Michael Maiello's picture

    Let My Tax Cuts Go

    By Michael Maiello on Wed, 12/01/2010 - 11:19am |

    I agree with Atrios here and maybe take it a step further.  The Republicans specifically designed tax cuts that expire in 2011.  So Obama should let them go.

    The Republicans will blame him for raising taxes but it's their law.  The President could, you know, say that in plain English.  The Republicans raised your taxes.  They've been planning to do it for a decade.  It's in the law they wrote.  Even as he says that, he could propose a new tax cut for every family making under $250,000.  He could even offer every bracket under $250,000K an additional 1% cut over and above what the Republicans offered temporarily.  He could also point out that his tax rates will remain in place until somebody changes them.  No sunset provisions.  No easy outs.  If it doesn't pass the House, well... then it's because the Republicans don't want tax cuts.  And that's that.

    As Atrios says, this can be called the Obama Tax Cut.  You know, because he is President.  Who's idiot idea was it to fight about the Bush Tax Cuts 2 years after the guy left office anyway?

    Atrios also points out that Obama should have done this six months ago.  Well, yes.  With majorities in both Houses, it might have even passed.  But, he didn't.  So he should do it now.  It won't pass and as a consequence, my own taxes will rise.  But that's because the Republicans raised my taxes.  Obama should practice saying that.  The Republicans raised your taxes.  I'm trying to cut them.  Here's my proposal.  I know.  The nerve of them.  It's your money.  They're stealing it.  But if you want your taxes cut, you're going to have to stop voting for them.

    Hammer that home for two years.  Will it help in 2012?  Dunno.  But I suspect that it beats running for reelection on the signature accomplishment of preserving a tax policy named after the previous president from the other party.  Just sayin'.

    Comments

    I just don't understand why this seems so obvious to us, and not to any Democrat in elected office.


    by MrSmith1 on Wed, 12/01/2010 - 12:31pm

    Has everyone seen the McConnell/Kyl 42 GOP Senators threat to filibuster everything except the tax-cuts which must include the rich, and the giant job killing bogeyman the death tax on multi-millionaires? "The death tax will climb from 0% to 55% which makes it the top concern for America's small businesses".  From what I hear the concern of small businesses is not dead rich people, but CUSTOMERS!!! The death tax was there at that rate for the entire 90's which had the biggest expansion of jobs since WW2, and the Dems are seeking to raise the exemption on it so it only affects the richest 0.25% of estates. The GOP letter is at TPM. Link

    I expect the Dems in the Senate to go off in every direction, like the Monty Python skit-The Twit of the Year Competition-while Obama diddles and provides zero leadership, no fight back, and after giving a speech or two-caves in.

    He already missed his opportunity to kill DADT which could be a done deal at this point if he had the guts to let the recent court decision stand. With luck Obama may perhaps get START (hey-even Dr. K is for it), DADT still a very big long shot in Senate, while Obama and the Dems will give the GOP all the tax-cuts they desire the way they desire them, and with the unemployment extension at least a 50-50 to pass also at some point, once the GOP gets a lock on the tax-cuts on the rich they will may be content enough to throw some bones to the poor..


    by NCD on Wed, 12/01/2010 - 1:28pm

    Yeah I did and I almost threw up.

    These hypocritical pricks think they own the next two years as a majority in the Senate and THEY DO NOT!!

     


    by Richard Day on Wed, 12/01/2010 - 3:36pm

    Because I suggested exactly the same thing a couple weeks ago I suppose I should agree now and add: Great blog!


    by A Guy Called LULU on Wed, 12/01/2010 - 1:18pm

    If Obama does this, lets the tax cuts expire, without immediately caving in January to GOP demands, I will eat my 1040 form, along with the instruction booklet!.


    by NCD on Wed, 12/01/2010 - 1:32pm

    I think you are safe, but on the chance that it happens I would gladly send you some excellent hot sauce to spice up your paper treat.


    by A Guy Called LULU on Wed, 12/01/2010 - 1:40pm

    James Kwak did, too; and I agreed.  And it's not much money for the middle class, and most never even notice the cuts.  Better in every way than allowing an extension for the billionaires.  Apparently 5-10 Dems don't want to vote for middle class cuts only.

    And the President has already told the R's he's willing to go for a 'temporary extension'.  They'll trade it for a couple months of unemployment compensation, won't they?  Bah!

    .


    by we are stardust on Wed, 12/01/2010 - 1:49pm

    If Obama was to choose to let all the tax cuts die and propose that Congress send him a bill reducing taxes on the middle class only, I would like to see him add one caveat. He should say that the money lost by that tax cut should be balanced by reductions in military spending. Every time a proposal was made to cut some program which costs a few million there should be an advertisement run showing a modern jet fighter and demonstrating that the cost of one of them would fund that program for years.
     I know I am getting out into never-never land here and hoping for a whole herd of ponies, but we really need a leader to speak strongly for reductions in our war machine, even if it doesn't happen soon, so that a base begins to build which recognizes the necessity and possibility and rightness of doing so.


    by A Guy Called LULU on Wed, 12/01/2010 - 2:12pm

    But endless war is working out so well for us!


    by Michael Maiello on Wed, 12/01/2010 - 2:21pm

    There are some defense cuts; very slow, very incremental as I remember.  The thing with the defese budget it that so many weapons systems, nukes, support, atc. aren't even included in the budget.  Here's a 2009 pie chart:

    http://www.warresisters.org/pages/piechart.htm

    Billions more for Afghanistan, of course.  Dunno how they figure the many, many billions for the under-construction embassies and bases and airfields and prisons in the area...

