President Obama’s call on Monday for raising $1.5 trillion in new tax revenue aimed to pick a populist fight with Republicans, a challenge the GOP leaders indicated they will accept. The question is whether, amid the gunfire, there’s a possibility of compromise. And at the moment, the answer would appear to be no.

Could the move change the political dynamics of the debate? Right now, there’s no telling who would take the blame if the super committee can’t come to an agreement in November. Democrats are under no delusions that the Republican House will approve rolling back tax breaks for millionaires or other revenue enhancements. But if the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction can’t come to an agreement, or can only agree on smaller cuts, Democrats hope the debate will have been framed their way going into next year’s congressional and presidential elections.

Republicans are eager to portray the Obama proposal not as a reasonable compromise but, as House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, called it, a “job-crushing tax hike that will hurt small businesses and create an even worse environment for private-sector growth.”

All parties are paying homage to the super committee, and each side is accusing the other of sabotaging its work. Boehner said in a statement that the deficit-reduction committee “is engaged in serious work to tackle a serious problem.” But he said the president’s proposal “has not made a serious contribution to its work.”

Meanwhile, tea party stalwarts like Rep. Allen West, R-Fla., were predictably quick to denounce a plan that includes tax hikes: “That was such a horrible speech, totally campaign-driven and just undignified.” For good measure, he tweeted: “Same ole stuff, just different day. If the president had not run up three years of trillion-dollar deficits, we would not be in this position.”

Obama will send the plan and his package of tax and other proposals to the deficit-reduction committee. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., called it a “sort of first principle” that will divide the parties along lines Democrats call favorable.
Congressional Democrats liked the plan. After months of urging the president to fight, they seemed to have found the left hook they were looking for. Aides to top Democrats in both chambers called Obama’s Monday speech the kind of a tough attack they have pressed Obama to launch against congressional Republicans.

Democrats in both chambers, including Schumer, who heads Senate Democrats’ policy and messaging operation, rallied around the so-called “Buffett rule” Obama outlined, which would aim to impose a minimum tax rate on millionaires to ensure they pay at least the same tax rate as middle-class households. “Let’s grab the language, get it scored, put it on the floor, and have a vote,” Schumer said.

The idea is based on billionaire investor Warren Buffett’s widely quoted view that he should not pay a lower tax rate than his secretary. The proposal also thematically resembles Schumer’s proposal last year to extend tax cuts passed under President George W. Bush for all Americans but millionaires.

A Democratic aide noted that 81 percent of respondents to a February 2011 Wall Street Journal/NBC poll called “placing a surtax on federal income taxes for people earning over 1 million dollars a year,” either very or mostly acceptable as a means to cut the deficit—the highest rank of any option polled. The poll of 1,000 adults had a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.

As yet, though, no “Buffett rule” is drafted, and converting it to legislation might prove difficult. Senate Democratic aides said the timing of such a vote is unclear.

Republicans ripped Obama’s proposal on policy grounds and faulted it as a divisive campaign-oriented plan. GOP members of the joint select committee, the ostensible target of Obama’s proposal, dismissed the plan.

Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., a super committee member, called the proposal “demagogic” and a “campaign document.” Kyl told reporters he hoped the plan “won’t have any” impact on the super committee. “I’m concerned that it might be unhelpful,” Kyl said.

Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., another senator on the committee, said the plan “seems more defined by political posturing, such as recycling tax hikes that even lawmakers in his own party have publicly opposed. With the Select Committee’s deadline looming, we do not have time to waste on political games and pushing big tax increases that will only make our economy weaker for all Americans.”

As part of the escalating fight, on Thursday the president will visit Cincinnati, his second visit in two weeks to Boehner’s home state. Officially, the focus is to highlight a bridge that is in need of repair. The bridge spans the Ohio River into Covington, Ky., the home state of Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. That trip comes on the heels of Obama’s visits last week to Columbus, Ohio, and North Carolina, and earlier this month to the district of another top House Republican, Majority Leader Eric Cantor, in Virginia, another presidential swing state.

A rare Democrat to criticize the plan was Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., who stopped short of firm opposition. “We need to deal with cutting spending first and the minute you deal with a legislative body and start talking about raising taxes the cutting stops,” Nelson said. Of the “Buffett rule,” Nelson said the fellow Nebraskan “is a good friend of mine. We agree on some things but we don’t always agree on everything.”