PDA

View Full Version : Obama calls for $4 trillion in deficit reduction



George Gervin's Afro
04-13-2011, 01:49 PM
Obama calls for $4 trillion in deficit reductionBy Alan Silverleib, CNNApril 13, 2011 2:36 p.m. EDT


Washington (CNN) -- President Barack Obama unveiled his long-awaited deficit reduction plan Wednesday, calling for a mix of spending reductions and tax hikes that the White House claims would cut federal deficits by $4 trillion over the next 12 years without gutting popular programs such as Medicare and Medicaid.

Obama's plan includes a repeal of the Bush-era tax cuts on families making more than $250,000 annually -- something the president has repeatedly called for in the past. It also calls for the creation of a "debt failsafe" trigger that would impose automatic across-the-board spending cuts and tax changes starting in 2014 if annual deficits are on track to exceed 2.8% of the nation's gross domestic product.

The president claimed that by building on reforms in his health care overhaul, $480 billion would be saved by 2023, followed by an additional $1 trillion in the following decade. Growth in Medicare costs would be tightly constrained starting in 2018.

"We can solve this problem," Obama said in a speech at George Washington University. "We came together as Democrats and Republicans to meet this challenge before, and we can do it again."

"Any serious plan to tackle our deficit will require us to put everything on the table, and take on excess spending wherever it exists in the budget," the president said. "A serious plan doesn't require us to balance our budget overnight ... but it does require tough decisions and support from leaders in both parties."

"Above all, it will require us to choose a vision of the America we want to see five and 10 and 20 years down the road," he said.

The administration's package stands in sharp contrast to the blueprint outlined by House Republicans last week. The GOP agenda calls for cutting the debt by $4.4 trillion over the next decade while radically overhauling Medicare and Medicaid and dropping the top personal and corporate tax rate to 25%.



Budget deal details revealed

What's on the budget chopping block?

Carney: 'Tough choices' with budget deal

Sessions: 'What we need is numbers' Under the Obama plan, Pentagon spending would fall by roughly $400 billion by 2023, while federal pensions, agricultural subsidies and other domestic programs would also face the budget ax, according to the White House.

In total, nonsecurity discretionary spending -- Washington jargon for domestic programs aside from the big entitlements such as Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security -- would be cut by a total of $770 billion over the next 12 years.

The $770 billion figure is in line with recommendations put forward by Obama's bipartisan debt reduction commission last December, the White House claims.

Social Security is not addressed by Obama's plan. The president does not believe that the program "is in crisis (or) is a driver of our near-term deficit problems," a White House statement noted.

But it does face "long-term challenges that are better addressed sooner than later," the statement added.

Obama's plan calls for top leaders on Capitol Hill to designate eight congressmen and eight senators -- equally split between the two parties -- to participate in budget talks spearheaded by Vice President Joe Biden starting in early May.

The aim, Obama said, is to reach agreement on a deficit reduction plan by the end of June.

The president, however, strongly opposes the proposed Medicare and Medicaid overhaul outlined recently by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wisconsin.

Under Ryan's plan, Medicare, a major contributor to spiraling federal deficits, would be overhauled starting in 2022. The government would no longer directly pay bills for senior citizens in the program. Instead, recipients would choose a plan from a list of private providers, which the federal government would subsidize.

Individuals currently 55 or older would not be affected by the changes.

Medicaid, which provides health care for the disabled and the poor, would be transformed into a series of block grants to the states.

Republicans believe state governments would spend the money more efficiently and would benefit from increased flexibility. Democrats warn that such a move would shred the economic security most Americans have come to expect in recent generations.

"I will not allow Medicare to become a voucher program that leaves seniors at the mercy of the insurance industry, with a shrinking benefit to pay for rising costs," Obama said. "I will not tell families with children who have disabilities that they have to fend for themselves. We will reform these programs, but we will not abandon the fundamental commitment this country has kept for generations."

The Republican "vision is less about reducing the deficit than it is about changing the basic social compact in America," the president asserted. "It ends Medicare as we know it."

