Obama Poised for New Fight With G.O.P. Over Tax Cuts

[alp227]

Source: NY Times

With a torpid job market and a fragile economy threatening his re-election chances, President Obama is changing the subject to tax fairness, calling for a one-year extension of the Bush-era tax cuts for people making less than $250,000.

Mr. Obama plans to make his announcement in the Rose Garden on Monday, senior administration officials said. The ceremony comes as Congress returns from its Independence Day recess, and as both parties and their presidential candidates head into the rest of the summer trying to seize the upper hand in a campaign that has been closely matched and stubbornly static.

House Republicans plan to vote this month to extend permanently all of the Bush tax cuts, for middle- and upper-income people.

The president’s proposal could also put him at odds with Democratic leaders like Representative Nancy Pelosi of California and Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York, who have advocated extending the cuts for everyone who earns up to $1 million. And it will most likely do little to break the deadlock in Washington over how to deal with fiscal deficits, an impasse that has only hardened as Republicans sense a chance to make gains in Congress this fall.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/09/us/politics/obama-seeks-2013-tax-cuts-within-limits.html?pagewanted=all

[choie]

1. what the fucking hell are

Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer doing supporting the extension of the tax cuts for people earning up to $1 million? Are they goddamn crazy???

[Skittles]

2. because it includes them?

just a shot

[Wilms]

3. They wouldn't!

Ah, would they?

[emilyg]

4. Yes they would.

[Skittles]

5. Dems and repukes both would

ABSOLUTELY

[choie]

9. well said

n/t

[AnotherMcIntosh]

7. They are giving cover to those who want to compromise (aka capitulate).

Once it is established that "We don't have enough votes" and "We must compromise," then the only question is "How much compromise?"

The answer will be that "the Republicans want a permanent" extension and the DC Democrats will then compromise by only giving them another extension. Everybody wins.

Kabuki theater. Since there's nothing that any of us can do about it, there's no reason for any of us to get mad about it.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

12. 'Compromise by only giving them another extension'--But AFTER

the President wins re-election and only at the price of Republican concessions on the American Jobs Act and on a National Infrastructure Bank.

In the meantime, the President's firm stand is great populist re-election politics as well as a great negotiating position for after the election. And this time next year, another extension battle could become another vehicle for more Republican concessions on community college expansions, more defense cuts, and other elements of the President's long-term economic growth policy.

If Romney wins, and if there are only small changes in the balance of power in Congress, Republican reconciliation efforts won't face any veto threats, and Republicans will get permanent tax cuts for the wealthy and defunding of healthcare reform anyway. But if the President wins re-election, this stand against tax cuts for the wealthy is a great springboard for getting Congress to approve the President's current agenda immediately.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

13. Since neither you nor I are lobbyists for the super-rich, nor are we big campaign donors, we do not

influence policy.

[Odin2005]

28. Because they are DINOs???

[AJTheMan]

6. Let the whole thing expire.

It's intended goal was to spur the economy and create jobs. It no longer serves that function.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

8. Maybe that was just one function. Another was to reward the wealthy contributors.

[airplaneman]

14. Im with you on this one. n/t.

[KansDem]

26. "It's intended goal was to spur the economy and create jobs."

And it did neither...

[Bandit]

33. No that was not the goal and even if it were it did neither.

I remember well, the reason was "It's your money and you know how to spend it better than Washington".. It was 100% political and had zero to do with the economy which actually was doing quite well when the first tax cuts were passed.. the recession began immediately after that tax bill was passed..

[harun]

35. Expire and increase across the board.

[underpants]

39. The middle class is what does and always has spurred this economy

the cuts for the top is what bankrupted us but the cuts for the middle class have to continue or there were will be at least a big drop.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

10. BRILLIANT political strategy, IMO. Ties Rs in Congress to

the successful campaign against Romney in swing states and in the 33 Senate races this year. Both Romney and Republicans in Congress will be tied together in voters' minds as concerned mainly with the interests of the wealthy "donors" who have bought them. Populism here we come, for the first time in many years. And Romney may take the bait and be made to further associate himself with the economic policies of George W. Bush.

I sure hope Romney picks former Bush Budget Director Rob Portman of Ohio as his VP candidate. That would be just PERFECTION for turning Romney into a combination of George W. Bush and Gordon Gekko.

[DavidDvorkin]

32. I agree

This also seems to be part of Obama's strategy of doing something every two or three weeks that derails the Republicans.

[underpants]

38. and the timing was spot on

top news story as everyone is back at work for the stretch to Labor Day.

Obama's MO
Open big (the press tried desperately to water down his opening)
Rope-a-dope and let the opposition flail about
Close (Charlotte NC stadium speech)

He has done this time and time again and they don't see it coming - well they saw it coming this time that is why they tried to diminish his opening in June.

BTW- the only reason Mitt is the nominee is to keep Scott Brown's seat in Mass. That HAS to happen if they have any chance of taking the Senate. It will be tight but the math simply doesn't work of Brown is voted out.

[SoutherDem]

11. Am I correct that if nothing is done they expire?

If this is true would it be worth trading an additional year of extending the tax cuts for an infrastructure package (jobs package)?

