Community | November 09, 2012 | 42 comments

Obama to Insist on Tax Increase for the Wealthy

BRAVATRAVELS
WASHINGTON — President Obama said Friday that he would insist that tax increases on affluent Americans be part of any agreement to avoid a year-end fiscal crisis, setting up a possible confrontation with Congressional Republicans who say they will oppose a rise in tax rates for the rich.

In his first remarks from the White House since his re-election, Mr. Obama made it clear that he believed his victory had validated his relentless campaign call for wealthier Americans to pay more and that he expected Republicans to heed that message.

“I just want to point out this was a central question during the election,” he said in brief remarks in the East Room. “It was debated over and over again. And on Tuesday night, we found out that the majority of Americans agree with my approach.”

Mr. Obama said he had invited Congressional leaders to the White House next week to begin talks as they return for a lame-duck session of Congress. He said he was willing to make some concessions as long as the final fiscal bargain was properly balanced between new tax revenue and spending cuts.

“I’m not wedded to every detail of my plan,” Mr. Obama said. “I’m open to compromise.”

At the same time, he encouraged Congress to quickly pass an extension of the existing lower rates for those making under $250,000 even while the broader negotiations take place.

“While there may be disagreement in Congress over whether or not to raise taxes on folks making over $250,000 a year, nobody — not Republicans, not Democrats — want taxes to go up for folks making under $250,000 a year,” he said. “So let’s not wait.”

The president’s comments came shortly after Speaker John A. Boehner, who had been striking a conciliatory tone since Republican election losses in the Senate and the House, told reporters that Republicans had won a mandate of their own by retaining control of the House and that he supported continuing rates enacted in the Bush-era tax cuts for all income levels.

“Raising tax rates will slow down our ability to create the jobs that everyone says they want,” said Mr. Boehner, who said he favored generating any new federal revenue to offset the deficit by closing tax loopholes and limiting deductions.

“It’s clear that there are a lot of special interest loopholes in the tax code, both corporate and personal,” he said. “It’s also clear that there are all kinds of deductions, some of which make sense; others don’t. And by lowering rates and cleaning up the tax code, we know we’re going to get more economic growth.”

The president and Mr. Boehner were careful with their language and left room for compromise despite their fundamental differences about shifting more of the tax burden to high-income Americans. Mr. Boehner would not be very specific on what his goal might be for raising new federal tax dollars.

“I don’t want to box myself in,” he said. “I don’t want to box anybody else in. I think it’s important for us to come to an agreement with the president. But this is his opportunity to lead.”


The speaker, who has struggled with his more conservative rank and file in the past, said he was confident that he could pass a deal if one was reached with the White House. “When the president and I have been able to come to an agreement, there has been no problem getting it passed here in the House,” he said.

House Republican leadership aides found some positive signals in Mr. Obama’s combative tone. They noted that he never specified he wants tax rates to rise, only that he wants additional revenues generated by taxes on the rich. That would give both sides the latitude to devise a restructured tax code that eliminates or limits tax deductions and credits for the rich — or that follows Mitt Romney’s proposal to cap deductions at a set limit for rich households, though many analysts say that approach alone cannot raise the revenue Democrats want.

Any agreement to avert a fiscal crisis in January, when hundreds of billions of dollars in automatic tax increases and spending cuts kick in, now revolves around the definition of tax increases. Mr. Boehner is holding the line against any increase in tax rates, even for the richest Americans, who currently are in the 35 percent tax bracket. But he is leaving open the possibility of a tax overhaul that raises more revenue than the existing code.

By HELENE COOPER and JONATHAN WEISMAN


Continue reading at post....
  1. groups:
    Community,   Politics,   US Politics,   Point of View/ Opinion,   1 more
  2. tags:
    public speaking tax cut for the rich progress and justices is coming
  3.     
    |

42 comments // Obama to Insist on Tax Increase for the Wealthy // Video

  • wtthfkovr
    • +1
      wtthfkovr  
    • THe potus has more political capital than his predasesor ever had for his second term, and the popularity of congress ( which was the least productive in history ) is so low that he should challenge their economic cliff bluff. also the senate Democrats should take on the republican filibluster threat if thats what they threaten then make them do it. make em talk until their teeth fall out. Enough with the bull shit threats take their challenge there is a voter mandate

    • 6 months ago
  • BRAVATRAVELS
  • cmc101
  • gatormouth
    • +2
      gatormouth  
    • Off the Cliff" is an great opportunity, not a horrible end.
      1: Modify Filibuster Rule,
      2: "Temporary" Tax cuts drop automatically,
      3 "Pass general Tax Relief Bill. (Pledges to Norquist don't apply, if you care)
      4: Problem solved.

