Political Positioning: Obama Obama Calls for Bush Tax Cut Extensions for Those Making Less Than $250,000
A lot of what is going on in Congress and the White House is political positioning. For instance, do House Republicans REALLY think they can repeal Obama care (as Dan Quayle would say “No. N-o-e: No.”). And does President Barack Obama REALLY think GOPers will go along with extend tax cuts to those making less than $250,000 but not to those making more money?
President Barack Obama called Monday for Congress to pass a one-year extension of the Bush-era tax cuts for people earning less than $250,000 a year.
“I believe prosperity comes from an economy that’s built on a strong and growing middle class,” Obama said at the White House, with people described as working Americans standing behind him.
In addition, an Obama campaign official said the president’s re-election team will “amplify the president’s message on middle-class tax cuts” by hosting a series of events in battleground states all week across the country.
In Las Vegas, for example, local elected officials will discuss Obama’s efforts to fight for the middle class, the campaign official said. In Colorado, Aspen Mayor Mick Ireland, Colorado Democratic Party Chair Rick Palacio and state Sen. Gail Schwartz will hold a news conference to discuss the contrasting economic visions of Obama and presumptive GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney.
The Obama campaign seeks to frame the November contest as a race between the president’s policies intended to help restore middle class opportunity versus Romney’s policies that it says would primarily benefit corporations and wealthy Americans.
A Romney campaign official criticized Obama’s planned announcement as more bad policy from the president in the wake of the weak June jobs report.
“President Obama’s response to even more bad economic news is a massive tax increase,” said Andrea Saul, the Romney campaign’s spokeswoman. “It just proves again that the president doesn’t have a clue how to get America working again and help the middle class.”
Unlike Obama, Saul continued, Romney “understands that the last thing we need to do in this economy is raise taxes on anyone.”
“In many ways the fate of the tax cut for the wealthiest Americans will be decided by the outcome of the election,” Obama said in remarks delivered at the White House. “My opponent will fight to keep them in place, and I will fight to end them. But that argument shouldn’t threaten you. It shouldn’t threaten the 98 percent of Americans who just want to know that their taxes won’t go up next year.”
Obama’s renewed focus on paring down the highest-income portions of the Bush tax cuts advances several White House priorities from a political, economic and negotiating perspective.
The president’s re-election message right now is almost singularly focused on disqualifying Romney in the eyes of voters by portraying him as rich, out of touch and determined to help out fellow millionaires at the expense of average Americans. Obama’s newest announcement puts Romney, who supports a full extension of the Bush tax cuts and additional tax breaks that independent analyses claim would benefit the wealthy, in a tight spot. The Romneys paid about 13.9 percent in taxes in 2010, much lower than many middle-income Americans, and Democrats are eager to use their opponent’s biography as a cudgel against Republicans arguing that the economy will suffer if the rich have to pay more.
Obama hammered at this angle repeatedly in his White House address, arguing that Republican claims that putting more money in the pockets of rich would stimulate the economy had already been tried unsuccessfully under President Bush.
The side that most convincingly positions itself — and negatively positions the other — wins.
Share This
Just another divisive maneuver for political reasons. He knows this will never get looked at in congress.
If he were serious about taxes, tax reform, deficit reduction, entitlement reform and doing the right thing for the country, he would have shown leadership, called all the leaders in congress to his office and began the process to legislate recommendations by Simpson Bowles.
Had he done that and the GOP rejected his actions, then he would be able to say he led and congress did nothing.
Right now no one is doing a dang thing except blowing manure out their mouths campaigning for November.
Frankly he should have let them all expire, but included only a 2% increase for the second tier, and a 1% for the rest. Spread the pain around a bit. Its in the long term best interests of this nation.
Oh oh I got it, maybe the GOP could be manuvered into saying how fair it is only the rich get hit with the old tax rates, Obama agrees, then spreads it around saying what a great concession he made with the GOP.
Considering how the GOP has frankly said they won’t do any tax increases no matter what, I don’t see how any proposal by Obama is any more outrageous.
“Spread the pain around a bit. Its in the long term best interests of this nation.”
True enough, and it really isn’t even pain, it’s mostly whining and greed – which back in the day weren’t considered desirable traits in the least. E pluribus unum much?
RP,
You said this is nothing more than a “divisive maneuver” because “it will never get looked at in Congress.”
I think it is worth pointing out that not a single thing Obama proposes from here until November will get “looked at” in Congress.
He could propose an omnibus bill to put Reagan on the 10 dollar bill, Jesus on Mount Rushmore, and making Grover Norquist’s pledge a Constitutional Amendment and the Republicans in Congress would oppose it.
Granted, what he’s doing is election year political grandstanding, but what else does he have?
He has the ability to reduce the deficit by preventing the perpetuation of the Bush tax cuts. All he has to do is not sign any bill that extends them.
As for Bowles-Simpson; I’d challenge anyone to demonstrate that, other than from the POV of for-profit financial “services” providers, there is anything wrong with Social Security. At All.
PS: Has everyone forgotten that the Bowles – Simpson commission never issued a report? The two of them just held a press conference during the course of which they espoused the pre-scribed opinions to which they had been unable to get the commission to agree.
Learn about Modern Monetary Theory (and some of the economic theories that have been spun off from it). Then the tax question changes entirely. I have written a few articles here about it.