Sorry for multiple posts. I blame my damn laptop keyboard. It overreacts.
On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 9:32 AM, Max Sawicky <[email protected]> wrote: > This has been "walked back," as they say in Spin City. > Though I don't doubt it will happen. > > > On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 9:26 AM, Louis Proyect <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/10/white-house-gives-in-on-bush-tax-cuts_n_781992.html >> >> White House Gives In On Bush Tax Cuts >> >> WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama's top adviser suggested to >> The Huffington Post late Wednesday that the administration is >> ready to accept an across-the-board, temporary continuation of >> steep Bush-era tax cuts, including those for the wealthiest taxpayers. >> >> That appears to be the only way, said David Axelrod, that >> middle-class taxpayers can keep their tax cuts, given the >> legislative and political realities facing Obama in the aftermath >> of last week's electoral defeat. >> >> "We have to deal with the world as we find it," Axelrod said >> during an unusually candid and reflective 90-minute interview in >> his office, steps away from the Oval Office. "The world of what it >> takes to get this done." >> >> "There are concerns," he added, that Congress will continue to >> kick the can down the road in the future by passing temporary >> extensions for the wealthy time and time again. "But I don't want >> to trade away security for the middle class in order to make that >> point." >> >> It has been widely assumed that the president would have to accept >> an across-the-board deal of some kind, but Axelrod's remarks were >> the first public confirmation of that fact -- and by a figure >> regarded as closer to Obama than any other White House staffer. >> >> Also dealing "with the world as we find it," Axelrod declined >> repeatedly to comment on any of the controversial debt-reduction >> measures suggested by the chairs of the president's own commission >> -- even those, such as raising the Social Security retirement age, >> that go against Obama campaign pledges and strike at the heart of >> Democratic constituencies. >> >> He said that the White House would wait until the commission made >> its final recommendations on Dec. 1 before adding, "the >> president's commitments haven't changed." >> >> By giving ground on taxes and remaining silent on budget >> suggestions that others, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) >> and AFL-CIO head Richard Trumka, quickly denounced, Axelrod showed >> the subdued caution of an adviser to a humbled boss. >> >> But the top Obama aide also erected some barriers against >> newly-emboldened Republicans and their Pentagon allies. >> >> Axelrod said that his boss would veto repeal of his cherished >> health care law, though he would "work with people" who "have >> constructive ideas about how to strengthen" it. The veto threat >> was not unexpected, but it was the first time that a top >> administration figure had issued such a threat on the record. And >> in doing so, Axelrod predicted that Republicans would be making a >> major misstep by challenging the White House's commitment on this >> front. >> >> "I'm not going to prejudge what they are going to do," Axelrod >> said of Republican opposition to the legislation. "But I will tell >> you this -- we are firm in our commitment, we are willing to work >> with people to improve this plan we are not going to stand for >> those who want to undermine it and destroy it." >> >> "The notion of spending the next two years fighting over this, I >> think, is a complete misreading of what the American people want," >> he added. "They want us to focus on the economy. They don't want >> us to fight the battles of the last two years. But we are not >> going to stand by and go back to allowing people with preexisting >> conditions to be discriminated against, go back to the situation >> where people can be thrown off their insurance simply because they >> become seriously ill or you can't get on your parents' insurance >> after the age of 20. There are so many things that are just central." >> >> Meanwhile, on the war in Afghanistan -- an expensive and >> increasingly unpopular conflict -- Axelrod pushed back hard >> against the notion, floated in some recent stories quoting "senior >> administration sources," that the deadline for beginning troop >> withdrawals had been pushed back from July 2011 to some time in 2014. >> >> "If it is being sourced to senior administration officials, then >> someone has bad administration sources," Axelrod said. "There is >> no change in the president's position. There is no change in that >> basic commitment." >> >> But there is just such a change on taxes. >> >> Although the president "took the position he felt was the right >> position" -- favoring a continuation of the cuts only for families >> earning up to $250,000 -- Axelrod portrayed this "optimal" stance >> as unrealistic in the lame-duck Congress that begins next week. >> >> For one, time is not on the administration's side. All of the tax >> cuts, enacted in 2001 and 2003, will expire at the end of this >> year unless Congress acts. The Republicans in effect "built in tax >> increases," Axelrod said. And separating out different categories >> of tax cuts now -- extending some without extending others -- is >> politically unrealistic and procedurally difficult, he added. >> >> "We