We’re getting our first indication of how the President will use the State of the Union address. With Speaker John Boehner behind him, President Obama will address a solidly Republican House of Representatives and a Senate with a 53-47 Democratic split. In his press conference yesterday he alluded to his persistence and unfinished business on a variety of issues, particularly surrounding the federal budget, the first wave of which will need to be completed by March to avoid a government shutdown. According to spokesman Robert Gibbs, the State of the Union will have a focus on the budget and deficits.
Gibbs made the statement on Twitter, where he was taking reader questions Thursday, in response to a question about whether Obama would push the recommendations from his fiscal commission during the State of the Union speech:
Yes – POTUS will use both SOTU & budget 2 talk about priorities & focus on our deficit/debt – team looking thru deficit comm recs 2 @mwfreel
Gibbs said the speech would come in late January:
Look for SOTU to be after visit by President Hu – late January @The_Future
As tea-leaf reading, this is thin gruel. But it does line up pretty favorably with what Robert Kuttner said would be the focus of the annual message. The question is which deficit commission recommendations will the President decide to embrace. There’s a whole area on tax reform which could have some bipartisan interest; the option of lowering rates and broadening the tax base is attractive to many, although there are much bigger issues about the overall size of government involved. And then there are recommendations that include major budget cuts, including cuts to Social Security, which falls outside the scope of the federal budget, having a dedicated funding source.
The decision will fall along these lines, but there certainly will be a kind of counter-offer made on deficit reduction in the next Congress. The President has talked about “cutting programs that don’t work” for years and offered a fair amount of rescissions in previous budgets. The question remains how big and how immediate the President will go. Near-term deficit reduction will ruin the stimulative effect of the tax cut deal, which he has said is crucial to economic recovery. That’s what Republicans will seek when they call for a 20% reduction in the budget in March. The President called those reductions outrageous in some parts of the budget, particularly education, but that doesn’t mean he won’t just shift priorities around to accommodate the request. Any reduction in the budget in the next two years will reduce aggregate demand and hurt the economy. The economy may be on a slow road back, but with 9.8% unemployment that road is entirely too slow. And major budget cuts can bring that to a standstill.
Austerity budgeting would sink the country, in other words, and unfortunately there seems to be quite an appetite for it in Washington.




60 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Reduce the deficit by drastically reducing tax rates on the richest Americans by a third. Brilliant! Why didn’t FDR think of that?
Focusing on using our tax dollars to rescue the many millions of Americans who are in the deep hole dug by the masters of greed and corruption would be entirely too much to ask, wouldn’t it?
Here’s some more that has me all riled up this morning:
How the Fed let small banks take on too much debt, then fail LINK.
11 Examples Of How Insanely Corrupt The U.S. Financial System Has Become LINK.
We need many more headlines like this, too:
AIG to pay $100 million in workers’ comp fines LINK.
a “bad” economy that is excellent for the nomenklatura and the owners is the desired outcome. a bad economy and being “at war” (with, you know, whoever) together provide excuses and justifications for anything. star chambers? imprisonment without trial at the will of the king? we’re at war! lords seizing the property of their serfs? well, yes, it’s regrettable, but we can’t do anything about it, what with this terrible economy. and so on.
I suppose the best we can hope for is that, in addition to sinking the U.S. economy, the ‘austerity’ (for real peeps, not for the rich & corps, of course) will also sink the political class. But I ain’t holdin’ my breath.
Obama and the Democrats invoke Austerity Measures for us.
and Multi-billion dollar military contracts for people like Dick Cheney.
Who lied us into ten years of war that a plurality of Americans oppose.
Obama should be impeached. He is a fraud.
And then there are recommendations that include major budget cuts, including cuts to Social Security, which falls outside the scope of the federal budget, having a dedicated funding source.
No it does not!!!!!!!!!!!
SS tax is a TAX, which is collected and put into the general fund. When will you educate yourselves about social security?? You simply cannot continue to write these essays without knowing the facts..
Austerity for thee but not for me.
Watch.
Yet you frequently comment without them. Like just then.
Sorry but it is you who needs help with the “facts.”
Yes, FICA is a tax but it is a dedicated tax that is collected for the Social Security Trust Fund. It has then been lent to the general fund for the past few decades with Special Treasury Bonds, earning interest, documenting the lending. Those are Treasury bonds similar to the ones sold on the open market to other governments or individuals or even the folks who purchase Savings Bonds. All are bonds backed by the full faith and credit of the United States.
