President Obama to Pitch Higher Taxes and Means-Testing Medicare
President Obama on Monday will outline more than $2 trillion in new deficit reduction over the next decade, senior administration officials tell ABC News, including $1.5 trillion in new taxes and means-testing Medicare for wealthy recipients — both in higher fees and benefit cuts for top income brackets.
Combined with savings from the debt deal and drawing down the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the proposal will guarantee that the size of the debt — as a share of the economy and percentage of GDP — will fall, with more than $4 trillion in deficit reduction total.
The president’s purpose in laying out this detailed plan is to avoid the criticisms that have dogged him throughout this year for not putting out a more assertive deficit reduction plan, and to further illustrate his “balanced approach,” requiring “shared sacrifice.”
A senior administration official described the president’s proposal as having “very tough policies in it, and we know that that’s going to be something that our friends and our opponents alike are going to notice. But there is no way to get this job done without making tough decisions, and this is putting forward a plan that does it in a fair and a balanced way.”
The president will propose roughly $580 billion in cuts to mandatory spending programs, including $248 billion from Medicare and $72 billion from Medicaid and other health programs.
Part of this will include asking wealthier seniors who receive Medicare to pay higher premiums and accept fewer benefits — means-testing the program.
But that said, the president will not accept any cuts to Medicare if tax increases on wealthier income brackets and corporations are not part of the final package.
“He will say that he will veto any bill that takes one dime from the Medicare benefits seniors rely on without asking the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations to pay their fair share,” a senior administration official said.
Obama’s remarks will push the so-called “super-committee” charged with finding at least $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction by November to undertake comprehensive tax reform guided by five principles: lowering tax rates; eliminating wasteful loopholes and tax breaks; reducing the deficit by $1.5 trillion; boosting job creation and growth; and being consistent with the “Buffett Rule.”
The Buffet Rule, named in honor of billionaire investor Warren Buffett, will state that those who make more $1 million a year “should not pay a smaller share of their income in taxes than middle-class families pay,” a senior administration official said.
Other ways to raise taxes that the president will propose are now familiar: $800 billion from letting expire the lower Bush tax rates for the top two tax brackets; and $700 billion from other revenue — capping income tax deductions for wealthier Americans; eliminating subsidies for petroleum companies; eliminating tax loopholes for corporate jets; and requiring hedge fund managers to pay a higher tax rate than the 15 percent carried interest rate they pay now.
Obama is seeking to draw contrasts with Republicans.
“If we stay on the path of just cutting spending and letting the chips fall where they may, we know where that leads to,” a senior administration official said. “Because congressional Republicans have put out a plan that does that. Millionaires and big corporations keep their special tax breaks and tax cuts, and there are severe cuts in programs which are very important to the American people and our economic future.”
Continued the official: “It’s not the right way to go to have 320,000 kids cut from Head Start, to have 75,000 teachers laid off, to have the maximum Pell award that 8 million students rely on be substantially reduced, or to cut our investments in energy programs by as much as 70 percent. It’s not the right approach to have Medicare end up become something that working people, when they retire, may not be able to afford, by shifting as much as $6,000 of cost to individuals in order to pay for $1 trillion in tax cuts for people who are much better off.”
– Jake Tapper

Email
Best Commencement Speeches of 2012
Joe Biden Recalls Death of Wife, Daughter
This is so cool. Seeing our president stand up to all these people that go out and earn their own money and want to keep it for themselves. Man, life don’t get no better than this!
Posted by: Jim | September 18, 2011, 11:29 pm 11:29 pm
I hope it works just for all the high price athletes stiff him when he wants to have them over to the White House.
Posted by: deadwrestler | September 18, 2011, 11:49 pm 11:49 pm
The top 400 richest Americans, all make over $110 million per year and make an average of $271 million per year, paid only 18 percent of their income in income taxes in 2008.
$271 million per year average earned by a rich person. That means their ‘wage’ is $92,000 per hour, 60 hours per week, 49 weeks per year. And the right wing whines about union workers bargaining for $20 per hour and some medical coverage.
Tax the millionaires!!
Posted by: Cynthia | September 18, 2011, 11:52 pm 11:52 pm
After all the stimuli, TBTF bailouts, cash for clunkers, windmill pumping, Af-Pak troop tripling, Libyan civil war side picking, and now Solyndra Obama goes, holy carp, I gotta close the barn door to get re-elected.
Even the senate democrats will run from Obama, or at least start walking slowly and build up speed going into Nov. 2012.
Posted by: dom youngross | September 19, 2011, 12:05 am 12:05 am
“He will say that he will veto any bill that takes one dime from the Medicare benefits seniors rely on without asking the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations to pay their fair share,”
==========
Doesn’t his medicare proposal itself ask the wealthiest Americans to pay more (than less wealthy Americans) and take less? He wants them to pay even more and take even less, is that right?
