White House wants Super Congress to take Bush tax cuts off table for 2012

Source: Daily Kos

MON AUG 01, 2011 AT 02:30 PM PDT
White House wants Super Congress to take Bush tax cuts off table for 2012
byJed Lewison

A veto threat from White House Press Secretary Jay Carney at today's daily briefing ... but it comes with a caveat:

*****If it fails either to produce something or if Congress fails to act on it, you can be sure that the President will honor his promise to veto any legislation that would extend the Bush high-income tax cuts beyond 2012, which would, of course, create nearly $1 trillion in revenue raisers when that happens.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/08/01/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-812011



Read more: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/08/01/1001820/-White-House-wants-Super-Congress-to-take-Bush-tax-cuts-off-table-for-2012?via=blog_1

or so we have been told

democrats took possession of them.

He kept them. That's on him.

:puke:

Would you rather the unemployed not get an extension just so the rich wouldn't get their tax cuts?

He should've growled at them for tying the survival of the most vulnerable in society to the right of yacht-owners to buy more yachts.

Unfortunately, Republicans don't want to listen to him and will do everything to sabotage his presidency. Mitch McConnell said the same thing almost verbatim recently.

And he's done plenty of leading. Unfortunately, Republicans/teabaggers won't give him an inch no matter what, bully pulpit or not.

It all comes down to the votes, and as everyone here agrees, the current crop of Republicans are dangerous ideologues who won't budge, so even if Obama went all the way with the so-called bully pulpit, how does that translate into the votes he needs?

They are criminals and con artists and they should be dealt with as such.

How would Obama being even more forceful lead to votes necessary for passage? And how would treating them like criminals and con artists do the same?

It's nice to envision a scenario where denigrating the other side will slide their votes over to ours, but it's not happening. I think this is one reason why people like Grayson, for example, are so popular here. They provide nice speeches and theatrics, but they don't have the capacity or will to actually enact anything, which is far more difficult.

The way I see it, we protected Medicare/SS from cuts (several links have been posted around here) and lifted the debt ceiling. True, there's no revenue increases, but the tax cuts are set to expire in 2012 and the trigger -- if the Republicans go for it -- is a political hot potato for them that will partially result in large defense cuts with no cuts to Medicare/SS benefits.

to do when extended benefits end December 31,2011? Do you think the generous cash-hoarding corporations of America will create the jobs? The Republican dominated congress doesn't think government creates jobs, and obviously those who've benefited the most from the tax cuts have no responsibility to do so. Neither the President nor congress has seriously grappled with this problem - why should they? They have jobs, nice health care, good pensions.

I simply pointed out that the unemployed got the extensions they needed at that time, which unfortunately were tied to the tax cuts.

They took the Unemployment issue and the Bush tax cuts OFF the table during the election season. You may have forgotten, but most of us who were paying attention knew then that a deal had been made.

If the Dem leadership, then in the majority had made those two issues a BIG PART of the campaign, they would have won in a landslide and there would have been an extension of UI benefits AND no tax cuts for the wealthy.

I wish people would stop revising history, especially recent history and bending over backwards to try to excuse the inexcusable. We really are not all stupid.

I'm telling you how things happened at the time. I dislike the tax cuts as much as you do, but unfortunately, the Republicans boxed us in.

The Dem leadership took the issues off the table where they should have been debated, by the American in the election. Why do you think they did that? At the time, we predicted exactly why, and what the outcome would be. And I recall being called an 'Obama hater' for predicting that contrary to what he had promised, the tax cuts were going to be extended and they would use the UI issue as an excuse. No one needed a crystal ball to see what they were doing.

Sorry, but if ordinary people can see through their games, there really is no point in trying to convince people that they were ever boxed in. This is a game played by both parties for the benefit of the Corps. We get crumbs and we are supposed to be happy with that. But the people are getting angry, tired of their blatant political games which somehow always benefit the wealthy.

What's going to happen btw, when those benefits run out? Where are the jobs we were promised, in return for the tax cuts? They don't even mention that anymore.

Obama saying something is certainly not the same thing as Obama doing something..

So why the hell should we not be suspicious that he won't break it again?

PB

caved. So what makes us think that he won't cave again? The GOP will probably come up with another way to blackmail him into extending the cuts again. I just have a sick feeling in my stomach about this.

They gave away the farm to keep those cuts for another year, giving us $600 billion dollars in stuff we wanted, a four-for-one trade on their part.

Must be a new thing for him. Or maybe just another attempt to fool us.

He'll have to prove it first.

ALL income from ALL sources must be taxed at same rate. no more discounts fro trust fund deadbeats!

He can be rolled, and the opposition knows it, so he will be rolled, whenever they decide to roll him.

He's certainly capable of rolling others as we've seen

"Hmm, well at least don't cross THIS line."

"Would you please not cross THIS line?"

"Maybe THIS line will hold for a day or two?"

...ad nauseam. Not with a bang, but a whimper. :(

I'd rather be depressed than deluded.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Your earnest tone and boyish good looks won't convince me. I've waited to see the steel spine emerge and have been disappointed yet again. Sorry -- no fooling this old fool anymore.

:shrug:

:D

EXCUSE ME?

will never go away.

There's no way Obama will defend a tax increase to middle-class voters right before an election. The GOP will beat him over the head with this issue until he finds something to compromise with them on in exchange for the extension of both top 2% and middle-class cuts.

but in their place we will cut Social Security and Medicare to make up for the loses.

hahhahahahahaha.

everyone who pays income taxes, not just the rich. Pres. Obama does not have the power with a veto to repeal the tax cuts for the rich while keeping them in place for the middle class.

If I am wrong, please explain how he could do this.

or whatever amount is appropriate, to take effect when the Bush tax cuts expire. Do this before the election and see who votes against it and use that to campaign on. Republicans are against tax cuts for the middle class or however you want to have it framed.

and didn't seem to effect the election. I'm fine with doing it again, but its not a magic bullet.

Doesn't it have to originate in the House, which is heavily dominated by Republicans? How would Obama or his allies in Congress introduce and pursue such legislation?

Also, what is to stop the Republicans from introducing legislation to extend all the tax cuts, and then portray anyone who votes against the legislation of voting for tax increases on the middle class?

based on his past performance.

This play is so damn predictable.

As for what will happen with the Bush tax cuts, who the fuck knows.

Take those promises to the bank and see how much you get for them..sheesh

Sounds like Obama wants them axed permanently in Sept. If either the Congress or the Super Congress fails to act on addressing legislature that would remove them he will veto it.

The "it" in question is the Super Congress that will be created by the debt limit deal should it make its way out of the House and Senate. And if the Super Congress proposes tax reform that changes rates, it would obviously render the Bush tax cuts (and the threat to veto them) moot—and that's something the White House thinks would be "a good thing":

Gee, thought those bush cuts were history, last time was the last time, no ifs, ands or buts, right?

But there they are, back on the table.

Three card monte, anyone?



It's a sucker's game.

And the triggers will also kick in, you can bet your ass.