John Boehner may have trouble keeping some of his Republican colleagues in line with his ideas. Boehner tries to hold sequester line

At least one House Republican is beginning to wonder whether the sequester is worth it.

Rep. Tom Rooney, a Florida Republican, Army veteran and member of the Intelligence Committee, is singing a different tune than most of his fellow Republicans who now accept the sequester: raise taxes


( Also on POLITICO: Obama tax-and-spending plan already DOA on Hill)

If that sentiment snowballs, that could be a problem for Speaker John Boehner as he tries to hold the line against President Barack Obama, who wants to mix spending cuts and tax loopholes closures to delay the spending cuts that now start in March.

Rooney — a Boehner ally — said on Tuesday that he “would rather have tax increases than cut our defense” after Obama suggested mixing spending reductions with revenue to stop deep Pentagon cuts.

“I think that our party has shifted away from prioritizing a strong national defense to one that’s considering what amounts to a reckless cut in spending just for the sake of cutting spending rather that looking at what we believe historically are the true drivers of our debt — entitlements,” Rooney said Tuesday. “We’re just taking what we can get right now.”

( Also on POLITICO: Boehner critical of Obama plan)

But Rooney’s buyer’s remorse over Pentagon slashing could have the danger of bleeding over to other GOP lawmakers before the sequester takes effect at the start of March, something that would help Obama — and hurt Boehner. After all, it was just one GOP lawmaker — Oklahoma Rep. Tom Cole — who supported the idea of raising taxes for those making more than $250,000 during the fiscal cliff negotiations in December. The GOP later compromised on tax hikes for the wealthy.

For now, Rooney is at odds with Boehner and the majority of his colleagues, who have indicated they support the sequester as a last-ditch effort to curb what they dub out-of-control government spending over raising new revenue for the federal government.

Even before Obama spoke, Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon (R-Calif.) said he was “flabbergasted” by the president’s proposal, while Boehner suggested that new revenues backed by Obama should not be part of any deficit-reduction package, short or long term.

“We’ve tried to replace sequester with other things, but it seems now that a large portion of our conference is [resigned] to the fact that sequestration is OK,” Rooney said in an interview. “It’s not. It’s dangerous, a huge mistake, a threat to our liberty … and I think that we should consider any and all options that don’t include hollowing out our military.”

Obama certainly hopes House Republicans move toward Rooney’s position. But Obama’s challenge is significantly more difficult, because most Republicans right now sound like Georgia Rep. Lynn Westmoreland.

“I think the sequester happens,” he said. “I don’t think anyone wants to see it, but we got to get real about cutting spending. If this is the only way we can cut spending, this is what we gotta do.”

What this fight comes down to, once again, is perception. Obama is flogging Republicans, positioning them as the party unwilling to close tax loopholes for megawealthy corporations to save national defense.

Washington has just weeks to stop the cuts, and both sides are locked in a battle to seem like the more responsible actor in this most recent budget stare-down.

Obama will be aided by Senate Democrats, who are expected to try to blunt the sequester with a bill that mixes revenue and spending cuts when they return from their legislative retreat in Annapolis, Md. If they bend to that inside-the-Beltway pressure, or the pressure of corporate or local constituents who fear the impact of the cuts, that could go a long way in dictating the immediate future of Pentagon spending.

Republicans say they’ve done their job to replace the cuts and point to their passage of a bill authored by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) that swapped out the cuts. They might pass that bill once again, lawmakers and aides say. But the sequester cuts are baked into law, and that makes them hard to undo.

In reality, most lawmakers privately say both sides have been irresponsible. Most of them voted for the sequester in the first place, and then pushed it off. And since the most recent delay in the cuts — a bid to spend more time hatching a plan to responsibly replace them — there has been absolutely no progress between Boehner and the White House. The speaker and the president have not spoken in person, or by phone, according to several sources close to Boehner. Obama administration staff and Boehner’s team haven’t spoken at all about how they might come together to prevent the cuts.

So, for all the talk of blame, there’s actually no effort afoot at either end of Pennsylvania Avenue to stop the cuts.

But privately, GOP leadership aides have signaled some openness to closing tax loopholes should a package come together that looks palatable on the whole.

Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio), a member of the Armed Services Committee whose district includes Wright-Patterson Air Force base, refused to draw a hard line against some revenue increases. He said both parties have been irresponsible in acting to replace the defense cuts. He voted against the 2011 debt ceiling package, which contained the sequester.

“It depends what the final details are,” Turner said in an interview. “But tax increases are not the answer. You have to see the whole package, but right now what the president is saying isn’t reflective of his own policy.”

Obama’s remarks, delivered in the White House briefing room, laid out options familiar to Congress that have become only more difficult over time. The president said his proposals for a big deficit deal are “still very much on the table.”

“The deals that I put forward, the balanced approach of spending cuts and entitlement reform and tax reform that I put forward are still on the table,” Obama said.

As entrancing as it might seem for Boehner to enter into negotiations for a massive deficit deal with the president, the time for that has come and gone, aides say. The speaker has promised House Republicans — who voted to keep him as speaker just a month ago — that he is done negotiating with the president in secret. Boehner instead says bills should move through Congress, and then be sent to the president.

Short of a big deal, Obama proposed a short-term delay of the sequester.

“[I]f Congress can’t act immediately on a bigger package, if they can’t get a bigger package done by the time the sequester is scheduled to go into effect, then I believe that they should at least pass a smaller package of spending cuts and tax reforms that would delay the economically damaging effects of the sequester for a few more months until Congress finds a way to replace these cuts with a smarter solution,” Obama said from the White House.

Republicans are growing weary of that approach.

Boehner didn’t think much of Obama’s Tuesday proposal. The speaker is aiming for reforms to taxes and spending that would replace the cuts — he has proposed a host of them over the past few years.

“We believe there is a better way to reduce the deficit, but Americans do not support sacrificing real spending cuts for more tax hikes,” Boehner said in a statement. “The president’s sequester should be replaced with spending cuts and reforms that will start us on the path to balancing the budget in 10 years.”

People like Rep. Duncan Hunter, a California Republican who represents a district near San Diego that abuts the Camp Pendleton Marine Corps base, are enjoying a moment of “I told you so.” Hunter voted against the 2011 deal that set in motion the sequester and is firmly against raising revenue to blunt the cuts.

“I thought we already answered the revenue question,” he said Tuesday. “We’re back on that now?”

He added, “There’s a reason a few of us voted against it, and it wasn’t just to say we voted against it. It’s because once this thing starts, there’s no stopping it. And that’s exactly what’s happened now.”

Tim Mak and Darren Samuelsohn contributed to this report.