Obama steals thunder from super committee with veto threat

President Barack Obama makes a statement about his proposed federal defict reduction plan in the Rose Garden at the White House September 19, 2011 in Washington, DC.

/ Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

After the marathon negotiation to raise the nation's legal borrowing limit resulted in a stop-gap creation of the so-called "Super Committee" of a dozen lawmakers to work out a compromise on deficit reduction, some pundits said the panel would have too much power.

President Obama on Monday might have just taken their power away.

As he unveiled his $3 trillion deficit reduction plan, he pledged to veto any legislation that takes the part of his plan changing Medicare that does not also include his proposal to raise taxes on the richest Americans.

Since half of the panel--the six Republicans--has pledged not to raise taxes on anyone under any circumstances, compromise is even more difficult today than it was at the panel's creation.

Republican Sen. Pat Toomey, one of the twelve, called Mr. Obama's proposal "political posturing" for the November 2012 elections.

"With the select committee's deadline looming, we do not have time to waste on political games and pushing big tax increases that will only make our economy weaker for all Americans," said Toomey, of Pennsylvania.

At the same time, Democrats in Congress were fired up by Mr. Obama's more combative tone Monday than he has displayed in earlier talks with congressional Repubilcans.

Democratic Rep. Chris Van Hollen, who also sits on the panel, called the plan "a common sense approach."

Mr. Obama "laid out the case for putting our fiscal house in order by making difficult cuts and also asking millionaires and billionaires to pay at least the same effective tax rate as many of those who work for them," the Maryland lawmaker said.

While it is still two months before a Thanksgiving deadline for the Super Committee to make its recommendations, those comments make it hard to see how the gaps can be bridged.

And the veto threat gives less room for the dozen panel members to cut a deal with the other side.

Under the agreement reached in the debt ceiling debate, if the Super Committee does not come to a deal, automatic spending cuts begin to kick in.

And those cuts are ostensibly designed to be painful for both sides, cutting the programs popular with Republicans like the Pentagon and those popular with Democrats like Medicare.

But the cuts do not actually kick in until 2013, after the elections.

So both sides will likely hold their ground, letting voters decide which side will have the upper hand for a deal to be negotiated in a year and a half.

[starman5409]

Well dummies, there's no money left to spend because all the tax cuts during the Bush administration cut government income, yet they continue to rubber-stamp anything the Republicans want to spend.

Remember "Cut, Cap and Balance" What the republicans really are saying is "Cut the Democrats out of the equation, Cap and stall the American Economy so the Republicans can balance out the 2012 election in their favor. But that will backfire because Americans are not stupid.
Well those days are over. All the influence the GOP has left is patting each other on the back for stalling the economy.

How long are we going to put up with Republicans hijacking congress so they can further stall the economy and make it look like Pres. Obama's fault.

The speaker of the house and all Republicans who continue their obstructionist and absolutist ways will find themselves having a rude awakening when they are impeached and thrown out for treason and un-constitutioinal activities. If you read the Declaration of Independence, it is precisely for that type of behavior that we threw out the British over 200 years ago.

If you want riots in the streets like in Greece and Egypt, keep it up Republicans. You have to be really dumb if you think that the American People don't see what you're doing. If you think this kind of behavior will get you re-elected, think again. You Mr. Speaker are going to single handedly destroy the Republican Party, and any chance for you're re- election. GOOD JOB.

[bcpats]

All great democracies have committed financial suicide somewhere between 200 and 250 years after being founded. The reason? The voters figured out they could vote themselves money from the treasury by electing people who promised to give them money from the treasury in exchange for electing them.

The United States officially became a Republic in 1776, 231 years ago. The number of people now getting free stuff out numbers the people paying for the free stuff. We have one chance to change that in 2012. Failure to change that spells the end of the United States as we know it.

[bcpats]

He says he's going to veto anything that the Republicans might present- - IF it has this, that or whatever he doesn't want ........ hmmmmmm ..... then has the audacity to say the Republicans are the 'party of no'.

Just a thought -- look at the last three letters of each party - - 'can' and 'rat'. 'Nuff said.

[fedup12]

I wonder if they would be ok with raising taxes in the event of a decade of war.

Oooh wait. We answered that question last president.

I wonder when the GOP became so um "Fiscally Responsible"

[imnotimportant]

Dear cbs4111
Obama is a flat-out liar when he claims that he can solve his massive debt problem by taxing the rich.
_______________________________________
Obama never said this.

Obama wants this as PART of a balanced approach in deficit reduction.

His primary goal right now is employment. Obviously the temporary Bush tax breaks didn't help the deficit because they didn't create jobs.

