Top Obama adviser: Tax system ‘rigged in favor of very wealthy’

[ProSense]

Top Obama adviser: Tax system ‘rigged in favor of very wealthy’

By Justin Sink

President Obama's senior campaign strategist David Axelrod defended the president's economic record on Tuesday and said reforming a tax system “rigged in favor of the very wealthy” would be an administration priority.

<...>

"It is the most important issue," Axelrod acknowledged. "We're going to have a big debate about the economy. That big debate is going to be, who's going to promote an economy in which the middle class can grow? In which hard work is rewarded, responsibility is rewarded, everybody plays by the same rules, from Main Street to Wall Street? And the question is which of these two candidates is more likely to promote that kind of economy."

The senior Obama adviser went on to say that a big part of the president's push would be vocal support for the so-called Buffett Rule, which would raise taxes on millionaires' investment income to match the rates they would pay for personal income.

"We have a tax system that is rigged against the average person, rigged in favor of the very wealthy, and we need to fix that. This Buffett Rule will address that, and most Americans, I think, would agree with it," Axelrod said.

- more -

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/220659-axelrod-tax-policy-rigged-in-favor-of-the-very-wealthy

The Buffett Rule vs. The Romney Rule

by Jed Lewison

With President Obama heading to Florida for a 2:55 ET speech making the case for the Buffett Rule and with the Obama campaign hammering Mitt Romney because he "is a beneficiary of a broken tax system, and he wants to keep it that way," a reporter posed the following question (my emphasis):

Against that backdrop, the potential political appeal of the Buffett Rule is such that a reporter on the White House conference call asked administration officials why they did not call it the Romney Rule. Mr. Obama first proposed the rule last September, but he and his advisers — both in the White House and the Chicago campaign headquarters — have lately begun emphasizing it anew as they mobilize for the expected race against Mr. Romney

.
It's a reasonable question, given the obvious political implications of focusing attention on the unfairness of Mitt Romney paying a minuscule 15 percent tax rate on his $21 million of income while people earning a fraction of Romney's income pay a much higher rate.

But the answer to the question is as obvious as the politics of the issue: President Obama's proposal isn't called the Romney Rule because the Romney Rule is the policy he's seeking to replace. (I first saw it called the Romney Rule on Greg Sargent's blog, who in turn gave Paul Begala credit.) The Romney Rule says certain "lucky ducky" high income taxpayers don't have to pay the same rates that everyone else pays, even though they are effectively earning ordinary income. The Romney Rule says Mitt Romney should get special preferential treatment, and that the benefits of that preferential treatment will trickle down to everyone else. The Romney Rule is what Mitt Romney and the Republican Party want to keep in place.

- more -

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/04/10/1082114/-The-Buffett-Rule-vs-The-Romney-Rule

http://www.whitehouse.gov/economy/buffett-rule

[Jackpine Radical]

1. Well, finally maybe the Administration noticed which way the crowd is moving

and they're now running to get out in front in order to convey the impression that they're leading the movement.

None of this would have been on the map without OWS. None of it.

[ProSense]

2. Would be

Well, finally maybe the Administration noticed which way the crowd is moving

and they're now running to get out in front in order to convey the impression that they're leading the movement.

None of this would have been on the map without OWS. None of it.

...great if OWS could pressure Congress to pass it.

[Jackpine Radical]

5. It will be an interesting year.

I can't see getting anything useful through our Republico-Blue Dog congress, though, unless something happens to scare the livin' beJesus out of the Twerpbaggers.

Maybe in January--

We've got to get some progressives elected this fall.

[ProSense]

6. It will be.

"I can't see getting anything useful through our Republico-Blue Dog congress, though, unless something happens to scare the livin' beJesus out of the Twerpbaggers."

If only someone could find the something, but I doubt it.

[Jackpine Radical]

7. Polling data?

The way to get to the pols (if there is a way) must be through educating the voters. Again, things like Occupy are the best way to do this.

One advantage of Occupy lies exactly in its non-alignment with partisan politics. People will hear messages from an apparently nonpartisan source that they would tune out if the messages came with a party label.

[ProSense]

8. Agree,

"The way to get to the pols (if there is a way) must be through educating the voters. Again, things like Occupy are the best way to do this."

...the momentum is not working in the GOP's favor.

[Jackpine Radical]

9. That's pretty clear.

They aren't even really having a Primary campaign. They're having a really slow train wreck.

[Fawke Em]

3. Duh...

Wish I could provide more commentary, but this is so obvious, it doesn't need any.

[ProSense]

4. Agree,

"Wish I could provide more commentary, but this is so obvious, it doesn't need any."

...but what's needed is for "obvious" to translate into a solution by passing this bill.