In August, Congressional Republicans tried to box in Democrats and the White House by demanding huge deficit cuts in exchange for preventing a government default. Then they joined in the creation of a “supercommittee” on deficit reduction that they hoped would take taxes off the table and focus entirely on cuts in spending.

But that supposed victory has forced many Republicans into an equally tight corner. They are starting to realize that if they remain adamant, the resulting across-the-board cuts will disproportionately affect programs they support, starting with military spending.

The joint committee created by the debt-ceiling agreement is desperately groping behind closed doors for ways to cut at least $1.2 trillion from the federal deficit. Republican leaders want it all to come from spending cuts; Democratic leaders want a mix of cuts and revenue increases. If the two sides cannot agree, there will be automatic cuts, which largely spare social-welfare programs but would severely reduce military and security spending.

Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona , who is happy to cut virtually anything else, says military cuts could lead to job losses. Representative Howard McKeon of California , the Armed Services Committee chairman, is so rattled by the law that he used an old scare tactic, saying the cuts could produce a new military draft. “It is my suspicion that the White House and Congressional Democrats insisted on that defense number for one purpose: to force Republicans to choose between raising taxes or gutting defense,” Mr. McKeon said.

Advertisement Continue reading the main story

That is exactly the choice, and Republicans brought it on themselves by turning the routine debt-ceiling vote into a life-or-death struggle over the unrelated issue of taxes and spending. They have a way out, however. President Obama has given the supercommittee a clear blueprint for $3.6 trillion in deficit reduction through a mix of spending cuts and tax increases on the rich. If the committee followed even half of that program, it could exceed its original mandate, wrap up its work quickly and accomplish a great deal.

Newsletter Sign Up Continue reading the main story Please verify you're not a robot by clicking the box. Invalid email address. Please re-enter. You must select a newsletter to subscribe to. Sign Up You will receive emails containing news content , updates and promotions from The New York Times. You may opt-out at any time. You agree to receive occasional updates and special offers for The New York Times's products and services. Thank you for subscribing. An error has occurred. Please try again later. View all New York Times newsletters.

Mr. McKeon is a rare Republican who says he would prefer the tax increases to military spending cuts. But the White House proposal, like virtually every good idea that has come up, has been removed from the table by Republican leaders, who have resisted even Democratic demands to allow the panel to add job creation to its mandate.