E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
PARMA, OH -- As the final stretch of the midterm election season approaches, the Obama administration has been eager to make the case to voters that their chief concern -- the economy -- is also the White House's.
After spending months and precious political capital on passing a landmark health-care law and the most sweeping overhaul of the financial regulatory system since the 1930s, the White House has struggled to convince the American public that it has put the economy back on the right track after a punishing recession. President Obama spent 45 minutes making that argument when he traveled to this suburb of Cleveland on Wednesday for what the White House billed as a major economic speech -- the sort of event that is accompanied by background briefings, fact sheets, and conference calls.
"My hope was that the crisis would cause everybody, Democrats and Republicans, to pull together and tackle our problems in a practical way. But as we all know, things didn't work out that way," he told the audience at Cuyahoga Community College on this his tenth trip to this state since taking office. "With the nation losing nearly 800,000 jobs the month I was sworn into office, my most urgent task was to stop a financial meltdown and prevent this recession from becoming a second depression. We've done that."
With unemployment at 9.6% nationwide (and higher in Ohio), the housing market still shaky, and businesses and consumers wary of spending, the president traveled here to spell out his plan for kick-starting the flagging recovery. The economy grew just 1.6% in the second quarter -- revised down from the 2.4% pace projected earlier -- and some private economists have downgraded their growth forecasts for the year while predicting the jobless rate will hover near 10%.
In addition to the small business jobs bill that Obama wants Congress to pass as the first order of business when lawmakers return next week, the president has proposed spending $50 billion immediately to improve roads, bridges, railways and runways. Today, he called on lawmakers to expand, simplify, and make permanent research and development tax credits, as well as allow companies to deduct the full cost of capital investments through the end of 2011 -- measures he believes will encourage businesses to spend and to hire. According to the White House, accelerating tax deductions as proposed would be "the largest temporary investment incentive in American history."
The administration has resisted calling these proposals additional "stimulus," since the original $787 billion stimulus package has largely been deemed a failure -- at least in a public relations sense -- even though economists believe it helped lift the economy and boost employment. Just 30% of those polled in the latest NBC/Wall Street Journal survey said the stimulus made things better.
Even if these proposals make it into law in the few weeks that Congress will be in session before lawmakers hit the campaign trail again, their ability to significantly lower the jobless rate -- a key barometer for worried voters -- before the election is questionable. Obama aides say that in order to stem losses in November, they'll need to sharpen their message on what the Democratic Party has done to bring the economy back from the brink of collapse and where the Republican Party will take the country. The president's remarks in Ohio were reminiscent of speeches he made on the campaign trail as a presidential candidate, a period he referenced several times.
"A lot has changed since I came here in those final days of the last election, but what hasn't changed is the choice facing this country," the he said. "It's still fear versus hope; the past versus the future. It's still a choice between sliding backward and moving forward. That's what this election is about. That's the choice that you will face in November."
The president has consistently argued a GOP takeover of Congress would mean a return to the same agenda that brought the economy to the edge of the abyss, like policies that favor corporations and the rich, while gutting regulations and consumer protections. Still, the NBC/WSJ poll showed just 39% approved of his handling of the economy and that 58% of those polled thought Republicans would bring new ideas.
Here in Ohio, Obama said Congress should permanently extend the Bush-era tax cuts for middle class families, while allowing those for individuals making over $200,000 a year (and households making more than $250,000 a year) to expire, arguing the country cannot afford tax cuts for the wealthy.
"With all the other budgetary pressures we have -- with all the Republicans' talk about wanting to shrink the deficit -- they would have us borrow $700 billion over the next 10 years to give a tax cut of about $100,000 to folks who are already millionaires," said Obama as he made the case that middle class families would be more likely to spend their tax savings than the wealthy, providing a better stimulus for the economy. "Keep in mind: Wealthy Americans are just about the only folks who saw their incomes rise when Republicans were in charge."
The choice of the Cleveland area as a venue for today's remarks was no accident. House Minority Leader John Boehner of Ohio spoke here last month, laying out his party's recipe for the economy and the White House wanted to use the same turf for their rebuttal. Obama mentioned the congressman by name at least half a dozen times.
Boehner's office responded after the speech, “If the president is serious about finally focusing on jobs, a good start would be taking the advice of his recently departed budget director and freezing all tax rates, coupled with cutting federal spending to where it was before all the bailouts, government takeovers, and ‘stimulus’ spending sprees.” The statement referred to a recent op-ed by former White House OMB Director Peter Orszag, who recommended extending the Bush tax cuts -- for all Americans -- for two years before ending them completely.
