The New Republic

Note: This item was revised to reflect news developments early Tuesday morning. First things first. At 12:00:00 a.m., we went over the fiscal cliff. And at 12:00:01 a.m., most Americans were talking about the new year, not the new fiscal regime. READ MORE >>

READ MORE >>

Will we get an agreement on the “fiscal cliff” before year’s end? Even after Friday’s developments, which included a meeting of congressional leaders at the White House, I really don’t know—and neither does anybody else. But when the deal materializes still matters less than what the deal entails. READ MORE >>

Howard Schultz is frustrated. So am I. But Schultz is frustrated that the two parties can’t come to an agreement about fiscal policy. I’m frustrated that Schultz still thinks the two parties are equally to blame for the impasse. And I’m frustrated that Schultz isn’t the only one who thinks that way. READ MORE >>

READ MORE >>

The most prominent "fiscal cliff" development on Tuesday was House Speaker John Boehner’s decision to introduce what he calls “Plan B.” The most interesting development was the liberal reaction to President Obama’s negotiating posture. Both deserve some attention, because both are going to shape the final deal. READ MORE >>

[UPDATED BELOW] READ MORE >>

President Obama hasn’t proposed increasing the eligibility age for Medicare. But would he agree to do so, in order to secure a broader agreement that raises taxes on the wealthy and avoids the automatic spending cuts set to take effect on January 1? Liberals are worried that he will—thanks in part to a pair of recent columns, one each by my friends Jonathan Chait and Ezra Klein. READ MORE >>

Can one very determined libertarian and one very distorted version of history keep millions of people from getting health insurance? We’re about to find out. READ MORE >>

One reality in the fiscal debate changed on Monday. And one did not. READ MORE >>