How the GOP can turn Obama’s ‘I won’ attitude against him
So far, President Obama and Speaker John Boehner aren’t negotiating a way to rein in budget deficits in private this time. They’re negotiating in the press, and Obama is taking the hardest line.
While Boehner has signaled a willingness to increase tax revenue by limiting and eliminating deductions rather than by raising tax rates, Obama says his idea of compromise is to do both. He wants $1.6 trillion in new revenues over the next decade, which is double what he and Boehner nearly agreed to do during the 2011 debt-ceiling talks.
Virtually all of this new revenue would come from high earners: individuals making more than $200,000 or couples making more than $250,000. Raising their tax rates and capping their itemized deductions is estimated to bring in more than $1.43 trillion. The “Buffett Rule” would tack on another $47 billion, bringing the tab to $1.48 trillion for those at the top of what’s already the most progressive tax system in the industrialized world.
Obama is so committed to his position that his spokesman says the president will veto any tax bill that leaves rates intact for the top two income-tax brackets (currently 33 percent and 35 percent). The rates for these brackets are scheduled to expire Jan. 1 and rise to 36 percent and 39.6 percent, respectively. Problem is, the current rates for everyone else are also scheduled to expire Jan. 1.
You gotta love Obama and the Democrats. They care so much about the middle class that they will let middle-class tax rates rise, if that’s what it takes to stick it to “the rich.” Somehow, though, Obama succeeded in making a majority of the electorate believe it’s the GOP that is holding the middle class hostage by insisting on keeping all rates the same next year.
It is ludicrous to claim Republicans are playing tax-rate chicken more than the president. In fact, it’s closer to the opposite, because Boehner is saying he’s willing to raise revenues, just not in the same way as the president. Obama is not only insisting on his end but his means — and saying everyone will feel the pain if he doesn’t get both.
It’s ludicrous, but . . .
It’s also brilliant politics. Obama knows voters gave him the benefit of the doubt and that he’s got limited time to take advantage of that (as all second-term presidents do, particularly those whose party doesn’t control Congress). However, he may be able to turn it into a longer-term advantage with this little two-step:
1. Force House Republicans to accept higher taxes on “the rich” before Jan. 1 on high earners to stave off tax hikes on everyone else, for which he knows Republicans know they would be blamed; and then
2. When the GOP comes back next year seeking spending cuts and structural changes to entitlements as their part of the “balanced” “compromise” Obama keeps insisting he wants, he can either tell them to take a hike or make a deal that puts all the onus for unpopular cuts on Republicans. (I’m sorry, my fellow Americans, but just to get the rich to pay their Fair Share, those evil Republicans insisted on ending Medicare as we know it…)
Some of you will say I’m making the president out to be unserious about our fiscal challenges. To you I say: No, his two campaigns and first term revealed him to be that way.
After all, that’s the only way to explain a proposal that raises an average of $160 billion more per year — when the deficit last month alone rose to $120 billion — while double-counting spending cuts such as those for ending the Iraq and Afghanistan wars (decisions that were already made and thus don’t represent new savings) and seeking to increase expand spending (er, “investments”) in certain favored areas.
What we’re really seeing here
So, to Obama, this clearly is more about good politics than good policy. The House GOP should respond in kind.
It should pass the “Buffett Rule” bill that failed to pass the Senate in April, amended to include an extension of all current tax rates through 2013, as a down payment. While the Buffett Rule is projected to raise $47 billion during the next decade if the current tax rates for high earners are not extended, I’ve seen projections of more than $160 billion in 10 years if rates don’t rise. That’s an increase of approximately $16 billion next year, and it comes from real millionaires — not Obama’s “millionaire” couples who earn $250,00 a year.
Given the support for Obama in America’s wealthiest counties, not to mention Hollywood, I’d chalk this up to a paraphrase of Mencken: It appears the truly rich know what they want, and they deserve to get it good and hard.
At the same time, House Republicans should introduce a bill outlining the deductions-cutting approach for which Boehner has expressed support. Many deductions represent subsidies that are merely located in the tax code rather than an appropriations bill, and this approach allows Republicans to talk about the importance of getting government out of private decision-making without reducing incentives to work, save and invest (by increasing marginal tax rates). I’d go ahead and include a corresponding reduction in tax rates but make clear that’s negotiable, depending on what happens on the spending side.
What might this look like? Capping deductions at $50,000 a year would, according to an analysis by the Tax Policy Center, raise almost $750 billion over 10 years, with about 80 percent of that money coming from the top 1 percent of earners. The change in the average tax payment for the three lowest income quintiles would range from zero to $12 a year. Again, this approach does not leave taxes on “the rich” intact.