don't want that tax increase to go forward for the middle >> class," he said, which means the administration will have to >> accept them all for some unspecified period of time. "But plainly, >> what we can't do is permanently extend these high income taxes." >> >> In other words, the White House won't risk being blamed for >> raising taxes on the middle class even though, arguably, it is the >> GOP's refusal to separate the categories that has put Obama in >> this bind. The only condition, at least initially, seems to be >> that the tax cuts for the wealthy not be extended "permanently." >> >> A student of history and a onetime political reporter, Axelrod >> expressed curiosity and even some optimism about the tea party, >> suggesting that Obama could work with them on matters such as a >> ban on spending earmarks and on winding down the war in Afghanistan. >> >> If so, Obama would turn the Clinton-era triangulation strategy on >> its head, reaching out not to the moderates in the other party but >> to the new breed of conservatives who could bring the ideological >> arc of Congress full circle. >> >> Can the White House work with them? "It is a fascinating time in >> our history," he said, "and I don't think anybody really knows. I >> mean I have watched carefully some of these folks on television. I >> don't think this is nearly as predictable as people think." >> >> President Obama, in fact, has called every new Republican >> senator-elect and many of the incoming GOP House members -- "well >> over 100 calls" in all, said Axelrod. >> >> That's how a shellacked president spends his plane time on a trip >> to Asia. >> >> --- >> >> NY Times November 10, 2010 >> Panel Seeks Social Security Cuts and Tax Increases >> By JACKIE CALMES >> >> WASHINGTON — The chairmen of President Obama’s bipartisan >> commission on reducing the national debt outlined a politically >> provocative and economically ambitious package of spending cuts >> and tax increases on Wednesday, igniting a debate that is likely >> to grip the country for years. >> >> The plan calls for deep cuts in domestic and military spending, a >> gradual 15-cents-a-gallon increase in the federal gasoline tax, >> limiting or eliminating popular tax breaks in return for lower >> rates, and benefit cuts and an increased retirement age for Social >> Security. >> >> Those changes and others, none of which would take effect before >> 2012 to avoid undermining the tepid economic recovery, would erase >> nearly $4 trillion from projected deficits through 2020, the >> proposal says, and stabilize the accumulated debt. >> >> “It’s time to lay it out on the table and let the American people >> start to chew on it,” said Alan K. Simpson, the former Republican >> Senate leader who is one of the co-chairmen, along with Erskine B. >> Bowles, who was White House chief of staff under President Bill >> Clinton. >> >> Their outline will be the basis for negotiation within the >> commission, which has a Dec. 1 deadline for submitting a final >> plan. It represents a challenge to both parties: to Mr. Obama and >> the Democrats, to show in the wake of the midterm election that >> they are serious about their pledges to address long-term >> deficits, and to Republicans, who for the most part have ruled out >> consideration of tax increases even as they have promised new >> adherence to fiscal responsibility. >> >> Liberal groups immediately condemned the plan when news of it >> broke, for its Social Security and Medicare changes and for the >> scope of the spending cuts. The House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, in a >> statement called it “simply unacceptable.” >> >> The furor on the left was not matched — yet — by a similar outcry >> from the right to the draft’s proposed revenue increases, cuts to >> the military or other options. >> >> The plan has many elements with the potential to draw intense >> political fire. It lays out options for overhauling the tax code >> that include limiting or eliminating the mortgage interest >> deduction, the child tax credit and the earned income tax credit. >> It envisions cutting Pentagon weapons programs and paring back >> almost all domestic programs. >> >> The plan would reduce cost-of-living increases for all federal >> programs, including Social Security. It would reduce projected >> Social Security benefits to most retirees in later decades, though >> low-income people would get higher benefits. The retirement age >> for full benefits would be slowly raised to 69 from 67 by 2075, >> with a “hardship exemption” for people who physically cannot work >> past 62. And higher levels of income would be subject to payroll >> taxes. >> >> But the plan would not count Social Security savings toward the >> overall deficit-reduction goal that Mr. Obama set for fiscal year >> 2015, reflecting the chairmen’s sensitivity to liberal critics who >> have complained that Social Security should be fixed only for its >> own sake, not to help balance the nation’s books. >> >> Mr. Obama created the commission last February in the hope it >> would provide political cover for bold action against deficits in >> 2011. His stance now, in the wake of his party’s drubbing, will go >> a long way toward telling whether he tacks to the political center >> — by embracing such proposals — or shifts to the left and leaves >> them on a shelf. >> >> For Republicans, the chairmen’s proposals and a similar report >> coming next week from