The only reason I am saying this is that the Republicans won't pass a jobs package without us giving something they really want and other than President Obama resigning, or killing something for the poor, I don't know of anything else they want.

If the Dems cave and they send a bill to Obama and he vetoes it could they override it? I don't really understand how all the rules work.

[Drunken Irishman]

15. If Obama could get his jobs package for a one-year extension, I think he should do it...

But I don't know if they'd go that far. If it's anything less than his jobs package, tell 'em to fuck off.

[Volaris]

16. I disagree with you, and here's why...

I would go balls out, and tell The People, "Look, I can get you an extension on a tax cut, but the GOP won't let me do it unless the Rich get to keep fucking us all over on the tax rate they SHOULD be paying. The GOP won't play ball on YOUR behalf, so I say don't vote for them."

And if he wins, and gets the House back, (yeah, its a long shot) he can work on getting all the Jobs Bills he damn-well wants. If he REALLY goes populist on these fuckers, he WILL win re-election,though.

But that's just my 2 cents for today, and just because I disagree with you, does NOT make you wrong.

[Drunken Irishman]

17. I agree somewhat with you...

My fear is that, as you predict, the Democrats probably won't gain control of the House. If that's the case, a jobs bill probably isn't feasible right now. I guess, though, it's possible, at the beginning of his second term, he uses the fact he's won to push through the bill (Bush did something similar and I have a feeling Obama will win by a wider margin). If that's the case, he can get both.

But that's a risk. If he lets the taxes expire and then the obstructionists fail to act in Congress, we could see a severe economic downturn that will laid at his feet at the start of his second term.

So, it's a gamble, either way.

Of course, this assumes he wins. If he loses, I'd just say fuck it and let them expire.

[Volaris]

18. "If he loses, I'd just say fuck it and let them expire."

Which, while not optimal, most of us on this side of the fence have decided we could live with, (if it came to that) for sake of the Greater Good. So, he may as well go for broke, and at least put himself in a position to make the argument that Dem's should run the House...its a wash either way, but ONE of those ways is better for the People...

[Drunken Irishman]

20. If you're suggesting losing would be ideal, I disagree...

It's something I could not tolerate and would be the absolute worst case scenario in any of this.

[Volaris]

41. I'm not suggesting that at all...

The title of that post was in quotes, because it belonged to the above poster, and I was responding to it. Sorry if I confused you..

[sofa king]

22. Yes, SD, they will expire on their own.

I forget the precise date, but it the expiration date was so well chosen by Congressional Democrats and the President that Congress will be out of session the week that it expires in mid-January, 2013, so the President can pocket-veto any last-minute extension.

That was the signature--or rather, lack of a signature--that made me certain this was going to go down. The President even planned it so that he doesn't even have to pick up a pen for it to happen.

It took about six months, from the December extension to the summer of 2011, for the Republicans to begin to suspect that the rude person they were beating up was in fact a tar baby. That is why they orchestrated the government shut-down last summer. On the sidelines, it was quietly reported that a re-negotiation of the tax cuts was the major deal they wanted to make behind closed doors, but the President had that option headed off at the pass, too.

So now that the rest of you finally see it as I did, the whole time, can you now see why the Republicans were so vitriolic, so uncooperative, so hateful in this past year? It is because they are as desperate and furious as a badger trapped in a corner of its own making. If they can't keep the tax cuts from being split (and they can't), Republican voters will begin to realize that they can pay themselves by not voting at all.

And that is how you build a landslide with coattails 3,000 miles long.

[wordpix]

42. MSNBC reported that if tax cuts expire, those making $50-100K will pay nearly $5000 more in taxes/yr

As you know, on East and West Coasts this amt of income doesn't go far for a family of four or even two, especially at the lower end of the spectrum. So paying $5000 MORE will really cause middle income people to take a hit.

Meanwhile, the top 1% will only be paying 13% more, while those in the lowest income bracket will pay 50% more.

This was reported last night on, I believe, the Ed Show.

[awoke_in_2003]

19. They will be extended...

there will be a bunch of false hand wringing and gnashing of teeth in front of the cameras, but, in the end, the rich will get what the paid for. Congress is bought and paid for, everything else is just bread and circus to keep the unwashed masses amused.

[sofa king]

21. Welcome to the glorious other dropping shoe!

Nobody could have possibly predicted the near-total defeat of the Republican Party in this election, over this issue, eighteen months ago:

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/sofa%20king/95

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/sofa%20king/96

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=356650

Except the President, and some other schmuck.

Remember that the Republicans are bought and paid for to deliver really only one issue to the filthy rich: keep their taxes low. They CANNOT allow the bush tax cuts to be split into two parts.

So they will be forced to block the middle class tax cuts until tax cuts for the rich are included.

Once Republican voters realize they can pay themselves by staying home, you get this:



And hell yes, I'm gloating. I had to listen to a good chunk of all of you and everyone else I knew laugh at me as I've been crowing that this election is over because of this simple little maneuver.