Your turn, Democrats
For now, that’s it. Dare Senate Democrats not to pass, and president to veto, a bill that includes their cherished Buffett Rule, just because it also keeps all tax rates in place for one more year while the two sides negotiate further. Further call their bluff with that second bill to raise even more revenue, almost all of it from the very highest earners, in the most economically sound way. Then, explain you’re looking forward to tackling the country’s real fiscal problems next year, and adjourn.
And leave it to Harry Reid and President Obama to explain to 99 percent of tax filers why their taxes are going up so that taxes can rise even more on the top 1 percent.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
542 comments Add your comment
md
November 14th, 2012
10:08 pm
4 cents? Is that all? Well then, you should be able to handle it for them……….
Morals don’t care if it’s a penny…….offer up your own tax cut then worry about someone else’ s….
Linda
November 14th, 2012
10:08 pm
Magic mirror on the wall, who’s the fairest of them all?
Not you, you socialist, Marxist, nationalist, progressive, radical liberal king or queen, whoever you think or profess to be. And it ain’t Snow White or her roommates, using her to clean & cook for them.
It’s not your highness or the Democrats who decide fairness. It’s me, the mirror, & I’m telling you, it’s the small business owners in this country, who have worked their butts off, mortgaging everything they have, engaging every family member to help, skipping sleep, time with family & simple rest, who are the most deserving members of the economy, those who have provided more jobs than the largest corporations during the most difficult times, sacrificing any & all personal rewards to promote the welfare of their employees.
Fair, my behind. Robbing Peter to pay Paul will result in Peter biting off your behind!
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
November 14th, 2012
10:08 pm
The increase in income tax rates is perhaps less destructive than the other increases, such as in rates on dividends and capital gains. Those who aren’t paying those rates really should just mind their own business.
Dusty
November 14th, 2012
10:14 pm
Well. looks like a nice day at Kyle’s place. Much better.
Anyway,today I had a good time reading some ancient world history no less. But it soundedalmost like the story of today!!
Remember Demosthenes looking for an honest man? Well, turns out he was one of the greatest orators in the then free and great democratic city/state of Athens in the three hundred years before the birth of Christ. Orators made the people aware of the state of their city..
Now Demosthenes was very worried about the brutish and greedy Philip of Macedonia (father of Alexander the Great) and the complacency of his fellow Athenians. He tried to awake selfless patriotism. but the golden age of Pericles had passed; public unconcern and corruption in high places combined to drag Athens down. It fell to Philip as did other city states.
Read Demosthenes. great speech The Third Philippic and realize some of the same concerns we hear today. Seems people don’t change or learn over the centuries. Almost seems like we wait until it is too late.
Hope I haven’t bored you to death. G’nite.
Linda
November 14th, 2012
10:15 pm
bluecoat@10:02, Earth shattering! You only have a few more nouns to understand.
bluecoat
November 14th, 2012
10:23 pm
dividends,capital gains,interest income should all be taxed for social security,and the income tax rate should be same.All should be treated as earned.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
November 14th, 2012
10:25 pm
Capital gains shouldn’t be taxed at all. Zero.
bluecoat
November 14th, 2012
10:26 pm
Linda don’t worry about the mule just load the wagon.
MrLiberty
November 14th, 2012
10:28 pm
The only strategy that will work for the GOP is to actually adopt sound economic principles and STICK TO THEM. They talk about the free market and endorce regulations of every kind (including the greatest economic evil, the Federal Reserve). There are no strategies to change the fact that no republican (except Ron Paul) can stand up and say that they support the free markets, have been voting for freedom, believe in small government, have voted for small government, etc. They are all just hipocrits. Romney had a hard time distinguishing himself from Obama because they agree on practically everything. Obama is serving out Bush’s 3rd term, and Romney wanted to serve his 4th. Both are a disaster for the nation as have been the republican and democratic parties and their policies of welfare and warfare and totalitarianism. Stop with the strategies and embrace freedom. It is popular.
bluecoat
November 14th, 2012
10:28 pm
All income should be subject to SS taxes,and income taxes.
Buzzy
November 14th, 2012
10:37 pm
How to turn Obama’s I Win Attitude against him….
I think you’ll have problems with that. It won’t work, because
HE WON.
Linda
November 14th, 2012
10:50 pm
bluecoat@10:23, proves you didn’t take Econ 101.
@10:26, proves you didn’t pass 8th grade English or participate in FFA or 4-H.
@10;28, proves you are a taker & all of the above.
Pitiful.
