republican, on a mind-boggling mission: coming up with a bipartisan bill to break the "fiscal cliff" stalemate in the most partisan and gridlocked U.S. Congress of modern times - in about 48 hours.

Reid and McConnell, veteran tacticians known for their own long-running feud, have been down this road before.

Their last joint venture didn't turn out so well. It was the deal in August 2011 to avoid a U.S. default that set the stage for the current mess. That effort, like this one, stemmed from a grand deficit-reduction scheme that turned into a bust.

But they have never had the odds so stacked against them as they try to avert the "fiscal cliff" - sweeping tax increases set to begin on Tuesday and deep, automatic government spending cuts set to start on Wednesday, combined worth $600 billion.

The substantive differences are only part of the challenge. Other obstacles include concerns about who gets blamed for what and the legacy of distrust among members of Congress.

Any successful deal will require face-saving measures for Republicans and Democrats alike.

"Ordinary folks, they do their jobs, they meet deadlines, they sit down and they discuss things, and then things happen," Obama told reporters. "If there are disagreements, they sort though the disagreements. The notion that our elected leadership can't do the same thing is mind-boggling to them."

CORE DISAGREEMENT

The core disagreement between Republicans and Democrats is tough enough. It revolves around the low tax rates first put in place under Republican former President George W. Bush that expire at year's end. Republicans would extend them for everyone. Democrats would extend them for everyone except the wealthiest taxpayers.

The first step for Reid and McConnell may be to find a formula acceptable to their own parties in the Senate.

While members of the Senate, more than members of the House of Representatives, have expressed flexibility on taxes, it's far from a sure thing in a body that ordinarily requires not just a majority of the 100-member Senate to pass a bill, but a super-majority of 60 members.

With 51 Democrats, two independents who vote with the Democrats and 47 Republicans, McConnell and Reid may have to agree to suspend the 60-vote rule.

Getting a bill through the Republican-controlled House may be much tougher. The conservative wing of the House, composed of many lawmakers aligned with the Tea Party movement who fear being targeted by anti-tax activists in primary elections in 2014, has shown it will not vote for a bill that raises taxes on anyone, even if it means defying Republican House Speaker John Boehner.

Many Democrats are wedded to the opposite view - and have vowed not to support continuing the Bush-era tax rates for people earning more than $250,000 a year.

Some senators are wary of the procedural conditions House Republicans are demanding. Boehner is insisting the Senate start its work with a bill already passed by the House months ago that would continue all Bush-era tax cuts for another year. The Democratic-controlled Senate may amend the Republican bill, he says, but it must be the House bill.

For Boehner, it's the regular order when considering revenue measures, which the U.S. Constitution says must originate in the House.

SHIFT BLAME

As some Democrats see it, it's a way to shift blame if the enterprise goes down in flames. House Republicans would be able to claim that since they had already done their part by passing a bill, the Senate should take the blame for plunging the nation off the "cliff."

And that could bring public wrath, currently centered mostly on Republicans, onto the heads of Democrats.

Voters may indeed be looking for someone to blame if they see their paychecks shrink as taxes rise or their retirement savings dwindle as a result of a plunge in global markets.

If Reid and McConnell succeed, there could be political ramifications for each side. For example, a deal containing any income tax hikes could complicate McConnell's own 2014 re-election effort in which small-government, anti-tax Tea Party activists are threatening to mount a challenge.

If Obama and his fellow Democrats are perceived as giving in too much, it could embolden Republicans to mount challenge after challenge, possibly handcuffing the president before his second term even gets off the ground.

It could be a sprint to the finish. One Democratic aide expected "negotiation for a day." If the aide is correct, the world would know by late on Saturday or early on Sunday if Washington's political dysfunction is about to reach a new, possibly devastating, low.

If Reid and McConnell reach a deal, it would then be up to the full Senate and House to vote, possibly as early as Sunday.

Reid and McConnell have been through bitter fights before. The deficit reduction and debt limit deal that finally was secured last year was a brawl that ended only when the two leaders agreed to a complicated plan that secured about $1 trillion in savings, but really postponed until later a more meaningful plan to restore the country's fiscal health.

That effort led to the automatic spending cuts that form part of the "fiscal cliff."

Just months later, in December 2011, Reid and McConnell were going through a tough fight over extending a payroll tax cut.

In both instances, it was resistance from conservative House Republicans that complicated efforts, just as is the case now with the "fiscal cliff."

(Editing by Fred Barbash and Will Dunham)

View the original article here

Analysis: Boehner has few options in fiscal cliff mess

U.S. House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) speaks to the media on a ''fiscal cliff'' on Capitol Hill in Washington, December 20, 2012.