Obama's approach to debt reduction seeks to carve out a political middle ground between conservatives -- who are pushing for deficit reduction based solely on spending cuts and expected economic growth -- and liberals, who are generally resisting entitlement reform and seeking higher corporate and personal taxes.

"To those in my own party, I say that if we truly believe in a progressive vision of our society, we have the obligation to prove that we can afford our commitments," the president said.

"If we believe that government can make a difference in people's lives, we have the obligation to prove that it works -- by making government smarter, leaner and more effective."

GOP leaders, who were briefed by Obama at the White House before his blueprint was officially released, blasted the president's call for higher taxes on those making more than $250,000.

"We can't tax the very people we expect to reinvest in our economy and create jobs," House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, told reporters. "Washington has a spending problem, not a revenue problem."

As Obama and the Republicans spar over long-term deficit reduction plans, they also need to tackle the budget for the remainder of the current fiscal year, which ends September 30.

The House is scheduled to vote Thursday on a deal reached late last week that would cut spending for the year by $38.5 billion.

The package cuts funding for a wide range of domestic programs and services, including high-speed rail, emergency first responders and the National Endowment for the Arts.

Under the terms of the deal, roughly $20 billion would be taken from discretionary programs while nearly $18 billion would come from what are known as "changes in mandatory programs," or CHIMPS, which involve programs funded for multiyear blocks that don't require annual spending approval by Congress.

Republicans generally opposed CHIMP cuts because they affect only one year, with funding returning to the preauthorized level in the following year.

Democrats and Republicans also have to contend with an impending vote to raise the nation's debt ceiling. Congress needs to raise the limit before the federal government reaches its legal borrowing limit of $14.29 trillion later this spring or risk a default that could result in a crashing dollar and spiraling interest rates, among other things.

Republicans have repeatedly stressed that any vote to raise the cap has to be tied to another round of spending cuts or fiscal reforms.

The administration, in contrast, has called for a "clean" vote on the cap, which would raise the limit without adding any conditions. White House Press Secretary Jay Carney has warned that trying to force the issue is tantamount to playing a game of "chicken" with the economy.

While meeting with reporters after his meeting with Obama, however, Boehner indicated that the president might be open to a compromise on that vote.

"It's time to act," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky. Other countries "want to know whether America's going to get its act together or (if it's) going to become another Greece."

Greece, after years of running massive budget deficits, was recently forced to confront an imminent economic meltdown by implementing severe austerity measures.

Wild Cobra
04-13-2011, 01:53 PM
Yet not a single proposal on paper.

George Gervin's Afro
04-13-2011, 02:05 PM
Yet not a single proposal on paper.

It will probably be out tomorrow. Do you need a hard copy?

coyotes_geek
04-13-2011, 02:06 PM
......the White House estimates that spending would account for the bulk of deficit reduction. Obama says he wants $3 in spending cuts for every $1 in additional tax revenue.

:tu


He also said he supports a "debt failsafe" trigger that would be activated if Congress fails to enact fiscally sound budgets. His target: Annual deficits that are no more than 2.8% of GDP....

:tu to the concept, but how would it work?


Three areas would be exempt from the trigger: Social Security, Medicare benefits and low-income programs.

:td So the majority of the budget would be exempt?


As expected, the president called for the expiration of the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy.

:tu for expiration on the wealthy.
:td for not including everyone else in the tax hikes. Everyone's taxes need to go up.


But he also proposed a future in which those tax cuts would be irrelevant for everyone. He lent his support to the idea of reforming the individual tax code in a way that reduces tax breaks in order to pay for the cost of lowering tax rates and reducing the deficit.

:tu


Relative to the estimated savings that would be achieved by the new health reform law, the president said he will propose an additional $480 billion in savings by 2023 ($340 billion of which would be realized in the next decade). He further estimates the proposal would save an additional $1 trillion in the second decade.

The savings would come by "reducing waste, increasing accountability, promoting efficiency and improving the quality of care" in Medicare and Medicaid, according to the White House fact sheet.

Worthless fluff material.