Linda
November 14th, 2012
10:57 pm
Obama won the battle. It’s the American people who will loose the war. Every single one of us. We will loose our country. Democrats will laugh their way over the fiscal cliff & beyond & below.
What liberals do not understand is that conservatives are not just sad that Romney did not win, but that America did not win. America lost the battle & the war. It’s the beginning of the end.
get out much?
November 14th, 2012
10:58 pm
Lil Barry – actually, capital gains should be taxes at the same rate as ordinary income, just like President Reagan did with is tax reform act of 1986. Then again, you are probably one of the modern day conservatives who believes more in Reagan the Myth, than Reagan the President.
MarkV
November 14th, 2012
11:13 pm
md @ 9:27 pm
“I understand the false narrative you are trying to present, but I also understand that we choose everything we do……so income equality is a utopian dream…….”
Thank you for confirming that you are completely ignorant of the meaning of the term “income inequality.”
ld
November 14th, 2012
11:13 pm
Anyone that believes that removing loopholes and deductions will solve the problem is delusional and not just because the math doesn’t add up — not even initially. Loopholes and deductions for the wealthiest were reduced and/or ‘eliminated’ for the wealthy during the mid eighties in exchange for a reduction in rates BUT then the wealthy hired lobbiests and put most of them and others back in. Expect that will happen again.
Old Timer
November 15th, 2012
12:03 am
Obama got his votes, now he want to dumb down the country to fit his everyone equal in the world plan, the one his FATHER was working on.
killerj
November 15th, 2012
12:43 am
This is going to be fun to watch Kyle! Let me get my peanuts and popcorn to watch the monkeys play! Ha Ha Ha
bluecoat
November 15th, 2012
1:43 am
Obama won with ‘gifts’ to some voters.Now we know where the OBAMAPHONE come from.
Linda@10:50 you are right on all three.I missed out on the Obamaphone,darn.
dagnabit
November 15th, 2012
5:43 am
Kyle: do you think Obama lost the election? Do you think at all? What is clear is Romney can’t think his way out of a wet paper bag.
Does McCain think he won the 08 election?
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
November 15th, 2012
6:54 am
Not a dime in new taxes until the Idiot Messiah returns spending to the level of his predecessor, which would be about $3 trillion per year.
Jefferson
November 15th, 2012
6:55 am
You will pay to play
catlady
November 15th, 2012
6:55 am
Kyle, how about the whine Romney has going on right now? Apparently he doesn’t consider his “slight changes” in opinion on important matters from the beginning of the campaign, when he was just another conservative, to the end of the campaign, when he was much more moderate, an attempt to buy votes! Poor man, he will feel better after he puts another 10,000 Americans out of work and buys his wife another Caddy.
Jefferson
November 15th, 2012
7:12 am
Romney lost because he was bad choice, you knew it going in, Santorium made it a point to tell you. Talk about “choices”
@@
November 15th, 2012
7:16 am
The Eurozone has fallen back into recession. It’s spreading.
Oh well.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
November 15th, 2012
7:19 am
And the Democrats keep fiddling while Rome burns, @@
What will they do when the Obama recession hits? Never mind:
“It is Bush’s fault!”
clem
November 15th, 2012
7:20 am
most repub congressman have very few folks in districts that will be hit by higher tax rate. it’s their benefactors. as bush said at a gathering of haves and have mores “my base”
get on with it.
lostinatlanta
November 15th, 2012
7:39 am
Kyle, The title of your piece was mean spirited and divisive. I expected better from you.
stands for decibels
November 15th, 2012
7:40 am
I know this has been touched upon somewhat earlier, but…
Raising revenues does not have to mean raising rates.
I get that. I’m not dead-set opposed to a deal that would include changes to some deductions in order to yield higher revenues.
But the biggest problem for me is that legislating away this kind of “tax reform” is relatively simple and can be done through the usual horse-trading that goes on in Congress. Increasing tax rates, on the other hand, is a big fat milestone, one that we seem terrified of moving under any circumstances, and I think that it would be a huge sign of maturity on the part of the GOP (and, frankly, many Dems out there as well) if we could just own up to the need to increase those rates.
and before any noobs out there start going after me personally on this, I’ve long been in favor of returning to the Clinton-era tax rates, meaning that my own income tax load would rise, not just the upper 1%ers.