Credit: Reuters/Yuri Gripas

By Richard Cowan

WASHINGTON | Fri Dec 21, 2012 3:34am EST

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Now that House Speaker John Boehner's "Plan B" for addressing the "fiscal cliff" has crashed and burned, the top U.S. Republican appears to have two remaining options - wash his hands of the entire matter or negotiate a compromise with Democrats that could abandon scores of his fellow Republicans.

The Republican rank and file and Democrats may face an equally stark choice: work together for a change, or plunge together off the cliff.

Boehner tried to ram a "fallback" plan through the House on Thursday - a relatively tiny tax increase on millionaires and billionaires - and failed. His rambunctious Republicans, who see opposition to all tax hikes as a matter of bedrock principle and of political survival, refused to go along.

President Barack Obama and his Democrats who control the Senate take the opposite view - tax hikes on the wealthy are a condition for their support of a fiscal cliff bill. If there is to be a resolution it will largely depend on an improbable scenario - Democrats in the House teaming up with less militant Republicans to back away from the fiscal cliff.

Compromise has been out of style in recent years, and many think it could require some prodding from the markets.

"At this point, I only see one route to avoiding the cliff, a replay of the TARP debacle in 2008," said George Washington University's Sarah Binder, an expert on Congress. In September 2008, the House defeated the bank bailout bill and the market collapsed, prompting a terrified lawmakers to reconsider and pass it.

"In this case, a harsh market and public reaction would be needed to force the hand of the speaker to negotiate a deal that can pass with Democratic votes," she said.

"If the GOP takes a beating in the headlines and the market tanks, I suspect a good number of rank-and-file GOP will demand that the speaker go back to the table. But absent whiplash from the markets and voters, I suspect it's over the cliff we go."

For the time being - or at least the 11 days until the automatic tax hikes and spending cuts are triggered - the House is in disarray and no deal to avert the fiscal cliff is in sight.

While the House in recess for a Christmas break that is likely to last at least until December 27, Boehner must decide whether to move any further in Obama's direction and agree to tax increases much higher than his own proposal that so angered his fellow Republicans on Thursday.

The Ohio Republican also might have to settle for fewer long-term spending cuts than he had hoped for.

WALK ON BY

Boehner's only other apparent option - one that he hinted at late on Thursday following the collapse of his bill - would be to walk away and leave the problem on Democrats' doorstep.

"Now it is up to the president to work with Senator Reid on legislation to avert the fiscal cliff," Boehner said in a statement referring to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

But in a closed-door session before that statement, Republican lawmakers said Boehner told them that he would at least try to work out something with Obama.

Either way, Boehner faces the possibility of having to battle not only Democrats for the next two years, but also his own membership on major bills.

"We have people (Republican lawmakers) who felt like they had to stand on the principle ... they couldn't vote for anything (that raised any taxes). I don't quite understand it," lamented Representative Buck McKeon, the powerful chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, who oversaw passage of a $633 billion defense spending bill for 2013.

"If you don't have the votes, you can't move forward," McKeon said of the Plan B fiscal cliff bill.

Representative Steven LaTourette, a moderate Republican who is retiring at year's end, told reporters that Thursday's legislative defeat - and public relations failure - will not stop Boehner from being re-elected House Speaker on January 3. "Name one member who opposes him," LaTourette challenged reporters.

Firing Boehner, LaTourette said, would be "like saying the superintendent of the insane asylum should be discharged because he couldn't control the crazy people."

Nonetheless, two years into his stint as Speaker, Boehner still has not found the right formula for corralling his Republican majority, especially the Tea Party conservatives whose victories in 2010 helped Republicans wrest control of the House. However, he has taken steps in recent weeks to punish a handful of uncooperative Republicans.

Since unveiling his plan on Tuesday, several conservative groups, including the Heritage Foundation, waged a spirited effort to kill the measure.

Those groups, LaTourette said, had been "making their phone calls, and they're bombing people" with pressure to vote against the bill. That, he added, "makes people nervous" about primary election challengers being recruited in 2014 by outside groups to defeat Republican lawmakers who vote for any tax increase.

"I doubt his speakership is in trouble," said American Enterprise Institute scholar Norm Ornstein, "The big question is whether, and when, he is willing to bring up a bill that will require more Democrats than Republicans to pass."

(Reporting By Richard Cowan. Editing by Fred Barbash)

View the original article here

Analysis: In ICE-NYSE deal, one CEO steps back, the other rises

By John McCrank and Jonathan Spicer

Fri Dec 21, 2012 1:11am EST

n">(Reuters) - Duncan Niederauer, the chief executive of New York Stock Exchange operator NYSE Euronext, once boldly proclaimed that his company could not be acquired.