You would no more call for defaulting on bonds sold to the Japanese, Chinese, or Germans, so why would you call for defaulting on Bonds sold to US citizens? By claiming as you are that is exactly what you are pushing for – the US to default on bonds to its citizens
You’re wasting your time. People who get their information from Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck will never want for drink.
Will Peter Peterson be sitting next to Mrs. Obama during the SOTU? Or will it be David Broder?
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
George Santayana, Reason in Common Sense.
This was supposed to be a reply to GeorgeJohnston @ 1.
“The question is which deficit commission recommendations will the President decide to embrace”
you meant that ironicaly right? to set up the rest of your piece??
Alan Greenspan, Larry Summers, all the usual suspects.
It is a tax with a dedicated purpose. In fact, we were told the government was to buy bonds with the funds. The accounting has always been messed up. That “surplus” that Clinton reported was only a surplus because they counted SS funds which they should not have. If it were a tax like everything else then the rich should pay the same on the billons they make, but they assuredly do not.
There shall be no Austerity Measures for Congress. Nor any Austerity Measures for the Military Industrial Complex, Nor any cuts to the Pentagon Budget – increases, in fact.
There will be no Austerity Measures for Wall Street. Wall Street is to receive our Social Security Funds.
There will be no Austerity Measures for TBTF Financial Institutions, but plenty of Austerity for the Public Education System. Our tax dollars are to be diverted to Crony Capitalists in the Charter School Business.
There will be no Austerity Measures for Private Prisons. Our tax dollars will be diverted from State Institutions to crony capitalists in the Privatized Prison Business.
Obama is full of Great Republican Ideas.
Perhaps kumari can explain why his/her check stubs say
Federal Income Tax with held $_______.__ and then
FICA Tax with held $______.__
See if the so called payroll tax receipts just went into the general fund, then why is it held out separately from the income tax? Or maybe s/he doesn’t know because s/he never pays taxes. In that case maybe s/he could explain that to the IRS.
Hey, Bucky, are you saying that St. Ronnie of Raygun lied to us? He’s the guy who told me I had to pay increased OASDI premiums (taxes, if you prefer) to go into a Social Security Trust Fund to pay benefits for me and the other boomers.
LOL.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Insurance_Contributions_Act_tax
Yeah but I was shorter. :)
‘Scuse me, but taxes on the poor need to go into the genrl fund to support the rich, while the rich need all the money they make for their own sustenance. /s
I refer you to item 9 above for a more complete statement of the facts. And you got them wrong.
“Austerity” is theft by means of politics. Obama and his democratic party enablers will have so much to stand on. what an “historic” presidency
I’d be willing to bet that O will choose the catfood commission’s suggestions over any of the better ones available.
Kumari is probably reapeating what he/she hears on FOX or on Big Pharmas right wing radio circus, live from the bunker, in sunny south floria.
so after extending the deficit busting bush tax cuts for another 2 years it is now time to focus ‘like a laser’ on the federal deficit.
how about the trade deficit? not likely.
The biggest and most blatant cause for the continuing deficits are the tax cuts to the top two brackets and to the tax loopholes on businesses. But those few control everything that matters in this world, like the nobles of the past.
We should adopt the stance of “no” to all cuts unless and until the taxes are restored and sanity put into the tax code.
On the email list for the talking points for peeps who can’t think for themselves.
Trade deficit!!!!
That’s all China’s fault. If China would only raise the value of its currency, thus further impoverishing the U.S. poor, all the U.S. trade prolems would be solved. /s
what this country needs are more surfs,,,austerity is the new buzz word, just see europe,,ireland, greece, etc…
the fed is owned by the member banks so they will always get zero interest loans,,,,wake up and get prepaired for an alternative existance,,,,,
And you know, when unemployment is hovering around 17% next year, try to get the Republican House to extend UI benefits again…
Hey, Pups! Just got in from a trip to Mom’s. She is torn all to pieces about the proposed cuts to Medicare and Social Security. I told her I know, I know.
We are both screaming. IT’S MY MONEY AND I WANT IT BACK!
Yeppers. Everyone knows all the U.S. economic problems are the fault of the middle class & the poor.