JDW
November 15th, 2012
7:41 am
Well judging from the headlines I can make a couple of assumptions about Romney/Ryan…
Romney talks like a whining loser—Romney: Obama won with ‘gifts’ to certain voters
Ryan has the fortitude to man up–Ryan: Shocked at loss, Obama won fair and square
tiredofIT
November 15th, 2012
7:42 am
Bill Kristol, for once, is right. The Bush tax cuts for the rich have to go.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/the-real-gop-fiasco-fairness/
JDW
November 15th, 2012
7:44 am
@LBB…”Not a dime in new taxes until the Idiot Messiah returns spending to the level of his predecessor, which would be about $3 trillion per year.”
pssstttt…Bush’s last budget spent 3.6 trillion…learn to read.
tiredofIT
November 15th, 2012
7:44 am
A capital gains tax rate (making money off money) that is lower than the earned income rate (making money off work) is just not fair. Bestowing that rate on hedge-fund managers through a specially designed loophole is just not fair. Allowing the rich to take mortgage deductions for second and third homes, or for homes worth over $1 million, is just not fair. Allowing business owners like me to take myriad deductions that our employees cannot take is just not fair. But, most of all, allowing the wealthy to pay very low tax rates while interest on the war debt accumulates, deficits continue, and middle-class incomes deteriorate is just not fair.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/the-real-gop-fiasco-fairness/
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
November 15th, 2012
7:45 am
tiredofIT: Grow up!
———–
You were close. What you and the Democrat rabble need to do is “pay up”. Start paying something toward the funding of your government.
Moon Mullins
November 15th, 2012
7:55 am
Kyle, it’s not just an “I won” attitude — it’s a REALITY! Obama sits in the Oval Office and will for the next four years. It’s REALITY nor a mere ATTITUDE!
JDW
November 15th, 2012
7:57 am
@Raft…”George W. Bush raised revenues…Finally, a liberal admits that tax cuts stimulate the economy and raise revenues. Next, we will move onto the laws of gravity with the libs.”
Anyone that admits such a thing is plan wrong…below are US revenues in 2005 dollars…
2000 Clintons last year and the baseline…2,309.2
2001…2,214.3
2002…2,027.9
2003…1,900.5
2004…1,949.3
2005…2,153.6
2006…2,324.6
2007…2,413.1
2008…2,288.1
2009…1,899.0
2010…1,927.9
2011…1,998.7
As you can see revenues have YET to recover from Duhbya’s folly and only in 2006 and 2007 did they reach parity.
On the other hand hand revenues ACTUALLY grown say 3% a years this is what today would have looked like…
2000…2,309.2
2001…2,378.5
2002…2,449.8
2003…2,523.3
2004…2,599.0
2005…2,677.0
2006…2,757.3
2007…2,840.0
2008…2,925.2
2009…3,013.0
2010…3,103.4
2011…3,196.5
Cutting rates from 70% to 39% might, and note I say might because the data doesn’t support it, have had a positive impact. Cutting them further is pure folly and has cost us dearly.
cc
November 15th, 2012
7:59 am
“It’s REALITY nor a mere ATTITUDE!”
He was only reelected as the president by a slim margin, he was NOT crowned as the King of America.
JDW
November 15th, 2012
8:05 am
@cc…”He was only reelected as the president by a slim margin”
332 to 205 is NOT a SLIM margin and while he is not King he is expected to enact or try to enact the policies on which he ran. One of which is raising the tax rates and overall taxes on the wealthy.
rwcole
November 15th, 2012
8:06 am
Kyle, you’re going to have to explain your protection of the mooching millionaires to your kids some day. Ouch!!
clem
November 15th, 2012
8:07 am
get mitt to release his tax returns. they would be roadmap on how to reform tax system.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
November 15th, 2012
8:11 am
“332 to 205 is NOT a SLIM margin”
Except that if only 410,00 votes had swapped in only 4 states, Obama wouldn’t have been elected.
The Electoral College gets you into office – it isn’t an accurate indicator of how close an election actually was, JDW.
But keep hanging your hat on statistics that don’t have any meaning in real arguments..
MarkV
November 15th, 2012
8:15 am
md @6:59 pm
“……..you on the other hand seem to lump them ALL together as merely rich people with money that you think you are somehow entitled to………”
md @7:48 pm
“if one votes for the guy that says he wants to take from one to give to another, then you are endorsing the practice………”
It is pointless to argue with someone who is incapable of elementary logic, like md.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
November 15th, 2012
8:16 am
As JDW just showed, tax revenues increased after the Bush tax cuts were implemented in 2003. Somehow she fails to recognize that recessions, like the Dodd-Frank recession of 2008, cause revenues to drop due to lower economic activity.
Bush’s tax cuts increased revenue, increased growth, and lowered unemployment.
Thanks, JDW!
cc
November 15th, 2012
8:26 am
It is difficult to unite most of the populace of any nation behind a noble, uplifting cause. JFK was successful in this effort with the space program and the moon landing. This endeavor did not truly unite nearly all Americans in the early, tedious preparations of development and testing, but bore fruit with the subsequent sub-orbital and orbital flights. By the time the moon missions began, nearly every American was solidly behind the space program.