Winehole23
04-13-2011, 02:13 PM
Obama's plan calls for top leaders on Capitol Hill to designate eight congressmen and eight senators -- equally split between the two parties -- to participate in budget talks spearheaded by Vice President Joe Biden starting in early May.Obama already had one of these -- Bowles-Simpson -- that couldn't come to a consensus. Hard to see the upside for the GOP playing ball this time. Too close to the elections. Compromise is a turn off.

Wild Cobra
04-13-2011, 02:16 PM
It will probably be out tomorrow. Do you need a hard copy?
Probably...

You believe that? I'll believe it when I see it.

All this time, complaints about the republican budget, and no written proposals by the democrats or white house.

You always fall for the propaganda hook, line, and sinker!

DJ Mbenga
04-13-2011, 02:25 PM
ryans play wasnt bad until i read he wanted to lower taxes for the rich. kind of defeats the point of things. its like an intervention where the guy stands up and says you must stop drinking since you are an alcholic. and then proceeds to pour the guy a drink.

Wild Cobra
04-13-2011, 02:28 PM
ryans play wasnt bad until i read he wanted to lower taxes for the rich. kind of defeats the point of things. its like an intervention where the guy stands up and says you must stop drinking since you are an alcholic. and then proceeds to pour the guy a drink.
How does lowering the top marginal rate, which primarily affects sports stars, lottery winners, and small business, lowering the taxes rate on the rich?

What percentage of the rich do you think make their money with common income? Correct me if I'm wrong, most their increased wealth is taxed as capital gains when they cash out stocks, or get dividends from them.

coyotes_geek
04-13-2011, 02:46 PM
ryans play wasnt bad until i read he wanted to lower taxes for the rich. kind of defeats the point of things. its like an intervention where the guy stands up and says you must stop drinking since you are an alcholic. and then proceeds to pour the guy a drink.

Ryan's plan was to lower tax rates and offset the lost revenue by eliminating most tax deductions. It's basically the same thing Obama is proposing.

CosmicCowboy
04-13-2011, 02:58 PM
Why wasn't all this in the budget he released 2 months ago?

DJ Mbenga
04-13-2011, 02:58 PM
in that case ill go back to not caring and waking up in 2012

Wild Cobra
04-13-2011, 02:59 PM
Why wasn't all this in the budget he released 2 months ago?
A budget isn't tax policy.

boutons_deux
04-13-2011, 03:16 PM
Barry has taken an extremely popular position: raise taxes on the wealthy, and even Repug voters say "Don't Touch My Medicare"

Boner says tax raises are non-starter, so any financial catastrophe due to Repugs blocking tax raises will be an electoral disaster for the Repugs.

I think the nigga has swung his big dick and dick-slapped the Repugs.

fraga
04-13-2011, 03:23 PM
What's funny is that the Republicans are now saying...we don't need scare tactics...mahahahaha...hello kettle...meet pot...

boutons_deux
04-13-2011, 03:40 PM
In 2001 Address, Bush Said The National Debt Would Be Paid Off In Ten Years

At the end of those 10 years, we will have paid down all the debt that is available to retire. That is more debt repaid more quickly than has ever been repaid by any nation at any time in history.

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/04/13/bush-sotu-debt-flashback/

boutons_deux
04-13-2011, 04:06 PM
Obama Deficit Speech: Lots of Flowery Talk About a Major Distraction


Barack Obama's deficit address was a classic piece of Washington Kabuki. Long on rhetoric but sparse in detail, it was replete with impossible-to-fulfill promises while kicking the stickiest issues down the road, perhaps until some period of idealized comity arises in the future.

Obama pledged to cut $4 trillion from the projected deficit over the next 12 years. “To meet our fiscal challenge, we will need to make reforms,” he said. “We will all need to make sacrifices.” Which means $3 dollars in spending cuts (and “interest savings”) for every dollar raised by cutting coporate tax loopholes and restoring the Clinton-era rates on the wealthiest Americans.

Obama again crowed about the “historic cuts” the White House negotiated with Congressional leaders last week, saying, “The first step in our approach is to keep annual domestic spending low by building on the savings that both parties agreed to last week.” The speech was designed to take Paul Ryan's ruinous budget out and beat it to death while claiming to be serious about deficit reduction. It did that.