a private bipartisan group will challenge >> their contention that the budget can be balanced by spending cuts >> alone. That is a claim that many conservative economists and >> budget analysts reject, given the scale of projected debt as the >> baby boom generation retires and begins claiming costly federal >> benefits, after a severe recession. >> >> Mr. Bowles and Mr. Simpson said their plan was “a starting point” >> as members of the commission met behind closed doors to consider it. >> >> That was clear from the initial reactions of the members, nine of >> them Democrats, seven Republicans. None embraced the package and >> several made clear they would not support it without big changes. >> >> “I think every member of the commission would agree that this is >> not the plan,” said Representative Jan Schakowsky, Democrat of >> Illinois, who is perhaps the panel’s most liberal member. >> >> The group had made no decisions before the midterm elections, to >> avoid politicizing the painful options. Even so, the election >> results — by emboldening victorious antitax conservatives and >> having led to the defeat of many fiscally conservative >> Congressional Democrats — are widely seen as having reduced the >> already slim chance that a supermajority of the commission could >> agree to a package of proposals by Dec. 1. >> >> Under Mr. Obama’s executive order creating the panel of 12 members >> of Congress and six private citizens, 14 of the 18 commissioners >> must agree in order to send any package to Congress for a vote in >> December. The Senate majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, and >> Ms. Pelosi, who will remain the speaker until January, have >> promised in writing that the Senate would vote first and, if it >> approves a plan, the House would vote. >> >> “I think it’s possible” that 14 members will agree, said Senator >> Tom Coburn, a conservative Oklahoma Republican who worked closely >> with the chairmen on proposed reductions from the military and in >> so-called tax expenditures, the myriad tax breaks for individuals >> and businesses that cost more than $1 trillion a year. “You don’t >> know until you see what the final plan is.” >> >> In five hours of deliberations on Wednesday, the commission did >> not discuss the plan’s particulars much but instead talked at >> length about whether a lame-duck Congress would have time to write >> specific legislation and then vote, members said in interviews. It >> was unclear, they said, whether that was a sign other members >> thought the commission actually could reach agreement, or whether >> they were hiding behind concerns about legislative procedures to >> avoid tough policy decisions. >> >> “At least people stayed in the room,” Andy Stern, the former >> president of the Service Employees International Union, said in an >> interview, recalling his concerns and others’ that Republicans >> would walk out if taxes were on the table and Democrats if Social >> Security and other spending programs were. >> >> Right now the biggest issue facing the lame-duck Congress is >> whether to extend the Bush-era income tax cuts, which expire Dec. >> 31, for all taxpayers, as Republicans want, or for income below >> $250,000, as Mr. Obama and Democrats want. The Bowles-Simpson plan >> includes one option that assumes only the lower-income rates are >> extended and another that ends all Bush tax rates and replaces the >> tax code with simpler, lower rates and many fewer tax breaks. >> >> Extending all the Bush tax cuts through 2020 would add more than >> $4 trillion to the debt — coincidentally, about the same amount >> that the chairmen’s painful options are designed to cut in the >> same time frame. >> >> Their proposed simplification of the tax code would repeal or >> modify a number of popular tax breaks — including the >> deductibility of mortgage interest payments — so that income tax >> rates could be reduced across the board. Under one option, >> individual income tax rates would decline to as low as 8 percent >> for the lowest income bracket (it is now 10 percent) and to 23 >> percent for the highest bracket (now 35 percent). The corporate >> tax rate, now 35 percent, would be reduced to as low as 26 percent. >> >> But how low the rates are set would depend on how many tax breaks >> are reduced or eliminated. Some of them, including the mortgage >> interest deduction and the exemption from taxes for employees’ >> health benefits, are political sacred cows. >> >> The 18.4-cents-a-gallon federal gasoline tax would rise by 15 >> cents between 2013 and 2015 so that transportation spending no >> longer requires money from the general treasury. >> >> The plan would cut $2 from spending for every $1 in new revenues. >> Total spending would be about 22 percent of the nation’s gross >> domestic product, and revenues would be held to 21 percent. >> >> Cuts in annual discretionary spending, domestic and military, >> would be the largest in recent decades. Farm subsidies would be >> reduced. To further reduce growth in the fast-growing entitlement >> programs, the plan would expand on the hard-won Medicare cost >> savings in Mr. Obama’s health care law. And it would limit >> malpractice awards, long a Republican goal. >> >> David M. Herszenhorn contributed reporting. >> _______________________________________________ >> pen-l mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l >> > >
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
