November 23, 2009 11:40 AM

David Obey Calls for War Tax on Wealthy

By
Brian Montopoli
Topics
Afghanistan
(AP)
Updated 12:52 p.m. ET

Rep. David Obey, a Wisconsin Democrat and the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, is the latest lawmaker to call for a new tax aimed at the rich to pay for a troop increase in Afghanistan.

White House Budget Director Peter Orszag has suggested it could cost the government $40 billion per year to send the 40,000 new troops sought by top U.S. commander Gen. Stanley McChrystal. (The Pentagon puts that figure somewhat lower.) Obey tells CBSNews.com the cost of the war could "destroy the other things we are trying to do in our economy."

In interviews with CBS News and ABC News, the Wisconsin lawmaker said that he favors a "war surtax" in which high-earners pay five percent of their incomes and lower-earners pay a smaller percentage, down to one percent.

"What we are saying is if this war is worth fighting, then it is worth paying for," Obey said on Monday's edition of CBSNews.com's "Washington Unplugged." (Watch at left.)

"We would impose a one percent surtax on anyone with taxable income that would rise to about two percent if you are making roughly $200,000 dollars, and once you get up into the stratasphere in terms of four or five hundred thousand dollars in income the surtax would be higher than that," he said. "Whatever the cost of the war is would be paid forthrough that tax. Because if we don't do that that war will bleed every dollar in the budget away from any other initiative and it will block us from making the investments we need to make in our own economy."

Last week, Michigan Democratic Sen. Carl Levin, the chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee, called for an "additional income tax to the upper brackets, folks earning more than $200,000 or $250,000" to pay for a troop increase.

"They have done incredibly well," Levin said of the wealthy, "and I think that it's important that we pay for it if we possibly can."

CBSNews.com Special Report: Afghanistan

President Obama is expected to announce his new strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan in the coming weeks. He plans to again meet with his national security team on Afghanistan and Pakistan this evening.

While Congressional Republicans largely support a potential troop serge, many members of the president's own party are more skeptical. They argue that the president is considering deepening U.S. involvement in an expensive and ill-defined mission.

Obey and Levin's comments are the latest indications that a fierce intra-party battle could take place should the president move to add to the 70,000 U.S. troops already fighting in Afghanistan.

"We have been fighting for a year to try to pass health care - it costs about 900 billion dollars - and we are being told that we have to pay for every dime of it," Obey said on "Washington Unplugged." "But if we adopt a plan that General McChrystal is talking about, we are also being told that we have to hunker down and be ready for a decade long or more commitment. If we do that the cost will also be about 900 billion dollars – the difference is that we are not being asked to pay for that. And we think that if we are being asked to pay for health care, we certainly should start paying for the war."

Add a Comment See all 46 Comments
by Jack Wiseheimer November 27, 2009 2:49 PM EST
Instead of proposing 'war-taxing' American people, Dems and the administration should rather ask their allies for due compensation. For more than 40 years the U.S. had kept their hands under the West European allies' butt, and pampered them by deterring the communists from attacking.
The Europeans are now liberated from 'real existing socialism' and in pretty good condition with having 26 nations in the E.U. - Why shouldn't they pay for stabilizing the regions in Asia where the U.S. is the main contributor?
But those ungrateful fellows keep their pockets closed. Shame on them.
What if the U.S. pulled out from Iraq or Afghanistan?
The Europeans would get diarrhea - then they should pay for the diapers, and feel the pinch of losing their loved ones.
Reply to this comment
by Omni-Present101 November 26, 2009 10:26 AM EST
David Gregory Gets "Joltin" Joe Lieberman

On the High Cost of the Afghanistan and Iraq War Cost 12 trillion and its Not Paid For, or Budget Neutral and Additional Cost of 9 Trillion more Dollars added to the already 12 Trillion Dollars, we Owe Communist-Socialist China, with Interest.
_____________

MR. GREGORY: I just want to...

SEN. LIEBERMAN: I don't want to do that.