Leave a Comment:
I am SO PROUD of President Obama... he took it right to the Tan Man...
President Obama sure packs a mean 'uppercut'! lol
He NEEDS to keep getting out there and continue the TRUTH... the 'blood bath' that's mean predicted my the righties will become nothing more than a PAPER CUT!
Voters with an IQ higher than a turnip will wake up and STOP buying the BS the Republican'ts are peddling!
Me, too, Feisty.
Thanks Jody!
Please pardon the typo's - should read;
continue telling the truth &
'blood bath' that's been predicted by the righties
Dang Gremlins are working overtime this afternoon... lol
hey, Fiesty-maybe you should de-frag. I got rid of my fraggles-sent 'em right back to fraggle rock. I have no idea how they got into my computer-
maybe travelin' matt?
Anyone else listening to Mike Pence WHINING about the President NOT reaching out to Republican's and NOT having a seat at the table?
Seriously... WTF are these Bozo's ON??
Question for you Mike... How many times do you extend a hand only to have it BITTEN before you learn to STOP trying to pet the dog?
That's sounds like a splendid idea NJ... those 'pesky fraggles' have a way of infiltrating everything don't they? :0)
Feisty and Jody, I'm with you. I'm so proud of President Obama! He took it to John Boehner and threw his careless words right back at him. The President gave Republicans a seat at the table on more than one occasion - I seem to remember about 7 televised hours of them sitting around President Obama's table - and they have squandered each and every opportunity.
Mike Pence can whine and snivel all he wants to; he and the others have had every chance to work for the American people and have turned their backs on us every time. They couldn't say or do anything that would ever convince me to give them a chance to govern for as long as I live and vote. It's bad enough that they disrespect our President from sunrise to sunset, but even worse, the Republicans disrespect every American family, including their own families, with their callous obstruction of every idea the President puts forward.
President Obama, keep calling them out today, tomorrow and every day until November 2 and let's see who comes out the big winner - the truth or lies. I'm putting my money on President Obama and the TRUTH!
Gail,TN: I'm so proud of President Obama! He took it to John Boehner
Well, I guess we're all just so happy for you Liberals. All the while unemployment is increasing, GDP is decreasing, the Obama has just proposed even higher deficit spending, and a record number of homes are being foreclosed on, but at least Obama got a zinger in on Boehner! You can take that to the bank, well, maybe you can't.
You know it Gail!
The gloves are off and by the time the President get's finished with them... they won't know what hit em! ;0)
FRH: The gloves are off and by the time the President get's finished with them... they won't know what hit em! ;0)
It will probably feel like a wisp of air. Probably one that smells with a hint of Marlboro Lights.
Gee, as a small businessman, I should be thankful for all the great things the Democrats have done for me. All of this great regulations which small businesses really need. Let's just talk about one of them. The Democrats lowered the level at which I have to issue 1099 forms for purchases now lower to $600. This means instead of issuing 5 1099s as in 2009, I will have to issue thousands of them for 2010. The estimate of additional cost is $8,000 to my business. I can give you 40-50 of these regulations increasing business costs. Then Democrats come along and give me a tax break on purchasing new equipment. Gee, thanks. Since you are taking 5% more of my profits come January, that was money I was going to use to purchase the new equipment . To finance the equipment the bank wants a five years and 10 years estimated return on the equipment. So your tax credit is good for one year. Reall big stimulus for small business there President. Get your administration off the backs of small business, there is a reason you are viewed as antibusiness. It is because of the regulations, taxes, and mandates you have passed. You cost us hundreds of thousands of dollars then give us $5,000 to $10,000 in tax credits and we are supposed to be thankful and start hiring. The President and his people have no clue what it takes to run a small business.
This is a tiresome storyline in the media. President Obama gets a daily economic briefing. He has been working on the economy. VP Biden heads up the jobs committee task force; this is not something that sat on the back burner--period. President Obama and Congress FIRST passed the stimulus legislation, that's for the economy people, well before tackling health care reform and various other legislation. Why does the media keep omitting those major points? I believe that every President and every Congress can do more than one thing at a time.