Posted by: MayBee | September 19, 2011, 12:11 am 12:11 am
Wasn’t this “Buffet Rule” once known as the AMT? And when it didn’t raise enough money, they started pushing the AMT on middle class people.
Posted by: MayBee | September 19, 2011, 12:31 am 12:31 am
Even the senate democrats will run from Obama, or at least start walking slowly and build up speed going into Nov. 2012.
Posted by: dom youngross | September 19, 2011, 12:05 am 12:05 am
Not a chance, the opposition is the Republican party of which the majority of Americans disapprove. Republicans have had so little to offer for so long but hypocrisy, economic ruin and negativity – and American doesn’t like their cultural policies.
Posted by: Arthur | September 19, 2011, 1:00 am 1:00 am
Obama’s three years too late in proposing anything. You snooze, you lose.
Posted by: Dawn620 | September 19, 2011, 6:54 am 6:54 am
More DC trickery and false cuts that will never happen. Whenever cuts are done over a 10 year period they never happen. The people in office will not even be around and the new congress and president are not held to those cuts. The CBO cant even score a bill or cuts with a 10 year projection. More fraud from the joker in charge as he continues to create over a trillion dollars in new debts every year.
Posted by: J.Herrera | September 19, 2011, 7:00 am 7:00 am
I guess it’s settled then.
Our President is unable to comprehend that the problem in DC is too much spending not not enough money.
Time to give someone else a chance at running the country.
Posted by: Noz | September 19, 2011, 7:16 am 7:16 am
The biggest money thee days comes from penetrating emerging markets and that accounts for 40% of earnings. Are you so greedy that you demand a piece of that action to pay for shrimp on treadmills?
Posted by: Claire Solt PhD | September 19, 2011, 7:57 am 7:57 am
The more government tries to manipulate outcomes, the worse things get. Almost every attempt to make things ‘more fair’ ends up creating a loophole that favors those who were ahead of the game in the first place.
Posted by: Larry | September 19, 2011, 8:55 am 8:55 am
Arthur, funny why are you accusing the republican for things that the democrats are doing????
Posted by: Lizzie | September 19, 2011, 9:54 am 9:54 am
Funny Arthur, why are you accusing the republican for things that the democrats are doing????
Posted by: Lizzie | September 19, 2011, 9:57 am 9:57 am
All of this discussion is a waste. Obama KNOWS that his proposals his proposals have NO chance of passing congress, therefore, all the bull that Obama can spin out is politics ONLY!!
Posted by: Manitu | September 19, 2011, 8:01 pm 8:01 pm
When Obama accuses some rich guys as paying only 15 percent when their secretaries are paying 18 percent. What he doesn’t tell you is that he 15 percent he refers to is THE TAX ON CAPITAL GAINS – NOT REGULAR INCOME TAX WHICH RICH GUYS PAY ALSO AT 35 PERCENT RATE!! Raising taxes on the rich is an attack on achievement!!!
Posted by: Manitu | September 19, 2011, 8:18 pm 8:18 pm
Under the laws of unintended consequences, Obama’s overall tax plan should finish off the remaining U.S. general aviation and luxury boatbuilding companies and their highly-paid employees, raise borrowing costs to state and local governments (zeroing out his one-time spending bonus to retain teacher positions), and result in reduced employment in sectors exposed to increased corporate and income taxation, which comes with the additional penalty of lost wages and tax revenues from the laid-off workers. Increased taxes on the rich invariably hurt the poor and the middle-class more than they hurt the rich. The rich do not passively accept large increases in taxation, but change their behavior instead – taking reduced salaries, abandoning formerly tax-advantaged capital gains assets (thus depressing the markets), reclassifying assets as corporate assets, and/or placing their assets in tax-free or tax-deferred instruments such as trusts or partnerships. Those that cannot totally avoid the increase in taxes respond by cutting down on spending and purchasing fewer luxury goods and services, severely affecting that sector of the market. It is the middle class and the poor who bear the brunt, as businesses retrench or go out of business entirely, and the workers are laid off. It should be noted that Obama’s millionaire’s tax isn’t indexed for inflation, and like the AMT which was originally intended to affect only high-income earners, will eventually affect taxpayers who aren’t wealthy, becoming a tax on the middle class (a process hastened by the continual printing of money by the Fed).
Posted by: Glen | September 20, 2011, 2:22 pm 2:22 pm
Means testing should consider just annual income.
Seniors should not be expected to use up savings or liquidate investments or encumber their homes due to increased Medicare costs.
Also Federal salaries and benefits should be reduced with larger cuts to he highest earners.
And some departments and agencies should be eliminated.
Posted by: ajaynejr | September 21, 2011, 9:25 am 9:25 am