Obama also trumpeted bipartisanship, recalling the sunny days when Tip O'Neill and Ronald Reagan would duke it out and then share a beer. “This sense of responsibility... isn’t a partisan feeling,” he said. “It isn’t a Democratic or Republican idea.”

If the budget projections don't look better by the end of 2014 – with debt stabilized and declining by the end of the decade – it would automatically trigger deep, “across-the-board” spending cuts. When a White House official was asked how this would actually work prior to the speech, he responded that the details are yet to be worked out.

:lol

In his address, Obama said we have to “put everything on the table.” But when asked whether a carbon tax would be part of the mix in closing the deficit during the White House press call, the official said it was not. When asked why Obama was calling for more modest defense cuts than many analysts say is necessary, he replied that, as Commander-in-Chief, Obama had to be more cautious. Despite the doubling of defense spending since 9/11, Obama promised only to hold future increases to some figure beneath the rate of inflation.

( the MIC escapes, as always )

“Winning the future” is definitely on the table, as is some vaguely articulated fiddling with Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. Promising not to balance the budget on the backs of the neediest, the president pledged to control drug costs without imposing a burden on seniors or the poor, but it's unclear how that might happen.

( easy: nullify dubya's rule that forbids govt from negotiating as single-buyer for Medicare/Medicaid/VA. Get BigPharm's US prices down to where they are in Europe, about 50%+ lower )

He vowed to control the growth of Medicare spending by holding down costs to a half of a percent above inflation beginning in 2018. How that will happen is also an open question, but health-care costs are projected to grow much more rapidly than the rate of inflation.

Ultimately, the speech was a catastrophe for progressives who argue that we need to grow our way out of the deficit by addressing the economic crisis pummeling “Main Street.” "The greatest long-term threat to America’s national security is America’s debt," he said. But there was little in the way of concrete substance.

( yep, "Where Are The Jobs?" )

How will we achieve $4 trillion in deficit reduction “without hurting the most vulnerable”? The president called for a “gang of 16” legislators, led by vice president Joe Biden, to enter into negotiations designed to figure it out. How will he contain health-care costs? By strengthening the Independent Payment Advisory Board that was created by the Affordable Care Act. What about cutting discretionary spending? Obama wants to implement the recommendations made by the co-chairs of the Simpson-Bowles commission. They called for restoring discretionary spending to 2008 levels, but there is nothing that binds future Congresses to those limits – it's called “discretionary” spending because it's determined during the annual budget process.

In tone, the speech was classic Obama – reasonable, informed and seductive to a degree that one might forget that we're debating to what degree we're going to put the breaks on this tenuous, jobless economic recovery. But that is what we're debating. Even the very moderate cuts agreed to last week will cost the economy about 400,000 jobs, according to models developed by Moody's chief economist Mark Zandi. Nobel laureate Joe Stiglitz called the Simpson Bowles recommendations – several of which Obama embraced in his speech – a “suicide pact.” He predicted that it would cost the economy millions of jobs.

“I understand these fears,” Obama said. “I say that if we truly believe in a progressive vision of our society, we have the obligation to prove that we can afford our commitments. If we believe that government can make a difference in people’s lives, we have the obligation to prove that it works – by making government smarter, leaner and more effective.”

The reality is that while our private profit-driven health-care system is unsustainably expensive, the U.S. spends less on the public sector than almost every other developed country. We're running large deficits because we're maintaining costly military operations in several countries and the federal government collected less tax revenue in 2010 than in any year since 1961.

Progressives will no doubt celebrate Obama's deft dissection of the GOP's budget gimmicks and his full-throated defense of the welfare state. But it was ultimately some thin political gruel with unemployment remaining at 9 percent and the foreclosure crisis continuing unabated. When Obama's on, as he was today, it's easy to forget that our biggest national debate is little more than a distraction from the real issues plaguing our economy.

http://www.alternet.org/module/printversion/150596

George Gervin's Afro
04-13-2011, 04:13 PM
What's funny is that the Republicans are now saying...we don't need scare tactics...mahahahaha...hello kettle...meet pot...

death panels!

