Yet another $450 billion comes from the tax increases the president proposed last week — and has already accounted for in new spending he wants on infrastructure, and other tax cuts.
That means in terms of actual new proposals, the president’s plan totals about $1.2 trillion, of which the lion’s share comes from his longstanding vow to raise taxes back to Clinton-era rates on the top income brackets. The rest is $580 billion in reductions to formula-driven entitlement programs such as Social Security, with much of the savings coming from reducing overpayments and finding waste.
Those $580 billion in newly proposed cuts are dwarfed nearly three-to-one by the $1.5 trillion in additional taxes the president wants to see going forward.
Mr. Obama said his plan calls for $2 in cuts for every $1 in tax increases, but he reaches that by re-counting cuts already in law or in the planning pipeline, and by factoring in lower debt service costs.
The White House said if Mr. Obama’s plans are enacted, debt held by the public would peak at above 75 percent of GDP in 2013 — a rise of 15 percentage points in just three years — but would then begin a slow decline.
Republicans, many of whom reject the idea of tax increases to solve the debt crisis, met the president’s call with scorn.
“Veto threats, a massive tax hike, phantom savings, and punting on entitlement reform is not a recipe for economic or job growth — or even meaningful deficit reduction,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Kentucky Republican. “The good news is that the joint committee is taking this issue far more seriously than the White House.”
That joint committee, a bipartisan 12-member congressional panel formed by last month’s debt deal, is working to come up with at least $1.2 trillion in proposed deficit reductions by the end of the year...................................."
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... increases/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
They can cal it a "user fee" if they like, just as long as they pay something.
