• Clinton lauds Obama, says economy not 'hunky dory' but on the mend

    By NBC's Andrew Rafferty

     
    GREEN BAY, Wis. -- Former President Bill Clinton took supporters here on a stroll down "fact lane" Friday night, passionately making the case that economy is well on its way to recovery.

    "People don't feel it yet. I get that. The deficit was going down three years in a row before a majority of the American people would say 'Ya, it's going down.'  People didn't feel it," Clinton told a crowd of more than 2,000 people. "And the damage was much deeper this time around.  I'm telling you, we are coming out of this, we are moving in the right direction. If you stay with this policy and you stay with this president and you elect Tammy Baldwin, you will feel it."

    The comments come one day after GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney's campaign jumped on Clinton's remark that the economy is "not fixed."

    At a rally late Thursday, Republican vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan said he agreed with the former president, and used it as an attack against the current administration's economic record.

    But in remarks that lasted nearly one hour, Clinton was careful to say the economy is not "hunky dory" but stressed that the nation's economy was on the mend.

    In recent weeks, Clinton has been one of President Barack Obama's most active surrogates, headlining rallies in nearly all the key battleground states. His appearance here at the University of Wisconsin Green Bay was also in support of Democratic senate candidate, Rep. Tammy Baldwin. The high profile race in the Badger State has gotten plenty of interest from outside groups who have poured millions into advertising in the state, to which Clinton warned supporters to "follow the money."

    The 42nd president was particularly critical of the Super PAC Crossroads, run by Karl Rove, a former aide to President George W. Bush. "You all remember Karl Rove, don't you? Now he was part of a great economic record," Clinton said to laughter. "He's out there plugging for Gov. Romney and plugging for Tommy Thompson, and if you liked the economics of the previous 8 years, you will just love what they do. You gotta follow the money sometimes, folks."

    Clinton also used his trip here to reflect on some of the pleasant memories from his own time in office, even briefly addressing his legacy. "When you have more yesterdays than tomorrows, there are only 3 things that matter: Are people better off than when you quit than when you started? Do children have a brighter future and are things coming together or being torn apart?" he said.

    "The rest of it is all background music."

     

  • Judging the Bush tax cuts -- 10 years later

    By Mark Murray

    Exactly 10 years ago today, George W. Bush signed the first of his large tax cuts into law, which President Obama temporarily extended last December.

    And get this: In those 10 years -- under two different presidents and after more tax cuts -- the U.S. economy has lost a net of 1.1 million jobs.

    Of course, much has taken place in those 10 years. The recession of 2001. The 9/11 attacks. The 2008 financial collapse. And the global economic downturn that followed.

    But those 1.1 million jobs lost -- compared with more than 20 million jobs added during higher tax rates in the 1990s -- make the argument that lower taxes aren't always a guarantee for economic growth and job expansion.

    The reason from the left: The Bush tax cuts were heavily tilted toward the wealthy, who are less inclined to spend their excess money. What's more, they reduced the amount of revenue flowing into the Treasury Department's coffers.

    "The Bush tax cuts are a major driver of our current deficit -- and have been and will continue to be," argues Chuck Marr, director of federal tax policy at the liberal-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

    Chris Edwards, the director of tax policy studies at the libertarian-leaning Cato Institute, has a different take on the Bush tax cuts.

    Edwards says the 2001 cuts (which included lower individual tax rates) turned out to be less effective than the later ones enacted in 2003 (on dividends and capital gains). "Bush's cuts were half and half in my view."

    He also contends that it's too simplistic to extrapolate from the last 10 years that tax cuts -- in general -- don't work. "So much goes on in the economy," Edwards said, referring to external events, trade policies, and spending. "Clinton's higher tax rate doesn't prove any kind of relationship."

    The current crop of Republican presidential hopefuls are continuing to bet on lower taxes. In his speech at the University of Chicago today, former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty proposed decreasing individual income-tax rates to just two levels: 10% and 25%; 35% is the current top level. And he also called for a lower corporate-tax rate.

    "Growing at 5% a year -- rather than at the current level of 1.8% -- would net us millions of new jobs," Pawlenty said. "How do we do it? In short, we create more economic growth by creating more economic freedom."

  • Bush declines invite to attend Ground Zero event

    By Savannah Guthrie

    President Obama invited former President George W. Bush to attend Thursday's event at Ground Zero in New York.

    Bush, however, declined. But he plans to be at Ground Zero for the 10th-year anniversary of 9/11 this September.