Wild Cobra
04-13-2011, 04:51 PM
In 2001 Address, Bush Said The National Debt Would Be Paid Off In Ten Years

At the end of those 10 years, we will have paid down all the debt that is available to retire. That is more debt repaid more quickly than has ever been repaid by any nation at any time in history.

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/04/13/bush-sotu-debt-flashback/
That was 27 February 2001, well before 9/11. He was also talking about just paying down 2 trillion over 10 years.

DarrinS
04-13-2011, 04:54 PM
death panels!

"Maybe you're better off, uh, not having the surgery, but taking, uh, the pain killer." -BHO, mmm mmm mmm

boutons_deux
04-13-2011, 05:09 PM
That was 27 February 2001, well before 9/11. He was also talking about just paying down 2 trillion over 10 years.

But WELL AFTER dubya's neocon and PNAC cabal had decided, in the late 90s, to invade Iraq for oil no matter what.

And clearly in Feb 01, the Repugs knew they were going to force through, as their very first legislative priority, with Senate reconciliation, a couple months later, nearly $1T in tax cuts.

So dubya was lying, or to be kind, an ignorant tool.

There was no way to invade Iraq and cut $1T taxes and pay down $2T. And guess what, dubya tripled the debt and excreted it on Barry.

z0sa
04-13-2011, 05:12 PM
But WELL AFTER dubya's neocon and PNAC cabal had decided, in the late 90s, to invade Iraq for oil no matter what.

:lol

boutons_deux
04-13-2011, 05:19 PM
"Maybe you're better off, uh, not having the surgery, but taking, uh, the pain killer." -BHO

That's actually true in many cases of back pain, where docs perform 1000s of back surgeries every year with almost no pain relief to show for it.

MannyIsGod
04-13-2011, 05:51 PM
Why wasn't all this in the budget he released 2 months ago?

How do you put these things into the budget? You can only include the cuts.

MannyIsGod
04-13-2011, 05:53 PM
Ryan's plan was to lower tax rates and offset the lost revenue by eliminating most tax deductions. It's basically the same thing Obama is proposing.

Ryan's plan was definitely not what Obama is proposing. Not even close. Ryan's plan was a fairy tale if I've ever seen one requiring growth that we have no reason to expect and no tax increases.

Just not the same at all.

coyotes_geek
04-13-2011, 05:56 PM
Ryan's plan was definitely not what Obama is proposing. Not even close. Ryan's plan was a fairy tale if I've ever seen one requiring growth that we have no reason to expect and no tax increases.

Just not the same at all.

I was only referring to the part of Ryan's plan dealing with simplification of the tax code, not Ryan's plan as a whole. Both Ryan and Obama have advocated lower marginal tax rates with fewer deductions.

MannyIsGod
04-13-2011, 06:00 PM
Gotcha.

MannyIsGod
04-13-2011, 06:00 PM
BTW, if Boehner holds firm with this no tax raising bullshit the GOP is not serious about debt reduction.

coyotes_geek
04-13-2011, 06:13 PM
BTW, if Boehner holds firm with this no tax raising bullshit the GOP is not serious about debt reduction.

No doubt. Especially after Obama tossed out that $3/$1 spending cuts to tax increases ratio. If you're the GOP and you're serious about getting something done, that's a pretty damn good offer.

boutons_deux
04-13-2011, 06:19 PM
"the GOP is not serious about debt reduction."

if? the above is true without conditions.

Repug don't GAF about debt (see the non-debt riders of which they lost all, except for politicians overriding wolf protection, that's a big debt reducer)

fraga
04-13-2011, 06:50 PM
I actually like this move by Obammer...he's drawn a HUGE line in the sand...basically saying...FUCK those rich bastards...enough tax breaks for them...let's fix Medicare...

Ryan's proposal...let's not touch the Richs' money...but let's put an end to Medicare...and FUCK all those old people....ooooookay buddy...I can't even begin to figure out how they would expect to win with this strategy come 2012...

DJ Mbenga
04-14-2011, 12:42 AM
the republicans dont really care about the debt reduction. its just the spending. this is all extra, cause they latched on to that message and are stuck with that burden.