[stephand]

CBS should run the associate press story fact checking Obama's claim that the Rich pays less than middle income people. It is not true...
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/fact-check-rich-taxed-secretaries-14561376

[cbs4111]

How much of Obama's MASSIVE deficit spending could be paid for by restoring the Bush tax cuts? The tax cuts enacted by George Bush in 2001 and 2003 lowered tax rates ACROSS ALL INCOME LEVELS on income, dividends, and capital gains. Bush lowered the tax burden on married couples and the working poor too. The Bush tax cuts increased tax credits for education and retirement savings. Obama is proposing to retain ALMOST ALL of these tax cuts except just the fraction that applies to individuals making more than $200K or families that make more than $250,000.

After Bush, the top tax bracket went from 39% to 35% where it remains, so restoring it to 39% would bring in 10% more on just the fraction of the taxes paid by those in the top tax bracket which covers only 2% of Americans (I'm not one). The total taxes collected in all tax brackets added together is about $2 Trillion, out of that the top bracket taxpayers already pay $1 trillion, or about 1/2 of the total. 2% of Americans already pay 50% of taxes. Raise their taxes by 10% and that $1 Trillion collected from them would go to $1.1 Trillion or about a $100 Billion increase.

$100 Billion sounds like a lot, but how much is Obama overspending? About $1500 Billion, every year. Raising taxes on the rich would pay for 1/15th, or 6.6% of Obama's foolish, wasteful spending.

Obama is a flat-out liar when he claims that he can solve his massive debt problem by taxing the rich.

[fedup12]

Dude. Most of those tax cuts did go to the wealthy. I would say they deserve it but their businesses didnt stop depending on our infrastructure or interstates. Their overseas businesses kept using the US military as their own personal security force. etc...

Bush threw is a little bone in order to take our eyes off the big prize the rich were getting.

[stephand]

Bush and the republicans were fiscally irresponsible. And then Obama came and showed them how its done!

[Rick03466]

This the title of this story should have been the first two words. Obama Steals! Mr. Obama can't say hello without trying to get his hands into someones Pockets. Every time he speaks he is saying let's tax someone. He is back to scapegoating again ("lets get it from those bad millionaires") Democrats you can no longer afford Mr Obama's delusions of competence. As an Independent BVote I beg the democrats to bring forward a guy like Democratic Governor of New Hampshire John Lynch. A guy who has proven he can work with a Republican Legislature and Grow an Economy WITHOUT Raising Taxes. Governor Lynch has done this in a state that has no Income Tax or Sales Tax. He is a Democrat I have voted for and would Vote for President.
Like Most Independents I will not Vote Obama.
DEMOCRATS GIVE US A BETTER CHOICE OR GIVE THE REPUBLICANS THE WHITE HOUSE!

[Excalibrationist]

THIS is the part of the print that is just hilarious
...for all of you liberal/dem idiots:

The vultures are starting to circle. Former White House spokesman Bill Burton said that unless Obama can rally the Democratic base, which is disillusioned with him, "it's going to be impossible for the president to win." Democratic consultant James Carville had one word of advice for Obama: "Panic."

[Excalibrationist]

by lg144 September 20, 2011 3:28 AM EDT
Ok you Obama hating republican supporters, please state any republican bill, policy or current political stance that favors struggling Americans over corporations, big oil and the wealthy? Of course this looong list will justify republicans deserving the votes of struggling Americans over President Obama and Democrats, right? I know you weasels will avoid this like you blood sucking vampires avoid light.
===================================================================
Swallow real hard, lg144, you deserve....

Chicago Editorial Writer Suggests Obama Step Down After First Term
Published September 19, 2011

President Obama's hometown newspaper has some startling advice for the commander-in-chief -- quit while you're behind.

Citing the president's record-low approval ratings and unease in the Democratic base, a Chicago Tribune editorial writer recommended over the weekend that Obama need not feel obligated to run for a second term.

Steve Chapman said that with Obama facing the prospect of a double-dip recession and, if he wins reelection, a gridlocked second term, it might be better to call it a presidency and let someone else -- maybe Hillary Clinton -- carry the Democratic mantle in the 2012 election.

...and I'm so happy to report this from FOX NEWS:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/19/chicago-editorial-writer-suggests-obama-step-down-after-first-term/

[Excalibrationist]

Here it is again
.....from the horse's mouth:

"Why Obama should withdraw"
September 18, 2011|By Steve Chapman | Tribune columnist

When Ronald Reagan ran for re-election in 1984, his slogan was "Morning in America." For Barack Obama, it's more like midnight in a coal mine.

The sputtering economy is about to stall out, unemployment is high, his jobs program may not pass, foreclosures are rampant and the poor guy can't even sneak a cigarette.

This election is about our future. Help change the world again.

His approval rating is at its lowest level ever. His party just lost two House elections — one in a district it had held for 88 consecutive years. He's staked his future on the jobs bill, which most Americans don't think would work.

The vultures are starting to circle. Former White House spokesman Bill Burton said that unless Obama can rally the Democratic base, which is disillusioned with him, "it's going to be impossible for the president to win." Democratic consultant James Carville had one word of advice for Obama: "Panic."