New York Times: Obama Will Not Extend Bush-Era Tax Cuts to Wealthy

[BzaDem]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/08/us/politics/08obama.html?_r=1&emc=na

"WASHINGTON — President Obama on Wednesday will rule out any compromise that would extend the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy beyond this year, officials said, adding a populist twist to an election-season economic package that is otherwise designed to entice support from big businesses and their Republican allies.

Mr. Obama’s opposition to allowing the high-end tax cuts to remain in place for even another year or two would be the signal many Congressional Democrats have been awaiting as they prepare for a showdown with Republicans on the issue and ends speculation that the White House might be open to an extension. Democrats say only the president can rally wavering lawmakers who, amid the party’s weakened poll numbers, feel increasingly vulnerable to Republican attacks if they let the top rates lapse at the end of this year as scheduled.

It is not clear that Mr. Obama can prevail given his own diminished popularity, the tepid economic recovery and the divisions within his party. But by proposing to extend the rates for the 98 percent of households with income below $250,000 for couples and $200,000 for individuals — and insisting that federal income tax rates in 2011 go back to their pre-2001 levels for income above those cutoffs — he intends to cast the issue as a choice between supporting the middle class or giving breaks to the wealthy.

In a speech in Cleveland on Wednesday, Mr. Obama will also make a case for the package of roughly $180 billion in expanded business tax cuts and infrastructure spending disclosed by the White House in bits and pieces over the past few days. He would offset the cost by closing other tax breaks for multinational corporations, oil and gas companies and others."

--snip--

I think this is the right way to go. We cannot afford the tax cuts to the wealthy, and they provide very minimal stimulus compared to tax cuts for the middle class and many spending measures. If Republicans complain about affecting small businesses, well, Obama is also announcing hundreds of billions of tax cuts that will help small businesses. If Republicans filibuster extending the tax cuts for 98% of the population AND additional small business tax breaks (and they will), it will set up a stark contrast for November.

[jannyk]

1. Why don't they just wait until tomorrow and let him...

actually say it?! Why do we always have to get some 'official' or 'insider' telling us what the President is going to say???!!!

:eyes:

[BzaDem]

5. Why not? What's the problem with knowing in advance? :)

[lonestarnot]

2. He better not! And I would like to see a veto of any fucking compromise.

[Barack_America]

3. I don't see how I could bring myself to vote for him again if he does.

So this news comes as a big relief.

[aquart]

4. Is this like being for the public option?

[BzaDem]

6. He didn't say he would never compromise on the public option. He knew he had to compromise months

in advance, because Lieberman made it clear he wasn't going to be its 60th vote.

[backscatter712]

7. He and the rest of the Dems are going to have to be aggressive now.

If they just say they don't want to extend the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy and let it lie there, the GOP's slime machine will eat them up.

Obama's going to have to go out there, make a lot of speeches, make a huge amount of noise, and explain that he's doing this to reduce the deficit, ensure money is available for Social Security, Medicare, stimulus programs, and aggressively make his case.

Because this one will be a big fight, which could decide the election.

[LiberalFighter]

8. The wealthy still receive some benefit from this. Just not in the upper brackets.

[applegrove]

9. Go Obama! Go Obama! Go Obama!

[TomCADem]

10. K & R!