The Daily Caller

The Daily Caller
Politics

Obama announces press conference in attempt to head off growing Democratic anger over tax cut deal

1:14 PM 12/07/2010
Jon Ward

President Obama hastily scheduled an afternoon press conference at the White House Tuesday, seeking to head off growing anger in his own party over compromises to Republicans in a tax cut deal announced Monday.

The press conference was announced less than two hours in advance as House Democratic leaders presented a united front in opposition to the deal as it currently stands, and anger among the Senate Democrat rank and file became more evident.

Vice President Joe Biden, meanwhile, attended the weekly lunch for Senate Democrats, seeking to call on the relationships he built during a 36-year career in the Senate to build support for the deal.

A noon statement by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on the tax deal, nearly 24 hours after she was briefed on it at the White House Monday afternoon, expressed clear dissatisfaction with the preliminary deal between Obama and congressional Republicans.

Most specifically, Pelosi voiced the anger of many on the left about extending the current tax rates for those making more than $250,000 and for allowing the estate tax to move from its current one-year level of zero percent to 35 percent instead of 55 percent, as it is scheduled to do.

“We will continue discussions with the President and our Caucus in the days ahead,” said Pelosi, California Democrat.

“The Republican demands would provide tax cuts to the millionaires and billionaires, fail to create jobs and increase the deficit. And to add insult to injury, the Republican estate tax proposal would help only 39,000 of America’s richest families, while adding about $25 billion more to the deficit,” Pelosi said.

A Senate Republican aide acknowledged that while there may be plenty of discontent on the right about the fact that the deal would add roughly $600 to $900 billion to the deficit, they expect to get support from most of their 42 senators.

House Democrats, the Republican said, “are the real wild card right now. It’s clear that the White House has some work to do.”

Despite the protests from House Democratic leaders, the pressure on them to pass a deal without allowing taxes to go up is immense given the electoral and political consequences of letting the cuts expire.

And if a deal is reached soon enough, Congress can try to move forward on other matters of importance to the White House and the Democratic base, such as ratification of a nuclear arms reduction treaty with Russia, a repeal of the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, and the DREAM Act.

Nonetheless, in a briefing with reporters Tuesday morning, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, Maryland Democrat, voiced concern with the the deal as it now stands, calling the compromise “contradictory” and said he expects the Senate to move before the House.

“It’s not good policy,” he said.

“At a time when the deficit is at unacceptable levels, giving tax cuts to high income Americans is not appropriate. Bringing the deficit down is a principle objective,” he said. “On the other hand, raising taxes on middle income Americans is not appropriate either.”

Hoyer defended his party’s decision last week to hold a vote on whether to permanently extend the tax rates only to individuals earning less than $200,000 per year and married couples with incomes below $250,000. The measure passed, but was later rejected by the Senate. He also said that there was “no consensus or agreement” with the White House in yesterday’s meeting with House leaders.

“We have been very clear on our position,” he said.

Democratic Caucus Chairman Rep. John Larson of Connecticut said Obama’s plan would be “difficult” to sell to the caucus and that he is open to ideas from his party on altering the plan.

And Rep. Chris Van Hollen, the Maryland Democrat and member of party leadership who represented the House Democrats in the tax cut negotiations, said on Bloomberg Television that he had “serious reservations” about the package.

“There are components that the Republicans got that probably should not have been in this package,” Van Hollen said, listing the estate tax rate as the most objectionable issue.

Tags: Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Center for American Progress, Chris Moody, Chris Van Hollen, Democratic Party, Don't ask, don't tell, John Podesta, Nancy Pelosi, Republican Party, Russia, Tax cut
← Older Comments
  • S-D-M

    Øbama, Reid, and Pelosi are masters of deception. Never underestimate them. They know they got rolled on Nov.2nd, and considered how best to turn a poor situation to their advantage. A concocted, fabricated split between the White House and congress to demonstrate Øbama’s ability to move to the center and repair his hard left record would be nice. Of course non of it would work unless there was great fanfare and hand wringing from Pelosi and Reid, which they seem to have done as if scripted. Once the “optics” have been satisfied and Øbama is comfortably seen to be more centrist, thereby increasing his 2012 re election chances, he and Reid and Pelosi will all go out for a drink and celibate their latest “big-con”.! Far fetched? Consider the scams leveled on the American people in the last two years, and ask yourself again.

  • kingfish

    Doesn’t it just give you “warm fuzzies” when the Dims are angry? I “love” the fact that the shoe is on the other foot now.

