Impeach Obama or Go Broke

The Next Tax Increase

The new tax hike is barely law and Obama already wants more. In case you missed it, President Obama held a press conference Monday to make essentially two points:

He won't negotiate with Republicans over raising the federal debt limit, and if Republicans want any spending cuts at any time in the next four years they'll have to raise taxes along with it.

He won, so get used to it, chumps. We'll elaborate on the debt-ceiling fight another day, but let's focus today on the President's demand to raise taxes—again.

Millions of Americans, rich and middle class, are still recovering from the shock of the income and payroll tax hikes in their first 2013 paychecks, while ObamaCare's new taxes have also just kicked in.

These are the biggest tax increases in at least 20 years, yet Mr. Obama is already stumping for another revenue raid.The President even invoked the American people to support his third huge tax hike, saying Monday that "They don't think it's smart to protect endless corporate loopholes and tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans rather than rebuild our roads and our schools . . ." You already know the rest.

But wait. It was President Obama who insisted that the recent tax bill be loaded with tens of billions of dollars worth of additional "corporate loopholes," including for his billionaire buddies in the green-energy business. Too bad no one in the White House press corps asked about that contradiction. Maybe next  Presidency.

The big fiscal news here is that Mr. Obama and the Democrats are all but conceding that the recent tax hike is little more than a token reduction in the deficit. The tax hike, while the biggest in 20 years, will raise only $620 billion at most over 10 years, and probably less.

Yet Mr. Obama conceded in passing Monday that the debt ceiling will have to rise by something like $1.25 trillion to accommodate this year's deficit alone. Other Democrats are also bellying up again to the tax bar:• Nancy Pelosi declared on January 6 on CBS's "Face the Nation" that the fiscal-cliff deal was "not enough on the revenue side." While declaring herself "fairly agnostic" on where the money will come from, she suggested closing tax loopholes and raising $38 billion by ending "special subsidies for big oil" that are merely the same as all manufacturing companies receive.• Michigan's Sandy Levin, the ranking Democrat on the Ways and Means Committee, recently reassured his liberal colleagues on the House floor that "additional revenues" are sure to come in future budget deals and that "this [tax hike] sets that important precedent."• Richard Durbin of Illinois, the number two Democrat in the Senate, was asked on January 6 on CNN whether there should be more taxes on the wealthy and he responded: "Absolutely." He explained that tax loopholes should be closed because "We forgo about $1.2 trillion a year in the tax code, money that otherwise would go to the government," as if it all belongs to Uncle Sam in the first place. Mr. Durbin then said that even that isn't enough and we "should have energy taxes that really fund infrastructure investment," including a gas tax increase. Give Mr. Durbin credit for candor for saying what nearly all of his fellow Democrats really believe, which is that income taxes alone won't fund the government they want.

Liberal commentators who aren't running for office are even more forthright. Former Vermont Governor and Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean conceded in December on MSNBC that "this may seem like heresy" but "the truth is, everybody needs to pay more taxes, not just the rich." The Obama tax proposal to tax the rich was "a good start," he added, "but we're not gonna get out of this deficit problem unless we raise taxes across the board."He's right about soaking the rich. Even if they taxed 100% of every dollar earned by every American who earned more than $500,000 in 2010, the feds would take in $1.29 trillion, or not much more than the entire 2012 deficit.

More and more liberals are picking up this theme and admitting that the middle class has to be taxed because that's where the money is. One Democratic newspaper recently suggested that Mr. Obama consider taxing "capital gains at the same rates as ordinary income" (which would be a 40% capital-gains rate, up from 23.8% now and 15% in December), "surcharges on multimillion-dollar incomes, and higher corporate taxes," plus "exploring carbon taxes . . . a value-added tax . . . and a financial transactions tax." Is that all? Republican leaders Mitch McConnell and John Boehner have ruled out any such tax increases, at least outside of a tax reform that also cuts tax rates. But they and other Republicans should note that having agreed to raise tax rates once hasn't assuaged Democratic tax ambitions or won them any fiscal respite. It has merely whetted the Democratic appetite for more.

Once upon a time, the Democratic political strategy was "tax, spend and elect." Mr. Obama has turned that strategy into spend, borrow, elect and tax.  And then tax some more. Republicans had better start educating the public about this, or they'll end up having to raise taxes again.

A version of this article appeared Jan. 15, 2013, on page A16 in some U.S. editions of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: The Next Tax Increase. Obama Blames Congress For His $5 Trillion Debt

 Posted 01/14/2013 07:06 PM ET

Debt Ceiling: The president now refuses to take responsibility for $5 trillion in deficits racked up in his first four years. That's a stretch even for him. How dumb does he think we are? We have to hand it to Barack Obama: He understands the power of repetition. People will believe all kinds of things if their president says it over and over. Such is his strategy for the coming fight with Republicans over raising the debt ceiling.

Obama wants the public to believe huge deficits of recent years are all the work of Congress, and that Congress now must take responsibility for the mess it made. On Saturday, for instance, the White House declared that "there are only two options to deal with the debt limit: Congress can pay its bills or it can fail to act and put the nation into default."

Obama returned to the theme at his Monday press conference: "Raising the debt ceiling does not authorize more spending, it simply allows the country to pay for spending that Congress has already committed to." In other words, I didn't load $5 trillion in future taxes on our children and grandchildren. Congress did it.

It's important to note that when Obama says "Congress," he's talking about Republicans — specifically the Republicans who have controlled the House of Representatives for the past two years. The GOP has not held the Senate during any part of Obama's time in office.

And it did not hold the House in Obama's key first two years, when spending exploded with his blessing. In other words, most of the responsibility in Congress for the Obama deficits sits with members of his own party.

But you never hear this from Obama and his media allies. The problem is with Speaker John Boehner and, to his right, those Tea Party wackos who want the federal government to stop sending out Social Security checks.

Republicans, for their part, haven't made their case, even with facts clearly on their side. But we have not given up hope that Americans, summoning up their reserves of common sense, will see through this Obama whopper even if they have let others pass.

Here are some facts for them to chew on:

• It takes two to tango. Congress cannot spend a single greenback unless the president signs a bill to do so. Thus, Obama OK'd every cent of the $5.095 trillion in deficit spending (per White House and Congressional Budget Office) from 2009 through 2012.

• Congress had its real spending binge in 2009, when Democrats were in charge of both houses and Obama asked for — and got — a massive stimulus bill. Total outlays soared from $2.98 trillion in 2008 to $3.53 trillion in 2009 and $3.46 trillion in 2010 (these are fiscal years ending Sept. 30). Spending in 2011 peaked at $3.60 trillion, but pulled back to an estimated $3.54 trillion in 2012.

• Presidents are required to submit budgets. Obama's budgets called for the deficit spending he now claims wasn't his fault.

A final thought: If Obama were just now taking office and if John McCain, say, had been president for the past four years, whose name would be on the debt problem? Hint: It wouldn't be the new guy.

 

Source:  Investors Business Daily, IBD: Updated January 14, 2013,

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/011413-640533-obama-blames-congress-deficit-debt-ceiling.htm#comments#ixzz2I2ogjqNH

Comments:

Most of what the federal government spends is unnecessary.  The rest of it is actually harmful.  We wouldn’t be going broke if we had elected McCain.  If we keep Obama we are headed for total ruin.  If we impeach him now, we may have a chance to save what’s left of the private sector economy.

Norb Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party Leader