A much easier task for a nation’s leader is to develop a point of focus for the majority of the populace to dislike or even hate. One percent of the population (actually more than one percent) is a small number to write off in the cause of unity and the redistribution of wealth. Even though exit polls showed only 47% of the voters agreed with Obama, this issue will be hammered again and again until that number grows. No one is asking this question, “If Obama gets his way with the 1%, who will be next?” A man named Adolph Hitler was very effective at focusing the attention of the German population on the Jews as the source of Germany’s economic problems.
A large percentage of Obama’s supporters and voters enjoy the largesse of government funded by the taxpayers and borrowed money. They are akin to a family with one milk cow. For years they enjoy the milk, cream and butter derived from that milk cow. They decide that steak would be better and the cow is slaughtered for the meat. When the meat is gone, there is nothing left to eat.
Hold firm, Congressmen! Do not let the ignorant and stupid slaughter the cow!
Will YOUR group be the NEXT target?
Thomas Heyward Jr
November 15th, 2012
8:31 am
cc
November 15th, 2012
8:26 am
It is difficult to unite most of the populace of any nation behind a noble, uplifting cause. JFK was successful in this effort with the space program and the moon landing. This endeavor did not truly unite nearly all Americans in the early, tedious preparations of development and testing, but bore fruit with the subsequent sub-orbital and orbital flights. By the time the moon missions began, nearly every American was solidly behind the space program.
A much easier task for a nation’s leader is to develop a point of focus for the majority of the populace to dislike or even hate. One percent of the population (actually more than one percent) is a small number to write off in the cause of unity and the redistribution of wealth. Even though exit polls showed only 47% of the voters agreed with Obama, this issue will be hammered again and again until that number grows. No one is asking this question, “If Obama gets his way with the 1%, who will be next?” A man named Adolph Hitler was very effective at focusing the attention of the German population on the Jews as the source of Germany’s economic problems.
A large percentage of Obama’s supporters and voters enjoy the largesse of government funded by the taxpayers and borrowed money. They are akin to a family with one milk cow. For years they enjoy the milk, cream and butter derived from that milk cow. They decide that steak would be better and the cow is slaughtered for the meat. When the meat is gone, there is nothing left to eat.
Hold firm, Congressmen! Do not let the ignorant and stupid slaughter the cow!
Will YOUR group be the NEXT target?
—————————————————————————–
.
Good screed and all but…………if you’re counting on the GOP to save your milk cow then you’re holding on to a dryed up tit.
.
lol
Jeff
November 15th, 2012
8:47 am
Let me see if I understand your position Mr. Wingfield. Gov. Romney proposed lowering tax rates and capping deductions. Pres. Obama proposed raising tax rates on incomes above 250,000. Your idea of a compromise is to go with Gov. Romney’s plan, despite the electorate rejecting that plan.
I guess you accept the GOP definition of “compromise” which seems to be that compromise happens when Democrats reject their own proposals and accept ours.
By the way, your own proposal raises $91 billion per year. (The high end estimates of the Buffet rule plus the capping of the deductions.) Yet you reject the Obama plan that raises $160B per year as being inadequate.
Throwing out a bunch of numbers combined with indignant rhetoric is hardly a substitute for thoughtful commentary.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
November 15th, 2012
8:55 am
Eurozone back in recession in Q3
How is that austerity working out for you?
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
November 15th, 2012
8:59 am
Dodd-Frank recession of 2008
Might want to switch news channels if you think there was anything called the “Dodd-Frank” back in 2008.
Fox News strikes again? Oh yeah. Fox News: Turning America into a bunch of yahoos as fast as we can.
BHG
November 15th, 2012
9:07 am
Instead of raising taxes across the board, why not allow the IRS to take donations? I’m sure Buffett and all these Hollywood millionaires who insist that they’re not paying enough would be more than happy to contribute extra if given the opportunity.
Meanwhile, those of us who prefer to donate our money to other non-profits would still be free to do so. The entire point of deductions for charitable donations is to allow private organizations to fulfill roles that the government cannot. (Except when the current administration has decided that there is no role that it cannot and should not fill.)
tiredofIT
November 15th, 2012
9:07 am
Lil’ Barry Bailout – OBAMAPHONE!!!
November 15th, 2012
7:45 am
tiredofIT: Grow up!
———–
You were close. What you and the Democrat rabble need to do is “pay up”. Start paying something toward the funding of your government.
++
Don’t worry, I pay my share.