Scream all you want. It’s going to the rich.
The US has been circling the drain in recession for so long I don’t see how Austerity will do anything but more devastation.
How can we get back to producing and strengthening anything if there is no money to be spent?
Got that right. Maybe, just maybe, some people will see the futility of the thugs and tea party. The dems are not much better but those guys would let their mothers out in the cold.
Echan. Don’t say it. We have to be unbendable about this. It is our very last string. They’ve already taken everything else.
Yeah, they are all too greedy for their own good.
It is going to be an interesting two years. Will the dems lose more seats in congress? will O get reelected? if not, who gets the job?
I don’t know about O, but if the repugs keep doing what they are doing the Dems will take majority again.
And stoopid. Don’t forget stoopid: too stoopid to unnerstan twenny gagillion page docs without any legal standing whatsoever, that commits them to homelessness no matter what they do.
Well, just driving by to say fuck this mindless all-destroying colossus and its crap theater and its boring insufferable assholes.
On the day of the vote on the Obama Tax Compromise, there was a request somewhere on FDL to call our reps and find out how they would vote. I called my rep. I had written him off as a reliable Obama type. To my surprise, he sent a letter re my phone call telling me he agreed with my criticisms/comments and had voted against the bill. I have lost all faith and confidence in Obama. But,maybe, individually some Democrats in Congress can be reasoned with when other dangerous legislation is proposed in 2011. I know this sounds obvious and naive, but lots of Americans like me have to wake up, find out what is happening and act.
I saw how stoopid they were in November. But even some of the people those stoopid people elected are stoopid.
I feel like O is the only thing standing between me and them. O shit is that baaad or what/s
And in other news……..Obama Admin warns of possible terror attack over the holidays titled “Something MAY happen”……bwahahahaha…….what a bunch of morons.
OT–
“Bank of America Loses Key Battle In Mortgage Fraud Fight” (Dec 23, 2010)
“Is Paulson Offloading BofA In Dark Pools?” (Dec. 23, 2010)
“Fresh humiliation for eurozone as China says it will bail out debt-ridden nations (Dec. 23, 2010)
Raise the f****ing cap.
LOL -
you ask folks to educate yourself – perhaps you might do so also?
yes the payroll tax is a tax – hard to argue that fact.
And yes the General fund by law (the reguirement that Social Security INVEST in government bonds) is the ultimate recipient of that tax – but NOTE it is not directly into the general fund and not part of the General Funds budget, albeit it is part of the budget presentation called the “unified budget” that was developed in the late 60′s so as to show clearly a number that related to expected gov borrowings from the private markets – meaning the gov deficit is shown but is reduced by the part being financed by investments of the Social Security Trust fund and other gov trust funds.
The only way the unified budget is reduced by action on Social Security is by making the annual Social Security surplus larger so it can absorb more of the deficit. But it absorbs that deficit via an INVESTMENT in gov bonds – better would be a Trust Fund investment in stock so folks like yourself would understand that it is indeed a dedicated tax and not general revenue – but the GOP scream “socialism by the backdoor” as they try to destroy SS with Obama’s help.
And Obama does plan to kill the effectiveness of Social Security to be a retirement for the non-rich – by cutting its benefits while not changing the long term payroll tax – thereby getting that larger Social Security surplus that must be invested – and invested in will be in gov bonds – effectively financing the tax cuts for the rich. Of course the rich do not want to pay back the loan that they got from Social Security that gave them their tax cuts – so they demand Social Security never cash in its gov bonds to pay benefits.
Since the actuarial facts of life are that Social Security begins cashing in bonds in 2017, the rich and corporate have gone into a panic – and Obama wants to help – so he will “save” what does not need saving by making Social Security way overfunded via benefit cuts so the rich need never fear Social Security cashing out one of those “investment bonds” it bought from the government.
No – your comments that there were no Cinton surplus without Social Security is wrong.
I posted a few times the end of year Federal Debt from 1999 to current and pointed out the the Federal Debt DECREASED between 12/31/99 and 12/31/2000 – which means that there was a Clinton surplus over and above the Social Security surplus. Obama folks put out the lie that that there was never a real Clinton surplus as they were taking down Hillary – it is time to drop that lie – Hillary is not challenging Obama in 2012 – although I wish she would.
