Buffett Rule: Policy prescription, or political opportunity?

AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais

President Obama may be talking about policy today when he trumps the Buffett Rule in an official speech in Florida, but his re-election campaign is seizing the issue to hammer Mitt Romney, his presumed Republican opponent, on issues relating to his wealth and taxes.

The so-called "Buffett rule," which would compel wealthy Americans to pay at least a 30 percent tax rate, may have close to no chance of becoming law in this polarized environment. It does, however, give Mr. Obama the chance to espouse a broader philosophy of economic fairness. Republicans are also seizing on the political opportunities the Buffett rule presents, castigating the president for turning to "gimmicks" and "class warfare" to address serious problems like the deficit.

On Monday, the White House released an official report to illustrate the benefits of recalibrating the tax code. On Tuesday, Mr. Obama's re-election team blasted out a memo charging that Romney opposes the Buffett rule because "he thinks millionaires and billionaires should keep paying lower tax rates than middle-class families."

The charge gave the Obama team an opening to once again slam Romney for paying a tax rate close to around 14 percent and using tax loopholes to avoid disclosing the details of his financial holdings. They also attacked Romney for a Swiss bank account he failed to disclose at the start of his presidential campaign and for financial holdings sheltered from taxes in the Cayman Islands, among other things.

White House pushes Buffett rule on taxes
White House Buffett Rule: A look at the numbers

The Obama team memo even returned a verbal joust that Romney delivered last week. "Romney should stop playing hide and seek with his tax returns," the Obama campaign memo said, noting that Romney has only publicly released two years of tax returns, even though he gave John McCain's campaign 23 years of tax returns when he was vetted for vice president. The line also referenced remarks Romney made last week when he accused the president of playing "hide and seek" with foreign policy.

While Mr. Obama's campaign was attacking Romney, Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus on Tuesday slammed the president for "campaigning on fear, division and class warfare."

"The fact is, President Obama has no plan to fix the economy except to raise taxes on Americans with gimmicks like the Buffett tax," he said, pointing out that the revenue from the Buffett rule would have a minimal effect on federal revenue.

Priebus said the Buffett rule "isn't about millionaires and billionaires," but rather about small business owners who could be hit by the rule. "This is a tax that's going to hurt small businesses at a time we should be making it easier for people to do business," he said.

The GOP chairman added that Mr. Obama's trip -- which includes three fundraisers in addition to his policy speech -- shows "we have a president in the White House more interested in campaigning than leading."

[paofpa-2010]

If Bush Tax Cuts never happen and he raised taxes to pay for two wars. The recession would not off been as bad. Also, the deficit would probably inching to zero.

[ConSense]

So?

Obama is president NOW. Blame Bush all you want to, Obama is in charge today. How many years does he get to blame Bush for his failures?

[JohnHinAZ]

ConSense, I don't blame GW Bush. I blame Republicans, period. I wish President Obama had used his first two years with Democratic control of Congress to pass a single-payer healthcare system and roll back the Bush tax cuts for the 1%. But, he never had the 60% Senate majority needed to pass anything, and he naively believed Republicans actually wanted to govern.

[HolyVoice]

"castigating the president for turning to "gimmicks" and "class warfare" to address serious problems.

After decades of the political gimmick "trickle down economics," we are left with class warfare as a result.

If the Bush Tax Breaks had created jobs during the eight years of his administration, we'd be in a different economic situation presently.

[rightontarget]

If you feel something "trickling down" chances are it's the Big Business Tycoons pizzing on the rest of us.

[Robby33383]

Obama believes most American's are clueless. People better wake up, he is throwing another SUCKER PUNCH and the media will play right into it!!!

[Dobri_Bozhilov]

Only the poor pay taxes...
http://dobrisratings.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=149533&Itemid=1

[proffessrG]

What the White House/Media purposely fails to mention in their narrative is that 80% of these "millionaires" are actually small business manufacturers and retailers... To repeatedly categorize the targets of this tax is "wealthy people" is grossly inaccurate and irresponsible.

[JohnHinAZ]

He's not proposing to tax everyone who has a million dollars. He's proposing to tax everyone who MAKES a million A YEAR. Pretty significant difference, if you care.

[JohnHinAZ]

bmallen3 -- who will rid us of these pesky voters?

[Henri_Rochard]

His policies suck, but Obama is a superb campaigner.

[stormerF69]

Why not just lower the taxes on the rest of the Americans to what Warren Buffet paid,instead of raising taxes on the rich?Since we know even if we raise taxes on the rich it will not pay down the deficit.

[ConSense]

The Titanic is sinking fast, and all the lifeboats have already left. There's no hope, but luckily, Captain Obama has a plan! "See that guy over there?" he asks. "He's got a bigger deck chair than YOU do. It's not FAIR!"

As the ship continued sinking, Captain Obama continued to point out things he saw that weren't fair. "A black person's cabin flooded before a white persons! That's not FAIR!," he cried. "Why is your life preserver faded?" he asked another. "That guy has one that looks brand new! "That's not FAIR!," he screamed!


All the liberal passengers heaped praise upon the wise Captain Obama, who continued pointing out all the inequities on the Titanic right up until the water closed over all of them.

[ConSense]

So, googlemoronism, you're saying that employees at Wal-Mart need bigger deck chairs?

Really, I don't have a problem with rich people paying more taxes. I don't have a problem with ME paying a little more tax.

I DO have a problem with a president who thinks "leading" is wasting time battling over ideas that won't stop the ship from sinking. The problem is SPENDING.

[rightontarget]

agentzer007 "The main thing to understand about the Buffett rule is that they say it's going to generate $47 billion in the next 10 years. The national budget for 2012 is what...$3.8 Trillion? So the Buffett rule is going to cover about 4 days of spending over the next 3650 days of the country operating?"
****************************************************

No the "main thing" to understand is that the Buffett Rule is about distributing the tax burden FAIRLY! As it SHOULD be. Sure, government needs to cut the "fat" by cutting WASTEFUL spending on stupid "special" projects being pushed by lobbyists, NOT by cutting needed social services. It's about stopping the GREED as much as solving the problem. That's what is wrong with our country today. It's no longer about what "we" can do for our country it's about "What's in it for me?"

[jntlw]

We need to address the unfair tax system we currently have. It is a giant welfare for the rich through loopholes and capital gains and tax credits. Teh Buffet rule is just the beginning. We need a progressive tax system which has no exemptions, no deductions, no loopholes, no tax credits, and no such thing as capital gains. All monies earned will be taxed as income. Both rich and poor will pay no matter what and the IRS and companies will benefit by reducing tax department staffing. It is a win win and no other solution is viable or as equitable

[ConSense]

Sure, until the democrats get ahold of it and start their income redistribution again.

[ConSense]

Tell you what, googlemoronism. I'll agree to the 5% increase on rich folks, if YOU agree that the budget must be balanced every year from now on. Deal?