    • 6 months ago
  • Paratus
  • cmc101
  • alexandrekBack
  • Andover
  • Argon18
  • SFirman
  • BRAVATRAVELS
  • Argon18
    • +3
      Argon18  
    • SFirman:

      http://youtu.be/mM5Ep9fS7Z0

      My pleasure, here's another video where Reich debunks "7 GOP Lies" and shows why a "Tax Increase for the Wealthy" is necessary for jobs and the economy. With those revenues the USA could rebuild the failing infrastructure that is outdated because it hasn't kept up with advances in technology.

      That would solve the problems of unemployment, middle class spending and the enviroment to switch to more efficient energy sources and distribution like upgrading to a "smart grid" with less failures of power during storms like Sandy

      http://www.smartgrid.gov/the_smart_grid

      "The Smart Grid represents an unprecedented opportunity to move the energy industry into a new era of reliability, availability, and efficiency that will contribute to our economic and environmental health. During the transition period, it will be critical to carry out testing, technology improvements, consumer education, development of standards and regulations, and information sharing between projects to ensure that the benefits we envision from the Smart Grid become a reality. The benefits associated with the Smart Grid include:

      More efficient transmission of electricity
      Quicker restoration of electricity after power disturbances
      Reduced operations and management costs for utilities, and ultimately lower power costs for consumers
      Reduced peak demand, which will also help lower electricity rates
      Increased integration of large-scale renewable energy systems
      Better integration of customer-owner power generation systems, including renewable energy systems
      Improved security"

    • 6 months ago
  • SFirman
    • +2
      SFirman  
    • Argon18:

      Great comment argon. Reich is right. Letting the tax cuts expire will give us extra money for re-building our infrastructure and creating jobs. We need to stop spending on wars, pet projects congress always wants that are not necessary. All this was in Obama's job bill that he couldn't get through congress. Maybe this time.

      Thanks to the president saving our car Industry we are building cars that use less fuel and the electric engine which is necessary for our plant. We need the Smart Grid to ensure our planet and the people's future. Although the US is building wind turbines and solar panals China is far ahead of us.

      China positions itself to be a leader in green technology – with major implications for the rest of the world

      http://www.worldofwindenergy.com/vbnews.php?do=viewarticle&artid=440&tit...

      The 7 lies, Reich is correct. I wish congress, especially the GOP should listen to him. Obama has four more years but when I think of it that's not enough time to accomplish all. I wish we had re-gained the house. He has battles ahead.

    • 6 months ago
  • Steamed_N_More
    • +4
      Steamed_N_More  
    • " even for the richest Americans, who currently are in the 35 percent tax bracket"

      This may be true for earned income! And only on "reported" income which was under reported in 2007 by 57% (ref IRS tax report). That would mean that effective taxation of earned income would have been 15.05% that year. If interest income at 15% was under reported, effective taxes would have been 6.45%. So how much income is earned vs interest( Dividends, capital gains, etc). So by economic class, in 2007, the top 20% effectively paid between 6.45% and 15.05%. And probably less! This is from public records.

      So, Mr. Boehner needs to use all available data, and not cherry pick! And a stop to include payroll taxes (wage earners tax liability) in a company's or employers tax distribution column. It is the wage earners tax distribution! That is fraudulent book keeping! This is why we are in trouble. This is why tax reform with simplification is demanded.

    • 6 months ago
  • gatormouth
    • +3
      gatormouth  
    • Realize that "Off the Cliff" is a beginning, not an ending. It will be a lot easier to "negotiate" with intransigent Republicans next year with with more votes in Congress and a modified Filibuster rule with all that is needed is tax REDUCTIONS not increases being the topic. That should be the threat if the Repubs want to refuse negotiate in good faith. We have the power if our leaders are willing to use it. Now would be a good time to begin to increase pressure on the Blue Dog Dems at the local level, too. They have become relatively expendable and could be replaced by challengers in the next primaries. We shouldn't wait for 2014 to start!