A gov fiscal year Federal Debt reduction 10/1/00 to 9/30/2001 would have occurred except Bush ordered the 4th quarterly corporate tax payment due at 9/01 to be delayed to 10/01 and therefor in the next fiscal year, and ordered a major portion of the defense budget for the 10/01 to 9/30/02 fiscal year to be recorded in 9/30/01. Bush was very scared of Clinton’s real surplus screwing up his tax reduction with new war plans – as Cheney said at the time – “Reagan proved deficits do not matter”.
Focus on the deficit, eh? Sure. More likely how to foc-us over by using this Trojan horse issue of the deficit instead of the more pressing need of creating jobs. More foolish pandering instead of genuine leadership by a risk adverse President that is determined to placate his political enemies by adopting their methodology.
the fed is set up so we can never pay off the national debt, its just not possiable..
as far as a challanger to presb o bama, there are a few repuks who are left of obambo,,,,romney may even be a little left IMO….
O is the greatest REpublican President since B…
What will be interesting to see in the new Congress following the planned change in the Senate filibuster rule is if the liberal Senate Democratic caucus has to start using the changed filibuster format to filibuster legislation coming out of the Republican-controlled House especially involving spending or budget cut bills.
Because if I were a Republican in the House, I’d craft legislation agreeable to not only Senate Republicans, but also to Blue Dog Democrats, figuring that if I got enough of these two blocs in the Senate to join in passing House legislation, over 50 votes might be gained, literally placing the liberal Democratic caucus in the minority…at which time any filibuster change might be a help to this Senate Republican/Blue Dog Democrat bloc…depending, of course, on what Sen. Harry Reid did or didn’t do.
IOW, Republican-controlled House tax-cutting program-slashing bills might make it through the “Democratic”-controlled Senate and land on President Obama’s desk for signing. Would he veto a bill that originated in the Republican-controlled House, traveled through the Senate relatively untouched, leaving much of the worst measures intact, finally landing on his desk? I believe we will see this happen over and over again over the next two years. How many will President Obama veto? How many will President Obama sign into law, while presumably holding his nose, like he did in signing the extension of the budget-busting deficit-exploding Bush era tax cuts because he “had to”?
And apparently President Obama’s going to “focus of the deficit” in his State of the Union address, talking about bringing down the deficit now that he and Republicans have added so much to deficits by extending Bush era tax cuts, while adding even more tax cuts to them in the process. Gee, I wonder if President Obama will suggest increasing income tax levels on the wealthiest to what they were before Ronald Reagan, or Bill Clinton, or before the Bush tax cuts of 2001/2003, so the federal deficit can be paid down? I doubt it. He will echo Republican calls for “sacrifice” and for cutting federal government programs and services, you know, austerity, austerity, austerity, with nary a word uttered about raising income tax levels on the wealthiest, something that will sink the U.S. economy even deeper into the conservative quicksand.
Let’s be honest,these dubious wins resulted from the pubs giving Obama the wins.They punked Obama so badly he became too discredited to peddle their agenda,which definitely includes gutting S.S. and targeting the middle-income strata for the austerity goats,as already evidenced with the payroll-tax fleecing to make SS a product of general funding.
bingo!
I suggest he propose more tax cuts so we can have more revenue.
I heard Pete Peterson will be the honored guest and will be seated next to Michelle, he will receive special recognition during the speech.
Actually, I think both sides are right in the discussion of the SS tax. Until a couple of days ago it was a segregated tax that didn’t impact the federal budget, except in the sense that tax revenues will be needed to redeem the Trust Fund IOUs. However, the new “tax compromise” now establishes for the first time that general fund revenues will have to be used to reimburse the Trust Fund for the “temporary” reduction in SS withholding. This is a very bad precedent; there is a huge difference between “redeeming” T-notes and “reimbursing” SS.
Hey, eCAHN –
I know that it’s somewhat sexist to criticize or comment on a women’s looks or attire when similar criticism is not leveled at a male in an equivalent position. However, a couple of days ago I happened to see your old buddy Alice Rivlin on CSPAN honking for the Catfood Commission recommendations. If we can describe Greenspan as an ugly old gnome, then surely it’s okay to describe Rivlin as exactly what she looks like: a wizend old witch.
Wow, really going out on a limb on that prediction, aren’t we?