    I just don't know any longer what Obama wants, or intends.  Just got an email from a blogger friend; we were discussing third parties vs. progressive lefties being able to change the Democratic Party.  He was talking about being a life-long Dem (me, too) and then said:  "I just want there to be more than one party at this point!!!"

    I know exactly what he means.


    by we are stardust on Wed, 12/01/2010 - 2:34pm

    No, we need $300 billion in stealth equipped F-22 Raptors AND $100 billion in new nuclear missile equipped 'boomers' (Navy lingo for ICBM subs) to prevent al Qaeda in Karachi from hitting us again.

    9/11 changed everything but the weapons systems, the contractors, the political patronage/$$ and the usual scary talk about 'threats' to our national security.


    by NCD on Wed, 12/01/2010 - 2:41pm

    Horse trading unemployment compensation in exchange for tax cuts for the rich? Sweet Jeezus!

    Argue the UC benefits on their merit, fer chrissakes! And dare the Repubs to vote against them in the face of such a need that is palpably felt throughout the electorate. That they would consider cutting UC benefits whilst promoting tax cuts for millionaires makes it an aggravated assault against the working class. Argue those tax cuts on their merit as well. This proposed giveaway to the rich certainly doesn't serve as the basis for a reasoned quid pro quo compromise. They are both wholly indefensible positions staked out by the Repubs. NAIL THE FUCKERS! Fer chrissakes, Dems, grow a pair and get into the class war fight on OUR (majority voter's) behalf before it's too late altogether.  .


    by SleepinJeezus on Wed, 12/01/2010 - 2:25pm

    Yeah:

    "While Republicans are unified in calling for an extension of all the Bush-era tax cuts, Democrats are split, with a faction led by New York Sen. Charles Schumer calling for the threshold for extension to be raised to $1 million in household income.  

    The White House has signaled that it is open to compromise on the issue, and a temporary (one to three-year) extension of all of the cuts appears likely, perhaps in exchange for an extension of unemployment benefits or a vote on START."

    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20024142-503544.html

    And Eric Cantor came out of the 'summit' saying that Obama had admitted he hadn't reached out to them enough these first two years'. 

    Obama is turning over negotiations to Timmeh Geithner and the OMB.

    Note, too: "a vote on START"; not a vote FOR START.  Sheesh.


    by we are stardust on Wed, 12/01/2010 - 4:19pm

    Obama is leaving it all to Reid it seems, as usual, no leadership, I honestly think Obama should withdraw from running for a second term and open it up to a real Democrat who knows how to deal with the GOP.


    by NCD on Wed, 12/01/2010 - 4:28pm

    IN HOW MANY WAYS CAN WE BEG OBAMA TO GET SOME BALLS, SJ? For the first time in years, I didn't bother to vote in November. Yes, Obama got dealt a lousy initial hand, but this guy makes me wonder how he ever became a state senator!

     

    “Don't wait until everything is just right. It will never be perfect. There will always be challenges, obstacles and less than perfect conditions. So what. Get started now. With each step you take, you will grow stronger and stronger, more and more skilled, more and more self-confident and more and more successful.” Mark Victor Hansen


    by chucktrotter on Wed, 12/01/2010 - 11:51pm

    Dear Chuck Trotter: a small gift for you this morning from Jane Hamsher, et.al.:

    http://my.firedoglake.com/scarecrow/2010/12/01/jane-hamsher-on-larry-ods-last-word-people-are-hurting-wheres-the-leaderhip/


    by we are stardust on Thu, 12/02/2010 - 10:28am

    Thanks for the gift..I'm honored!  Although I "did" click on the referenced URL, I watched the  forum twice last night.  I try to be a positive soul, but this administration has turned into a Progressive fiasco!  Aways helps when Jane is a guest on any of the ''talking heads" programs.  Thanks  to all of those at the Lake.

    Chuck


    by chucktrotter on Thu, 12/02/2010 - 6:09pm

    You know this is funnier today; for me anyway.

    THE REPUBS ARE RAISING YOUR TAXES. Love it.

    We need a new PR machine in the WH & the Senate.


    by Richard Day on Thu, 12/02/2010 - 11:22am

    Shoot, Destor; not so much, I guess.  Gibbs says even trades shouldn't be spoken about in conjunction with 'temporary extensions'....

    http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2010/12/robert-gibbs-signals-temporary-extension-of-all-tax-cuts.html

    Even when you know it's coming (Axelrod delivered it a couple weeks ago, I think) and the public hates the notion, it's hard to have it confirmed so boldly.  Feh!

    It seems even the politics of it son't really matter.  What does?  Is it really economic ideology on the President's part? 


    by we are stardust on Thu, 12/02/2010 - 1:47pm

    It does seem as if he's been convinced that lower top tax rates are "pro growth" doesn't it?


    by Michael Maiello on Thu, 12/02/2010 - 5:25pm

    Latest Comments