    • 6 months ago
  • deane
    • +1
      deane  
    • Let us put it to a new vote on whether or not to increase taxes on these poor job creators ( actually they have proven to be better at campaign finance than creating jobs) a vote solely among the men and women serving our country in Afghanistan on whether or not there should be a tax increase on the wealthy. I do realize the men and women in the military might vote against a tax increase on the wealthy, because they believe in serving their country at any cost.

    • 6 months ago
  • gatormouth
    • +2
      gatormouth  
    • deane:

      Why put these tax increases to a vote? They WILL happen if we do nothing, then we can negotiate on tax DECREASES with no Norquist complications. We have a hammer, but we must not use it? That would be the most miserable kind of caving.

    • 6 months ago
  • deane
    • +1
      deane  
    • gatormouth:

      Why put these tax increases to a vote? I must apologize, I was making point about how our military sacrifices while the wealthy whine about extended tax cuts. I was not trying to make a point about voting.

    • 6 months ago
  • Paratus
    • -6
      Paratus  
    • For Obama to be "open to compromise" he would have to be completely different that he was in his first term. Obama is a good Marxist.

    • 6 months ago
  • Radical_Centrist
  • gatormouth
    • +2
      gatormouth  
    • Paratus:

      He is a Neoliberal Centrist. (or Transformist!).He is hardly a Marxist or Democratic Socialist, either. He takes his guidance from Corporate influence and favors Free Trade/Globalization and Deregulation. His record on liberal favored wedge issues is very good. But on Multinational Corporate favored issues (viewed by a Progressive)? Not so much. Don't get me wrong, he was very much the best of the choices given us in the last election! But that was then.

    • 6 months ago
  • gatormouth
  • cmc101
  • Radical_Centrist
  • JanforGore
  • gatormouth
  • tverdell
  • gatormouth
  • remanns
    • +6
      remanns  
    • It was a good speech. +^d ( Obama does much better when he's not bending over to suck up. ) The man is certainly better delivering a message from a position of power, rather than as a supplicating campaigner.

      STILL - I wish it could have been even more combative

      p.s - " I'm NOT a ' victim ' of your capitalist plutocrat pig RAPE,....
      ( asshole )
      I'm a SURVIVOR "!

      " NO MEANS NO ' !

      ( something along those lines )

    • 6 months ago
  • BRAVATRAVELS
  • ejasun
  • WalmartRamen
    • +2
      WalmartRamen  
    • Image
    • ejasun:

      entitlement reform & spending cuts?

      I worked all my life & payed into the Social security it's my money in there,
      keep your hands off my money! No entitlement reform!

      Spending cuts? For the Rich?
      Or are we going to drag all the poor into the ground? Who will pass the background check? The Middle class does not work for the middle class!

      Why make it bad for your self & have no workers or people that can afford what you are trying to sale? We need a foundation, there is nothing to build on it's quick sand!

      The poor with no help will pull down your towns property value.
      Detroit! Or like my town!
      Pulls down many businesses value. Like a Walmart moving into your town
      like it did in the 90's. Many businesses lost value, they knew
      Walmart would kill them.
      So the poor will kill businesses also! They will take us all to their level!

      http://politicalirony.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/d3a742408336012ee3c400163e4...

    • 6 months ago
  • Wyley_Wombat
    • +1
      Wyley_Wombat  
    • WalmartRamen:

      I worked all my life & payed into the Social security it's my money in there,
      keep your hands off my money! No entitlement reform!

      Right you are !! It is not an entitlement, it is money that they owe me, and I expect payment. I have paid into SSI ever since I had my first job.

    • 6 months ago
  • Argon18
    • +4
      Argon18  
    • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8q63EpQUr0

      Now is the time for Obama to use the "bully pulpit" and hammer the GOP on the point that Boehner's argument is worthless as shown by the non-partisan Congressional Research Service because it turns out facts are stubborn things. From the report:

      http://www.dpcc.senate.gov/files/documents/CRSTaxesandtheEconomy%20Top%20Rates.p...

      "The results of the analysis suggest that changes over the past 65 years in the top marginal tax rate and the top capital gains tax rate do not appear correlated with economic growth. The reduction in the top tax rates appears to be uncorrelated with saving, investment, and productivity growth. The top tax rates appear to have little or no relation to the size of the economic pie. However, the top tax rate reductions appear to be associated with the increasing concentration of income at the top of the income distribution."

      http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/11/03/1154629/-The-Report-the-GOP-doesn-t-wan...