Jody, the President and Congress passed a now $864 billion stimulus in the spring of 2009. They then proceded to ignor the economy for a years figuring they had solved the problem. Meanwhile the regulation increases from his czars and bureaucracy created far more costs for business than any of his stimulus helped. He worked the next year on health care which Americans show was 9 or 10 on there list of needs. While working on health care reform, his stimulus flopped by every economists measure. Job creation went nowhere as he scared business with more tax increases, more regulation, and mandates. Now business is sitting on $3 trillion in capital because they sure what all the regualtion, tax increases, and especially health mandates will increase their costs. As a business person, if you can't project your major costs for the next 5 years you don't spend much money until you can. You spend money out of your profits and excess. But business does not know what those will be at this time. When asked why by surveys like the Chamber of Commerce, business leader all point at Washington. Obama has gotten his message out and he is perceived by business as anti-business.
“If the president is serious about finally focusing on jobs, a good start would be taking the advice of his recently departed budget director and freezing all tax rates, coupled with cutting federal spending to where it was before all the bailouts, government takeovers, and ‘stimulus’ spending sprees.”
How about this - could we turn back the clock to the time before we invaded Iraq? That would save the US billions in dollars and thousands of lives! Oh, wait, that war wasn't in the budget so it didn't cost anything anyway - what was I thinking?
John Boehner v. President Obama - We know who is sincere and who isn't about moving this economy forward for the American people.
First Read: Minority Leader John Boehner of Ohio spoke here last month, laying out his party's recipe for the economy and the White House wanted to use the same turf for their rebuttal. Obama mentioned the congressman by name at least half a dozen times.
Think Progress: John Boehner: We don’t need more government ’stimulus’ spending. We need to end Washington Democrats’ out-of-control spending spree, [and] stop their tax hikes.
This week, President Obama rolled out a plan to invest $50 billion in infrastructure as a way of boosting job creation, which will be (at least partially) paid for by cutting subsidies to oil and gas companies. Republicans immediately criticized the proposal, with even Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK), who typically jumps at the chance to approve infrastructure spending, saying he wouldn’t vote for it.
But many Republicans, at the same time that they are claiming that a $50 billion investment in America’s infrastructure is a budget-buster, are pushing to extend the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest two percent of Americans. At $830 billion, the price tag for extending that sliver of the Bush cuts is more than 16 times the cost of Obama’s infrastructure proposal...
These Republicans all support extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest two percent of Americans as a means of boosting the economy. But as The Wonk Room explains, investing in infrastructure provides far more bang for the buck in terms of job creation than extending the Bush tax cuts. Plus, if $50 billion for infrastructure (that will be at least partially paid for) is too expensive, then extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy is definitely unaffordable as well.
_________
We're on to you Rep. Boehner.
"What this country needs is more unemployed politicians." Angela Davis
Can you imagine a debate on the economy: Pres Obama vs Boehner, Cantor, McConnell, McCain, and all the others. I know who would win. Pres Obama cleaned the entire GOP caucus's clock at their own annual meeting.
Jody, President Obama could debate them all at the same time, unassisted, and still make them all look like the idiots they are.
I'm just looking forward to watching Reid and Pelosi giving speeches about extending the Bush tax cuts.
Great posts all!
"Attaboy!"-ing and backslapping our way to victory in November...
We have been having a debate on the economy for the past 18 months, and if the administration has made fools of anyone it is either themselves or the 20% of the country that no longer believes in their ability to govern competently.
"...And take a look here -- 55 percent say they want to put the Republicans in charge because they want a check against President Obama, vs. 39 percent who want the Democrats in charge to support his agenda -- again, another trend, if you look back in July there, that is growing in the Republican favor."
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/july-dec10/taxes_09-07.html
The sad reality is that the even though the republicans don't have anything of value to sell, and are a one note (tax cuts) bunch, they have out-flanked the great communicator and the democrats at every turn. So, if you're all right in that the President can whip 'em all in a debate, why have we been losing the debate?
Simply railing against the republicans is useless and won't change a single vote...
What's with 58% thinking if they elect Republicans they will somehow suddenly come up with new ideas on the economy? It appears that the inmates are taking over the asylum. Please vote, people. Lets give them a huge November surprise!
Heartlight,
Although they don't like Republicans, ideas or no ideas, the idea is to stop the clueless and insane spending of Obama and expansion of the role and control of government.
Facts are facts. Obama spent a trillion and we are still in the ditch.
Jody,
You are right. Obama is great at debates, great at speeches and great at campaigning.
He is just not any good at being a leader and actually solving problems.