MR. GREGORY: Are you consistent on this matter? If you say you don't like a public option because of how it might influence the debt, will you apply that same standard to escalating the war in Afghanistan?

Should that be deficit-neutral, what we spend on Afghanistan?

SEN. LIEBERMAN: Incidentally, over the years, back in the Bush administration, I put forward tax programs to pay for the wars because I, I don't know of another time in our history when we went to war and didn't pay for it.

That's part of why we have the enormous debt that we have now, [$12 Trillion] today, predicted to add [[$9 Trillion]] in the next 10 years.

MR. GREGORY: All right, so that's the question.

SEN. LIEBERMAN: It, it's going to...

MR. GREGORY: You, you would pay for escalation in Afghanistan? It would have to be paid for?

SEN. LIEBERMAN: Absolutely.

Note: Lieberman is Giving Gregory Borderline Bull Spit and Gregory Knows it too.
_____________________
Reply to this comment
by Omni-Present101 November 26, 2009 10:26 AM EST
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/rep-david-obey-warns-president-obama-afghanistan-war/story?id=9126805
_____________

David Obey:

"There Ain't Gonna be No Money for Nothing if we Pour it All into Afghanistan"

House Appropriations Chairman David Obey told ABC News in an exclusive interview. "If they ask for an increased troop commitment in Afghanistan, I am going to ask them to pay for it."

Watch ABC News' exclusive interview with Rep. Obey here.

Obey, a Democrat from Wisconsin, made it clear that he is absolutely opposed to sending any more U.S. troops to Afghanistan and says if Obama decides to do that, he'll demand a new tax -- what he calls a "war surtax" -- to pay for it.

"On the merits, I think it is a mistake to deepen our involvement," Obey said.

"But if we are going to do that, then at least we ought to pay for it. Because if we don't, if we don't pay for it, the cost of the Afghan war will wipe out every initiative we have to rebuild our own economy."
Related

_______________
Obey's opposition to funding a troop increase in Afghanistan without a new tax would pose a significant problem for Obama if he decides to send more troops (a decision the White House says the President could make as early as November 30).

As Appropriations Committee chairman, Obey was a key player in securing money for the war when the last war funding bill narrowly passed the House in June.

His demand for a new war tax echoes a similar call by Senate Armed Services Chairman Carl Levin, also a Democrat, who recently told Bloomberg's Al Hunt that he favors a new tax on Americans earning more than $200,000 a year to pay for sending any additional troops.

Obey argued that the tax should be paid by all taxpayers, with rates ranging from 1 percent for lower wage earners to 5 percent for the wealthy.

The White House won't be able to count on Obey's support the next time the president seeks funding for the war.

"I want the president and every American to think ahead of time about what it means if you do add to our involvement in Afghanistan," Obey told ABC News. "I am no military strategist, but I don't believe we have the tools to accomplish our mission in Afghanistan because you have to have functioning, effective government and there isn't one in Afghanistan.

There isn't one in Pakistan either."
___________________
Reply to this comment
by Omni-Present101 November 26, 2009 10:22 AM EST
No Sir, The ChickenHawk Republican Machine are in Support of the High A!! Cost Afghanistan Occupation.

Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, Praeger, Majority of Republican Talk Radio Pundits and their Legion of Fans & Fox News are all for this War.

"Listen to the Generals on the Ground"

Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty, Mike Huckabee and All the other Fox News Numbskulls, Chant this Sad Refrain, Over & Over Again.

They won't be able to Get Away from their Statements. That is Exactly why, President Obama should Listen to his VOICE and CONSCIENCE and Withdraw. This War, is Too Costly in Lives, To Costly In Time and Too Costly to the USA,

Its "Generational Theft and Generational Debt"

If President Obama Pulled Troops out in 2011 along with the Iraq Withdrawal, People would See the Logic. Let them Defend their Own Land, so We can Defend Ours here in the [[USA]]
_______________

I Love President Obama, But He Caters to the Republican Right, Too Much on the War and on Health Care, Cowtowing to Olympia Snowe, One Republican Vote, when all he has to do, is have Cloture and Reconciliation and Do what's Best in Resolving the Health Care Problems of this Nation.