I was right the whole time, and the rest of you can SUCK IT! And my billable rate is now $300 an hour.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

23. God, I wish this scenario could become a reality in the fall.

[Enrique]

24. what is the connection to the OP

it's not obvious to me.

[sofa king]

25. The possible outcomes are predictable.

Forgive this abbreviated explanation; there are a couple other less likely outcomes, and infinite ones involving breaking the law. I don't have time to talk about those, so this is just the most likely path, I think:

First, the President opens the salvo with his speech. In it, I expect he will propose to split the cuts and extend only those for the middle class, slyly adding that we cannot afford the other tax cut.

The Republican-controlled House will have none of that, because the only reason they're there is to protect the tax cuts for the rich. So we know for sure they'll reject any alternative.

In the Democratic-controlled Senate, however, Senator Reid will fast-track an extension for the middle class only...

... which Republican Senators will have to filibuster or otherwise block (which will also require Grover Norquist to do some soft-pedaling) in an attempt to get tax cuts for the rich tacked on.

It doesn't actually matter if an extension passes or not. I personally don't see how it can, unless the GOP is willing to make some painful and embarrassing concessions. The

At which point, political ads which have been polished for eighteen months will be released, showing Republican voters that their Republican Senator blocked a middle class tax cut. The kiss of death in an election year.

When Republicans realize they can pay themselves by not voting, the House flips, the Senate is held, the President is re-elected, and everyone gets to work on running out enough Republican Senators to gain a supermajority--and the power to impeach Supreme Court justices--in 2015.

[Enrique]

31. the GOP will block it

either vote it down in the House, or filibuster it in the Senate. Obama has made clear that he is unwilling to give up the tax cuts for under $250,000. The GOP will use that promise to get the whole thing. They're not just going to give it to him.

[sofa king]

36. I expect them to block it, and so does the President.

The President has presented them with a Hobson's choice: alienate the voter base, or alienate the donor base. They're Republicans! They'll take the money and fuck the people every time.

The President has no reason to cave in on this, at all. Ending the tax cuts for the wealthy is what he wants, and he already got that, screwed down so tight that ruining the nation's credit rating couldn't undo it.

He doesn't even need to lift a pen to make it happen now, and he's got a pretty decent chance of destroying the Republican Party if he does nothing at all from this point on (this now being after the speech I predicted he would make above). The Republicans have done everything they could to reneg on their prior deal. They failed, and now they have nothing left to offer but a record of disingenuous dealing. They're fucked without a kiss.

The ferret is already in the potato chip bag, and now the President can drop it in the cage, let it go, or drop it in the wood chipper. Now we know he's chosen the wood chipper.

[Odin2005]

30. Oh, that map looks so beautiful!

[underpants]

37. This was brilliant. The timing is great - just as everyone gets back from the 4th of July

top news story as everyone is back at work for the stretch to Labor Day.

Obama's MO
Open big (the press tried desperately to water down his opening)
Rope-a-dope and let the opposition flail about
Close (Charlotte NC stadium speech)

He has done this time and time again and they don't see it coming - well they saw it coming this time that is why they tried to diminish his opening in June.

BTW- the only reason Mitt is the nominee is to keep Scott Brown's seat in Mass. That HAS to happen if they have any chance of taking the Senate. It will be tight but the math simply doesn't work of Brown is voted out.

[sofa king]

45. And there's another nice touch, too.

President Obama seems to enjoy ruining Republicans' vacations. It's the closest thing to malevolence that I can see in his politics.

The August recess is less than a month away, which in election years is the time when Senators hit the ground back home, and the legislative staff people get to go on campaign and/or concentrate on their drinking, preferably in someplace other than a hellishly hot and humid former swamp.

But the timing of this announcement sets the legislative wrecking-ball aswing, and all the Republican legislative staff have just finished explaining to their bosses that NOT FUCKING ONE OF THEM noticed that the timing of the previous tax cut compromise was a trap (and yes, it is definitely in their job description to notice and react to such things).

Now, they're going to be eighteen months behind a political and legislative plan that they very likely cannot unravel, but which their pissed off bosses will tell them to work on all through their vacations, anyway, so that they can try to delay the hammer-drop until after the election... in the hellishly hot and humid swamp, while Democratic staff goes on campaign... or concentrates on their drinking somewhere else... with their game-plan long since scripted and nearly certain to work.

Ouch.

[joshcryer]

40. I like your optimism and spunk sofa king.

Have to hand you that.

[Odin2005]

27. GOPricks are SCREWED!

[bemildred]

29. Fighting with the GOP is good politics. nt

[Blue Owl]

34. Kick 'em while they're down

PLEASE!

[laureloak]

43. Then write a bill to cut only middle class taxes

When it makes it through then let the Bush cuts expire.
How could the republicans object when Romney says he's gonna cut taxes beyond the Bush cuts?

[musiclawyer]

44. The ads are key

They must be simple. Showing that the tax cuts are expiring; the savings to the average family; and saying, "the GOP only works for the top 2%, but if you vote Democratic, the Democratic party will return the tax cuts to you, the middle class, and return fairness our tax structure in order to build the new US economy and create jobs here in America."