either that or it's your unconscious that's talking. On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 8:30 AM, Max Sawicky <[email protected]> wrote: > It's a Dell Studio. A nice laptop, actually, but it's easy to hit the wrong > key by accident. > > On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 11:26 AM, Jim Devine <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> what brand is it? >> >> On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 8:18 AM, Max Sawicky <[email protected]> wrote: >> > 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 >> > >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own >> way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > >
-- Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