So now Obama and the Liberals are FOR the Bush tax cuts, at least for those making less then $250,000 a year, being those cuts will project out to $3.1 trillion dollars of lost tax revenue over ten years! But you Liberals have been telling us that those tax cuts didn't support job growth, and those tax cuts caused massive deficits, and those tax cuts caused jobs to be not created, but were lost instead. So what happened to all that rhetoric? Did you Liberals lose your collective minds in the past couple of days and now you support the tax cuts?
And on top of that Obama is now proposing $50 billion this year in more spending to do what he said would be done when he spent the $787 billion last year. Excuse most of America if it questions Obama credibility today, fool us once, and all.
Bottom line, Obama wants to keep taxes low and spend more money he doesn't have. What could go wrong with that, right Libs?
I'm oppossed to the tax cuts - period. I think a boost on the upper eschelon is warranted, most certainly - but no one in those bottom wage brackets has any right to complain or demand if they're not paying into the system.
You may not be able to balance the budget by robbing the middle and lower classes of their blood, sweat and tears alone (or grabbing a slice of the wealthiest pies around), but you sure as hell exacerbate our considerable debt problem by not scaling back these cuts across the board.
I'd rather see everyone give up a portion of their income to pay down the deficit than go out and blow it on cheaply manufactured, shoddy Chinese imports come each April. Who's economy are we supposed to be kick-starting here, eh?
But you see ED, there's the rub. Even the Democrats now admit lower taxes are an essential element to a better economy while higher taxes are a sure way to kill the economy. With that truth staring Obama and the Democrats right in face, they flinched. But to dress it up a little to and to at least try and pass the smell test for his liberal base, Obama throws in the line "But it's not for those Evil Rich People!!". Yeah, sure, what a tough guy.
I'd rather see a 10% reduction across the board of all discretionary spending. And yes that includes the defense budget. The entitlements, now that's a different problem . . . . . Either way, you do that first, then come to us Americans and talk about higher taxes.
We all seem to enjoy big, round numbers in this country - maybe I'm too close to the military establishment and my view is colored, but I don't think any cut to the defense budget is a wise idea, especially given the ever-present vociferousness of states like Iran and Pakistan.
Forgive the Spinal Tap reference, but why not go all the way to 11% and spare the armed forces? Much as I'd like to see the cost of running the government scaled back, I don't want it done at the expense of the uniformed service. Much as I'd like to see taxes lowered, as well, I'd much rather see that mounting debt cut back in a hurry before anything else.
Raising taxes on people with no money or no jobs isn't going to help the economy. Ending the tax cuts on the wealthy will put more money in the treasury, and a 4% tax increase on billionaires is not going to bankrupt them. If jobs were going to be created by that 4% tax differential, it would have happened sometime during the last 10 years when the billionaires were stashing their 4% of additional income in their offshore accounts instead of hiring Americans.
If everyone would actually read what Mr. Orzag said, you would know that he does not support keeping the tax cuts on the top 2%. He said that he would be willing to accept it if it was the only way to keep the tax cuts for the other 98%. Republicans are up to their same tactic of telling only part of the story to make it fit their agenda when the whole story says otherwise.
Orzag thinks the tax cuts should expire on the top 2% now but if they have to accept them to keep the other 98%, then they should only be extended for 2 years. He says it would be irresponsible to extend them for another 10 years.
If you're going to use facts, use all of the facts.
Heartlight3: Ending the tax cuts on the wealthy will put more money in the treasury,
About $70 billion a year. So Obama is telling us that he can better spend that $70 billion then the "Evil Rich People" can. Too bad there's no proof of that notion.
And Obama just proposed spending an additional $50 billion on "infrastructure", so he's already spent 70% of that anticipated revenue for next year. You throw in the the $26 billion he just added to the deficit for the states teachers unions pensions (What, you think the states rehired teachers with that money? No, no they did not) and now he's spent all that money and more.
Obama doesn't have any concept of money, budget, or restraint.
One wonders what Orszag thinks of the massive deficits he helped to create. Well over a trillion dollars for years to come. Not extending the Bush tax cuts at all would barely make a dent in those deficits. One wonders if he thinks those deficits are irresponsible.
I guess we'll have to wait for his next op-ed piece for those answers.
Apparently the right wing complains about deficits when democrats are in power. Where was your outrage from 2001 through 2006? There was none. Deficit spending by the government is necessary NOW to boost the economy; GOP and Dem economists say that. Anyone with a bit of common sense and knowledge of history would know that but then we are talking about logic and common sense which is lacking on the right.