      So just repeating the same BS over about "lowering rates, more economic growth and our ability to create jobs" that has proven to be false just makes it worse and that point should be "driven home" to show how foolish any plan to continue it is.

      “Raising tax rates will slow down our ability to create the jobs that everyone says they want,” said Mr. Boehner, who said he favored generating any new federal revenue to offset the deficit by closing tax loopholes and limiting deductions.

      “It’s clear that there are a lot of special interest loopholes in the tax code, both corporate and personal,” he said. “It’s also clear that there are all kinds of deductions, some of which make sense; others don’t. And by lowering rates and cleaning up the tax code, we know we’re going to get more economic growth.”

    • 6 months ago
  • Leen61
  • Argon18
    • +4
      Argon18  
    • Leen61:

      http://youtu.be/7nr9CoGCwqU

      Unfortunately from all the evidence the facts have as much effect as a "fart in a hurricane" since the attitudes have not changed.

      Is it going to take a demonstration as dramatic as the all the damage caused by Sandy to get through to some people? Would they need something like the Zombie Apocalypse to give up their cynical and stubborn denial of the facts?

      http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/09/the-tyranny-of-zombie-econom...

      "The Tyranny of Zombie Economics in America: How a stubborn misreading of classical economists -- combined with a hyper-partisan Republican Party -- haunts the U.S. economy

      The story of where we are is a story of the destructive ideas that guided us here. Bad ideas about how capitalism works--ideas that fail to describe how economies actually function--have combined with conservative politics to promote policies that stifle growth, redistribute what growth there is upward, skew our fiscal outlook, and handcuff our policy process.

      We are like travelers who have followed a road map to a destination that promised bliss but instead delivered stagnation and joblessness to many and political dysfunction to all. The economic geography behind that roadmap is a misreading of the original mapmakers--the founders of free markets--which eventually morphed into the deeply damaging belief that markets never fail and always self-correct; and therefore, government actions can only distort otherwise self-correcting markets.

      Because the predictions that fall out of the model I'm describing have largely all come to pass. Deregulation coupled with lack of attention to the existent regulatory regime has led to the shampoo economy: bubble, bust, repeat. This last bubble--in housing--has been particularly devastating. It is directly responsible for literally trillions of dollars in output lost forever, for lives lastingly disrupted through millions of foreclosures, for lifetime earnings trajectories that will likely be permanently altered downward, for hundreds of millions of lost hours of work.

      Even after the devastating failure of the dominant model should have been clear to all in recent years, the Obama administration has struggled to victories -- in stimulus spending, health reform, and financial regulation -- that many considered too incremental."

    • 6 months ago
  • Leen61
  • northernexpat
    • +3
      northernexpat  
    • Argon18:

      They have been singing the same mantra since Clinton raised taxes on the wealthy back in the 90s. They still cannot accept that the country was more prosperous as a result. It's denial, denial, denial. It's even worse these days, as they live in their own little bubble and only believe their own so-called facts. I am hoping that the President holds his ground and forces them to finally face reality.

    • 6 months ago
  • cmc101
    • +2
      cmc101  
    • northernexpat:

      I am hoping that the President holds his ground and forces them to finally face reality.
      as long as the voters support pipe dreams the denial, denial, denial. will be the status quo.

    • 6 months ago
  • tverdell
  • treewolf39
    • +4
      treewolf39  
    • Mr. Boehner has to check what his masters want him to say. We may have to let the republicans take us over that edge. This will hurt the things that we should be really talking about like a lot more of unpredictable weather or clean water or food with accurate labeling or nuclear radiation from an ongoing meltdown. The house needs a lot more cleaning if any real productive work is going to be done. I think the Republicans are going to need several more disagreement where they get their asses kicked to start to get it. Brain repair is slow and tedious and often can not be fixed.

    • 6 months ago
  • BRAVATRAVELS
    • +7
      BRAVATRAVELS  
    • Image
    • “Justice and power must be brought together, so that whatever is just may be powerful, and whatever is powerful may be just.”
      Blaise Pascal quotes (French Mathematician, Philosopher and Physicist, 1623-1662

    • 6 months ago

top videos