He Now CowTows to the Republicans who will Hate Him Anyway, as you can See on this Thread, whether he Sends 35,000 or 100,000 US Soldiers, they will Not Like Him, Vote for Him or Favor Him, No Matter what he does to Appease them and she Shouldn't Appease them at all.

Bush used Reconciliation in 2001, 2003 and 2005.

Regarding Reconciliation 51 Vote Majority Rules:

Republican Judd Gregg stated ..

"If You're the Majority, You Win]

___________________
Reply to this comment
by Cattzen November 24, 2009 4:56 PM EST
The George Bush/Richard Cheney Republican Conservative Administration cut taxes and barrowed ($BILLIONS) from the Peoples Republic of China to fund their two middle east wars and, didn?t account for it. The Republican $pending Bills were kept off the fiscal budget and were passed as supplemental.

The $pending Monies earmarked for the Bush/Cheney Wars were doled out to Private Multinational Corporations through no-bid contracts with no oversight of the $pending, Costs, or performance results. The Republican Party lied to the American People to obtain the necessary political capital to insure their runaway spending war scam.

The United States needs to wrap up the mess left by the mismanagement of the two Middle East Wars and return our troops home along with the massive and wasteful pork spending to private Multinational Corporations with tax free offshore bank accounts.
Reply to this comment
by babooph November 24, 2009 4:48 AM EST
These wars-revenge for the trade center & protection for Israel-should be FULLY paid for by the ones who want it& profit by it-how many poor & middle class
US citizens owned shares in the trade center?
Reply to this comment
by californiadreaming November 25, 2009 3:39 PM EST
This proposed "tax" is for all American taxpayers if you investigate further. In fact, it starts with a 1% surtax on all Americans earning UP TO $150K. So be prepared to pay - everyone - for a war which the majority does not want. Obama is an idiot - pure and simple. He's starting to make Bush look not so bad.
by edgy44 November 23, 2009 2:27 PM EST
40,000 Soldiers are paying taxes right now. Send them to Afghanistan and their pay is tax exempt. Economics are neat...
Reply to this comment
by jntlw November 23, 2009 2:15 PM EST
You want to make WAR then pay for it. Since there is no middle class just the poor, it will be up to the rich to fund it. If they don't like that they can bring our troops home now!
Reply to this comment
by californiadreaming November 25, 2009 3:39 PM EST
This proposed "tax" is for all American taxpayers if you investigate further. In fact, it starts with a 1% surtax on all Americans earning UP TO $150K. So be prepared to pay - everyone - for a war which the majority does not want. Obama is an idiot - pure and simple. He's starting to make Bush look not so bad.
by cbs4me3 November 23, 2009 2:14 PM EST
Liberals are running scared. Sarah Palin has written her book and her constituency is growing rapidly. Meantime, the liberal Obama's popularity is sinking like a stone. Liberals are in a mad rush to push their agenda before they are totally neutralized. So, the rush on health care and this tax increase. Obey says there is no money and, why not given their reckless spending and the national debt escalating out of control.
Reply to this comment
by jntlw November 23, 2009 2:24 PM EST
No one is remotely afraid of Sara Palin and she offers nothing. You have to be braindead to fall for her policies or RW rhetoric.
by fedup12 November 23, 2009 2:42 PM EST
I hope her and Beck get the nomination in 2012. That would be great!
by vietnamwar November 23, 2009 2:05 PM EST
ah.....the land of the opportunity for taxes and taxes and taxes...
Reply to this comment
by chi-11 November 23, 2009 6:01 PM EST
Don't like these taxes? Then you must not support the wars. Paying for these misadventures is way overdue.
See all 46 Comments
.

Follow Political Hotsheet

Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook
  • Building You a Better Morning

  • CBS This Morning

    "CBS This Morning," anchored by Charlie Rose, Gayle King and Erica Hill, airs weekdays from 7 to 9 a.m. ET and at the same time in other time zones.
    Learn more...