  • Jeb Bush: 2012 run is not happening

    By Domenico Montanaro, Deputy Political Editor, NBC News

    Despite conservatives best efforts, including a column by National Review editor Rich Lowry, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush reiterates to Politico’s Jonathan Martin that he’s not running:

    "Yes," Bush wrote in an email when asked if the door remained firmly shut on a White House campaign next year.

  • Poll: JFK tops presidential approval poll, Carter slips 9 points

    John F. Kennedy remains the most popular modern U.S. president, according to a new Gallup poll of the nine most recent presidents, while Jimmy Carter’s approval rating has dropped 9 percentage points since 2006.

    Since Gallup began its retrospective job approval poll in 1990, Kennedy has consistently topped the list of most popular presidents, while Richard Nixon has received the lowest approval rating in every poll except the one conducted in 1993. Lyndon Johnson, who now has a 47 percent rating, was ranked last that year.

    Kennedy got a thumbs up from 85 percent of respondents.

    Carter has a 52 percent rating this year, down from 61 when the last poll was conducted in 2006. That puts him sixth on the list (above Johnson, George W. Bush and Nixon). Carter’s approval reached its peak in 1999, according to Gallup, but has consistently dropped since then due to a loss in support from Republicans and independents in recent years.

    “These changes may reflect Carter’s outspoken criticism of then-President George W. Bush over the Iraq war, at one time calling Bush’s presidency ‘the worst in history’ on international matters,” Gallup said in a press release. “Whatever the reason for the decline, Carter remains better regarded today, overall, than he was in the early ’90s.”

    New to the list this year: George W. Bush who ranks eighth with 47 percent approval – up 13 points from when he left office in 2009. (It’s also one percent higher than President Barack Obama’s current rating, as POLITICO points out.)

    After staying out of the spotlight, Bush has hit the road in recent weeks to promote his new book, “Decision Points,” which was released Nov. 9 – one possible explanation for the bonhomie respondents of the latest Gallup poll seem to be sending his way.

    Gallup also noted that Johnson, Nixon and Clinton have maintained job approval ratings that approximate how they were viewed at the end of their terms.

    The poll was conducted between Nov. 19-21 on a sample of 1,037 adults using landline telephones and cellular phones.

    You can find the complete results of the poll here.

  • Democrats debate extending Bush tax cuts for the rich

    From NBC's Luke Russert and Domenico Montanaro
    Recently a few House Democrats have publicly come out in support of extending President George W. Bush's tax cuts for families making over $250,000 for two or more years. These Democrats are of the view that with the nation expected to continue in a severe recession for the next 18-to-24 months, according to respected economists, and that the tax cuts should not expire, because wealthy families would tighten their belts and not put as much of their fortune toward disposable income. Politically, many also fear being labeled as tax-raisers in the months before the contentious midterm elections.

    The idea has gained traction within the Democratic Caucus over recent days, Gerry Connolly, a vulnerable freshman House Democrat from Virginia, told The Hill newspaper, "I think the recovery is sufficiently fragile that we ought to leave tax rates where they are."

    In her weekly press conference on Capitol Hill today, though, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) all but closed the door on the idea. Pelosi said passionately, "Our position has been that we support middle income tax cuts, the tax cuts at the high end have increased the deficit enormously, and they have not created jobs over the last eight years of the Bush administration. Think of the inconsistency of what the Republicans have said about these tax cuts, they insisted that the unemployment benefits be paid for, but the tax cuts for the wealthiest in the country should not -- $34 billion for unemployment insurance benefits which create jobs, $700 billion dollars for the wealthiest Americans that don't want to pay for it, and they do not create jobs. I think we have a clear distinction here -- if we want to lower taxes for the middle class and reduce the deficit and create jobs, extending the tax cuts at the high end are not conducive to reaching those goals."

    The New York Times on July 16 noted, "The economic recovery has been helped in large part by the spending of the most affluent. Now, even the rich appear to be tightening their belts."

    Mark Zandi of Moody's said, “One of the reasons that the recovery has lost momentum is that high-end consumers have become more jittery and more cautious."

    More: "[T]he Top 5 percent in income earners -- those households earning $210,000 or more -- account for about one-third of consumer outlays, including spending on goods and services, interest payments on consumer debt and cash gifts, according to an analysis of Federal Reserve data by Moody’s Analytics. That means the purchasing decisions of the rich have an outsize effect on economic data. According to Gallup, spending by upper-income consumers -- defined as those earning $90,000 or more -- surged to an average of $145 a day in May, up 33 percent from a year earlier. Then in June, that daily average slid to $119."

    It'll be interesting to see how this story develops after the August recess, if rank-and-file members, back from town halls, report to the House Democratic Leadership that letting the tax cuts expire could be politically damaging, perhaps there could be a change in Democratic policy.