  • rigdum funidos

    you can only get near $900 billion if you include the $140 billion from freezing the current rate for the “rich” and include the $600 billion from freezing the current rate for the “middle class.” Subtract that from the $900 and it seems to me that we add more like $160 billion to current law: which is the difference between the cost of the SSA reduction [I think $190 billion] and the cost of the incremental Unemployment Insurance, compared to what is raised by the new taxes on estates. It seems to me that in comparison to where we are now, we are increasing the deficit by more like $160 billion: and for this we get a much more reasonable estate tax [which of course I would like to see repealed entirely], continuation of dividend and cap gains lower rates. I don’t like the Unemployment Insurance extension, but it is limited in time and along with the SSA reduction probably will help the economy: at least they go directly to the people rather than to some bureaucrat.

  • nomore

    If this deal falls through then the GOP will backdate a tax cut and there will be no extension of unemployment benefits, unless they’re paid for. There will be no negotiating and instated of taking hostages, the GOP will take no prisoners. Personally, that is the scenario I’d like to see.

    • grayzel

      I agree, when the One first announced it I know it had to be a bad deal. Anything the man touches turns into some kind of loss of liberty.

      “Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.” Orwell

      Here is a prime example of their double think—President Bush was bad for the economy because he spent too much. President Obama is helping the economy by spending a lot.

  • erick1740

    Fun to watch liberal scum eat one another.

  • loudog

    The top 400 households paid 16.6 percent of their income in federal individual income taxes in 2007, down from 30 percent in 1995. This decline works out to a tax cut of $46 million per filer in 2007. – CBPP

    Meanwhile, as the rich get much richer and middle class wages decline slightly, the wars go unfunded and this “compromise” will cost another $900 billion added to the deficit.

    • truebearing

      It doesn’t matter how high you raise taxes if the spending isn’t drastically cut. This isn’t a situation we can tax ourselves out of, and if we don’t do something to start producing some jobs, the governmnet revenues will continue to fall. If you tax the rich too much they will just leave, like happened in France.

      Why isn’t Obama slashing the government payroll, like Britain, Cuba, and Russia have? You keep yammering about raising taxes on the “rich” when it won’t solve the problem, and $250,000.00 a year isn’t rich. Take my word for it, when the IRS gets done giving you the “TSA”, there isn’t much left of that $250,000.00, and the dollar is worth less and less as WeimarBama continues to print worthless money.

      • loudog

        Extending the unaffordable tax cuts will cost another 900 billion in debt to China and nobody said we didn’t need to cut spending.
        I feel for your bleeding heart for the rich but we’re talking about a 4-5% increase. You might recall the good ole days in the 90′s when we had record economic growth with the same tax rates?

        • truebearing

          You carry on about the taxing the rich as if it is the only solution. If we raise the taxes on the “rich” we should raise ALL taxes. Isn’t that what your buddy, David Stockman, advocates? Why aren’t you? You’re fond of quoting him when it fits your cause.

          I don’t recall you complaining about the debt when Obama was ramming his health care power grab through, or when he was trying to build momentum for Cap and Tax, or when he was squandering a trillion dollars on the stimulus. All of these things, and more, were spending money, or trying to spend money we don’t have. It seems to me that your problem isn’t debt and deficit, but punishing and fleecing the rich, including small businesses who definitely aren’t rich.

          I am not for any more debt, but this economy can’t recover if the primary generator of jobs, small business, gets hit with yet more taxes. Lets start cutting the idiotic regulations that stifle small businesses, especially when it comes to taxes. Tax and Squander is what got us into this mess and it can’t get us out. Slash the federal budget by at least 20%. Privatize government agencies, increase penalties for things like Medicare fraud and then send forensic accounting bounty hunters out to find the crooks, make federal employees take a pay cut, kick the unions out of everything….. I’m sure you will agree.

          • loudog

            I prefer to let the Bush Vote Buying Tax Cuts that we couldn’t afford while we invaded two countries and passed medicare part d unfunded expire for everyone but that isn’t an option it seems. Not extending tax cuts for millionaires is, but Americans don’t seem to be interested in paying as they go and prefer to borrow from communists in China so they can have a tax cut.

            btw, I was against the “stimulus”.

        • Satchmo

          Again, tax cuts don’t cost the government money because it isn’t the government’s money to begin with. Besides, these aren’t tax cuts. They are agreeing to keep the current tax rates that have been in place for the better part of a decade the same for the next two years.

          • loudog

            Tax cuts cost all of us when we have to borrow from communists to fund our wars and entitlements because we don’t want to pay for them ourselves.

    • johnanderson

      I don’t think you did the math when you broached this point. If the tax rates increased for these 400 families the percentages you claimed, government receipts would increase a whopping $18.4 Billion, or a whole %2 to %3 of the projected $600-$900 billion deficit created by extending unemployment insurance. (400 * 46,000,000 = 18,400,000,000) Really, what is that going to solve? Not to mention, I’m guessing that most, if not all of these 400 filers are employers. If each employer is then faced with an added $46 Million dollar expense per year, how many hires, or lay-offs does this translate to?