Last year, even when Niederauer was prepared to sell his company to Deutsche Boerse, he insisted that he be chief executive of the combined company. The deal ended up being quashed by German regulators.

But with the agreement by IntercontinentalExchange to buy NYSE Euronext for $8.2 billion, Niederauer has accepted he will have to at the very least play second fiddle. He will become president at the combined company, while still running the New York Stock Exchange, and report to ICE CEO Jeff Sprecher.

"In a sense he must be very frustrated because some of the big things he was trying to do did not work out," said Andre Cappon, president of CBM Group, a New York-based consultant for global exchanges.

To an extent, the world may have left Niederauer behind. His expertise was in stock trading, a business that now has razor-thin margins and is increasingly left to computers.

Sprecher, on the other hand, has ascended as derivatives have become a key part of financial markets and the financial crisis made listed derivatives relatively more important.

Born in Indiana near the Kentucky border, and raised in Madison, Wisconsin, he has a down-to-earth aura that belies his ambitious type-A personality, say people who know him.

Sprecher has not met with constant success, but when something goes wrong, he moves on.

"He's not afraid to fail," said one person who knows Sprecher well.

Among his misses: a failed bid to buy the Chicago Board of Trade in 2007, not to mention a failed joint bid for the NYSE with Nasdaq OMX Group Inc.

He made his move for the CBOT at the annual meeting of the Futures Industry Association, in Boca Raton, Florida, where CME Group officials had expected to deliver a progress report on their planned acquisition of their smaller rival.

Sprecher slipped the formal offer under the hotel doors of CBOT Chairman Charles Carey and CBOT CEO Bernard Dan, at about 6:30 in the morning of the conference's first day.

CME Group later raised its bid for CBOT and clinched the deal in mid-2007 - but Sprecher would still finish the year with two key acquisitions, the New York Board of Trade commodity market and Canada's biggest grains exchange.

This summer both Sprecher and Niederauer bid for the London Metals Exchange and lost. Within four months they were talking to each other about a much larger deal.

LETTING GO OF EGO

There was some bad blood between Sprecher and Niederauer last year, when Sprecher's ICE was part of the group that made an unsolicited bid for NYSE Euronext.

NYSE Euronext was instead focused on a different deal: selling itself to Deutsche Boerse. Sprecher admitted in an interview with Reuters that he tried to wreck the Deutsche deal by "calling out every wart and pimple" on the transaction.

The two men stopped talking for about six weeks.

But after ICE posted good fourth-quarter results in February, Niederauer extended an olive branch with a surprising three-word email to Sprecher: "Hey, great quarter."

"He and I had a preexisting friendship and I wondered if it was going to survive my trouble making," Sprecher told Reuters. Then the email arrived.

"He was very magnanimous and so I knew that he saw through what I was doing and we were still very cordial."

Niederauer took over as NYSE Euronext CEO at the end of 2007, just after his predecessor, John Thain, had completed the landmark deal to buy Franco-Belgian Euronext.

After a 22-year career at Goldman Sachs, mostly in equity trading, and just nine months as head of NYSE's trading operations, he took control just before the 2008 financial crisis triggered a seismic shift in the exchange world, one that seemed ill-suited to his background.

Equity investors, burned by scandals and volatility, were trading less and less; meanwhile new regulations would drive more derivatives onto exchanges like ICE and CME.

The answer, Niederauer thought, lay in Deutsche Boerse. But when regulators nixed the deal in February this year, he quickly laid out a new strategic plan for shareholders: clearing and technology - two areas in which ICE already excelled.

By June, Niederauer was saying it was "make-or-break time" for NYSE's nascent U.S. futures operation, which was clearly failing to thrive in the shadow of established rivals.

In working together at the merged venture, Sprecher and Niederauer may each find a comfortable way to co-exist, each playing to his respective strength, some say. But several people, including a NYSE investor and a board member of a rival exchange, questioned whether the partnership can last.

In an interview, Niederauer said he would remain at least through 2014 as an "important senior member" of Sprecher's management team.

He added: "People get too caught up in titles. Let's just worry about making it work and my guess is that if it's still fun for both of us in 2014, or 2015, or whatever, we will keep doing it."

(Reporting By John McCrank, Jonathan Spicer, Josephine Mason and Jessica Toonkel in New York, and Ann Saphir in Chicago; Writing by Jonathan Leff and Dan Wilchins; Editing by Steve Orlofsky)

View the original article here