From MMFA (see for full post), here is what we can look forward to if the dopes of nope happen to win, which they aren't.
Fox calls for repeal of the 20th century
September 07, 2010 2:43 pm ET — 127 Comments
Since President Obama's election, Fox personalities have expressed opposition to or called for the repeal of virtually every progressive achievement of the 20th century, including Social Security, Medicare, the Americans with Disabilities Act, portions of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the 16th and 17th Amendments to the Constitution.
Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid
17th Amendment
16th Amendment
Americans with Disabilities Act
Civil Rights Act of 1964
Voting Rights Act of 1965
Nuclear arms control
Abortion rights
Labor unions
Department of Education
Unemployment insurance
Environmental Protection Agency
Progressive taxation
Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid
http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=old&doc=68">Social Security is a federal social insurance program funded through payroll taxes that provides benefits to the elderly and disabled and their survivors. It was signed into law by President Franklin Roosevelt in 1935. Medicare and Medicaid were http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=old&doc=99">established by the Social Security Act of 1965, signed into law by President Lyndon Johnson. They provide health insurance to the elderly and the poor. All three programs have been defended by progressives and opposed by conservatives for decades.
Hey repubs if you want to repeal medicare and social security and put millions of the elderly on the streets since it is too late for these people to take care of their own retirement being that they contributed to social security their whole working lives...ok...I say lets repeal that every senator and congressman not and I mean notttt receive the salary they presently receive for the rest of their lives...somewhere in the neighborhood of 160,000 a year...let them retire with nothing also. Why should my tax dollars pay for them to live like kings for the rest of their lives just for messing up our lives with their leadership. Gee seems like we pay out a heck of a lot of money for these jokers so they can live good while they give a darn about us middle class slobs who rely on social security...oh and I love the one the repubs want...put social security in the stock market...hey dumbos the stockmarket came close to crashing two years ago....remember....how many people lost their retirement funds when that happened and these clowns want to put it in the stockmarket...bull...play with your own furture not mine. Yep them repubs are just full of great ideas....huh
Lets get real here folks, we're talking about raising the taxes on the wealthiest by 3%! 3% Most of them pay minimal taxes to begin with, because they have creatively invested in tax free vehicles, like muni bonds. They can afford to hire the advisers to avoid as much tax as possible. And even at that we talking about adding billions of gov't revenue with the phasing out of these tax cuts! This is a no brainer. I make way way less than the $250,000 level, but would be willing to pay a few percent more to get our country back on track financially and back as a leader in energy & science innovation with a literate population!
Lets raise it to 90
Dems , more taxes next year very high taxes. Zerobama is now a Bush tax cutter?
we all know more taxes are coming be it from the GOP or the Dems. its a fact. and also thier will be cuts in spending. the questions to ask is
#1 who should pay more taxes??
#2 What should we cut??
Let's start cutting before we talk about any new taxes. Since entitlements represent 55% of all government spending they are increasing each years at a massive rate. When asked about spending cuts, Obama points to Secretary Gates and the Defense Dept. Why is it that the only thing which liberals can think to cut is the Defense Dept. Even if he does manage a 10% cut. The DOD budget is 17% of the federal budget which means a 1.7% drop. Not much when we borrow 35% of all money in the budget. Until we get serious about the entitlement we are headed for bankruptcy. We will get to the point where Greece was earlier this year, on the edge of going bankrupt. We will have to do what they had to do to balance things? They were forced by lenders to cut entitlements. There version of Social Security had to take a 45% average cut. Meaning they are paying their seniors 45% less. We can address it now or be force to make harder cuts in the future. Make a choice!!
Lets raise it to 90
What a totally stupid comment!! You raise the top tax rate to 90% and what happens here is exactly what happened to Great Britain in the 60's. All of the truly rich and their assets flee off shore to countries with far smaller tax rates. Then you have no rich to tax. So the government doubles the tax on the middle class. The people revolt and you get thrown out. But meanwhile you have trouble getting the rich back. Just ask the Beatles who move their permanent residence to the US and other countries at that time. They incorporated in countries with very low tax rates.
defeat republicons, they have crashed the economy and exploded the national debt by trillions of dollars on fraudulent oil wars, what wmd ? the cons bailed out wall street bankers and ignored joe the plumber, dump the cons for their failed trickle down policies and lies. dump the cons for allowing 911 when they knew the terrorists could not land the planes.