      Think about the talking points before you repeat them.

      • loudog

        That’s why I prefer the Bush vote buying scheme to end for everyone. The example I gave only showed how the rich in this country are getting richer as they pay a tax rate not seen since the 1920′s while our debt piles up because someone has convinced people like yourself that we don’t have to pay our way.

        • johnanderson

          In typical lefty fashion you moved the goal posts. In your first post you were railing against tax cuts for the rich, in your second post down you were doing the same, then someone comes along and spells out the math for you, and all of a sudden you want everyone to give more of their own money to the omnipotent, benevolent, government.

          A 1920′s-esque tax rate you say? Well, let me tell you, there was depression between 1920 and 1922, the reason this depression lasted for a little over a year, followed by a boom known as the roaring 20′s, was mostly due to Warren Harding’s policies of cutting taxes.

          Go find an accredited economist, and ask them if raising taxes during a recession or depression is a good idea. Then see if they can answer you with a straight face.

          • loudog

            Mr libertarian Rpublican himself, Alan Greenspan: “Rather than keeping tax rates steady for all but the wealthiest Americans, as the White House wants, Mr. Greenspan is calling for the complete repeal of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, brushing aside the arguments of Republicans and even a few Democrats that doing so could threaten the already shaky economic recovery.
            I’m in favor of tax cuts, but not with borrowed money,” Mr. Greenspan, 84, said Friday”

            Reagan Budget Director, David Stockman:
            “The tax – the Bush tax cuts costs $300 billion a year: 100 billion to the top 2 percent, 200 billion to the middle-class. So I ask the White House, why is a $175,000-a-year family going to be given a tax break that we can’t afford – a large tax reduction, tens of thousands of dollars a year? To me, it makes no sense.”
            http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129052425

          • loudog

            “But, of course, the Bush tax cuts did not even come close to paying for themselves. The Bush tax cuts cost us around $1.7 trillion in revenue from 2001 through 2008, in part because of weak output and job growth following the cuts (contrary to assertions about how the tax cuts would stimulate economic growth).”

            http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2010/10/one-more-time-with-gusto-tax-cuts-do-not-pay-for-themselves.html

  • CK4RP

    Poor title as there are no tax cuts involved. As a matter of fact, I called both of my Republican Senators and asked them not to support the deal since it involves resurrecting the “death tax” and agreeing to a CR (continuing resolution) to fund government until Sept 30, 2011 (which means continuing to fund Obamacare). Apparently, this “compromise” is OK to some “conservatives”. This duopoly, (this one party, two-headed monster), this dog and pony show of them pretending to be against one another is insulting to Americans and to their collective intelligence. 99% of the Washington DC “establishment” belongs to the same party, the party of “ME”. My healthcare (not Obamacare), my retirement (not Social Security), my salary (on average, twice as much as the unwashed massses in the private sector), my perks (all on the taxpayers’ dime), my earmarks and pork barrel projects (many of which bear my name) my ethics (which, when censured, receive a standing ovation from my colleagues), my legislation (which I am not subject to) and on and on and on. And they want us to be angry at Julian Assange??? They are angry at him, for sure. He put a little too much sunshine on their shenanigans. They might lose their sweetheart deal. The sheeple may actually become outraged over the behavior of their government if this sort of transparency is not quickly snuffed out. They’re shouting it in alomost perfect unison – “WikiLeaks must be stopped!” “Assange needs to brought to justice!” “Assange is an enemy combatant!” GIVE ME A BREAK!!!

    When will we finally reach the point of “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore!”? It’s too much FALSE – the false dichotomy, the false choice, the falsehoods. It is an illusion, folks, and the sooner America figures it out, the better. Our government has declared war on it’s own citizens. They steal from us. They laugh at us. They spit on our laws. They don’t play by the rules. They manipulate us. They lie to us. They lie to each other. They lie to foreign governments. They lie whenever it suits their purposes. AND THEY GET AWAY WITH IT!!! Hasn’t anybody noticed how many “conspiracy theories” are eventually shot all to truth as time passes? Think Gulf of Tonkin (know anybody who died in ‘Nam?). Think weapons of mass destruction (know anybody who died in Iraq?). Think Operation Northwoods… Just think. Think of all those political “fringers” who correctly predict the consequences of the actions of our out of control government. You know, the weirdos, the “extremists” who don’t commit adultery, evade taxes, misuse campaign funds, lie, cheat, steal, abuse the public trust, etc. Maybe, just maybe, we need to think for ourselves. Or actually read some of the WikiLeaks stuff. The inconvenient, uncomfortable truth.

    End of rant.

← Older Comments