ABOUT FIRST READ

First Read is an analysis of the day's political news, from the NBC News political unit. First Read is updated throughout the day, so check back often.

Chuck Todd, NBC Political Director

Mark Murray, NBC Deputy Political Director

Domenico Montanaro, NBC News Political Reporter



First 100 days: Budget day

Posted: Thursday, February 26, 2009 9:18 AM by Mark Murray
Filed Under: , , ,

Reuters previews the budget that Obama will unveil today. “President Barack Obama will forecast a 2009 deficit of $1.75 trillion in a budget proposal on Thursday that sets goals of overhauling the healthcare system and shoring up the U.S. economy. The huge deficit would represent 12.3 percent of U.S. gross domestic product -- the largest share since World War II. Two senior administration officials … said Obama's expensive policy goals would be offset by cuts to put the country in better fiscal shape.” 

Bloomberg says the budget request “would provide as much as $750 billion in new aid to the financial industry.” An administration official “said the White House hasn’t decided whether the $750 billion in additional aid to the financial industry will be needed. He said it will be put in the budget as ‘placeholder.’ The official said the aid would appear in the budget as about $250 billion because the rules require policymakers to record the plan’s net cost to taxpayers. The government anticipates it would eventually recoup some, though not all, of the money expended to help financial companies.”

Also in his budget, the Washington Post reports, Obama “is proposing to begin a vast expansion of the U.S. health-care system by creating a $634 billion reserve fund over the next decade, launching an overhaul that most experts project will ultimately cost at least $1 trillion. The "reserve fund" in the budget proposal being released today is Obama's attempt to demonstrate how the country could extend health insurance to millions more Americans and at the same time begin to control escalating medical bills that threaten the solvency of families, businesses and the government.”

To help finance this reserve health-care fund, the New York Times says the Obama administration proposes calling “for stricter limits on the benefits of itemized deductions taken by the wealthiest households… Administration officials said Mr. Obama would propose to reduce the value of itemized tax deductions for everyone in the top income tax bracket, 35 percent, and many of those in the 33 percent bracket — roughly speaking, starting at $250,000 in annual income for a married couple.”

More: “Under existing law, the tax benefit of itemizing deductions rises with a taxpayer’s marginal tax bracket (the bracket that applies to the last dollar of income). For example, $10,000 in itemized deductions reduces tax liability by $3,500 for someone in the 35 percent bracket. Mr. Obama would allow a saving of only $2,800 — as if the person were in the 28 percent bracket. The White House says it is unfair for high-income people to get a bigger tax break than middle-income people for claiming the same deductions or making the same charitable contributions.”

RNC spokesman Alex Conant points out to First Read that on Obama’s transition site, the president “said he would pay for health care by ‘rolling back the Bush tax cuts for Americans earning more than $250,000 per year and retaining the estate tax at its 2009 level.’ Now we know that is not true.  He is paying for it with a NEW tax.”

The New York Daily News' cover: "The check please! Obama unveils record budget to pay for recovery."

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

A trillion here, a trillion there. Pretty soon we're talking real money!
Raising taxes is now called "rolling back the Bush tax cuts"? Nice euphemism. Oh, and so you libs don't have to run to your Funk & Wagnalls, a euphemism is a substitution of an agreeable or less offensive expression in place of one that may offend or suggest something unpleasant.
Why is money to pay for the healthcare of American citizens who are uninsured so controversial?

We pay for citizens of other countries to get healthcare all the time.

The fact is, we are all already paying for the uninsured - I'd rather pay on the front end and know what I am getting than pay on the back end when my "insurance" company denies my claim and my doctor charges me $500 for peeing in a cup and two Tylenols.

Enough of the phony arguments. People get sick, whether they have a job or not.

Let's quit pretending like it's okay for people to die because they can't afford to be treated. It's wrong and I am proud of President Obama for putting the needs of the American people ahead of his political future.
What a relief that we have Obama giving us a new budget instead of Clueless George and his party of deadbeat taxpayers.  What a shame that Obama has to repair such horrendous damage that the Irrelevant Elephants have wrought upon us.  With fellow citizens like the repugnant ones our country doesn't need any enemies.

Oh I like hearing about itemized seduction reform.  Schedule A is the most abused form by the rich and greedy to evade paying their fair share of taxes.  I say kill Schedule A and give eneryone the same kind of standard deduction to make it fair for those who aren't billioniares.  Time to stop letting the richest and greediest from avoiding taxes by giving away large donations to dubious charities which are just political action comittees.

Fair Taxes for All the Rest of Us!
Anyone else notice this is an attack on married people?  As an individual you can earn up to
$249,999 gross and not pay the "hate the rich" tax.  A married couple, each earining $125,000 suddenly under Obamanation, has to pay not only the increase income tax burden, but also, illogically, gets fewer deductions that mr. single who earns $1.00 less.  It is entirely possible that said married couple will have LESS take home pay, after they get through paying for others health care, that mr. single.  Good plan, Obamanation, you are targeting this one directly at your voter.

New age of responsibility - HA!  More like %5 of the earners are responsible for the other %95 holding their hands out.

Once again the liberals want to punish the sucessful and reward the failures.  Especially if they are (gasp!) married. Is that the American way?  It is in the Obamanation!
Ditto to Nashville and a question.  Rather than wasting even more time and money on band-aids, isn't it time we started talking about universal health coverage?  It ought to be clear by now that the alternatives haven't worked, and even more, that they won't work, at least not as long as greedy people are left to their own devices in an underregulated system.  
Nashville_fan: Why is money to pay for the healthcare of American citizens who are uninsured so controversial?

We pay for citizens of other countries to get healthcare all the time.

Really? What country is the US paying healthcare for? We need to put a stop to that and just pay for our own people's health care.

I take it you're also against healthcare payments for illegal aliens in the US too?
24 - 39

Ya gotta love the GOP.  They bitch and moan about the Dems making every spending item 'permanent' but when they have a temp tax cut run out - with a sunset no less - suddenly it is a RAISE in taxes. There are a few more people with Fuzzy Math issues than previously thought.   PLUS - how does this work? The past administration drove us into a ditch with 2 wars OFF THE BOOKS and tax cuts with  no maintainence of our country - and NOW they are bitching?  Give me a flipping break!  Somebody has to pay - and it is ALL of us!

Even lower income people had savings, pensions or 401Ks that took a hit - so get off your poor pitiful rich crap - and get down here with the rest of us - you played and now you get to pay!
24 - 39

Ya gotta love the GOP.  They bitch and moan about the Dems making every spending item 'permanent' but when they have a temp tax cut run out - with a sunset no less - suddenly it is a RAISE in taxes. There are a few more people with Fuzzy Math issues than previously thought.   PLUS - how does this work? The past administration drove us into a ditch with 2 wars OFF THE BOOKS and tax cuts with  no maintainence of our country - and NOW they are bitching?  Give me a flipping break!  Somebody has to pay - and it is ALL of us!

Even lower income people had savings, pensions or 401Ks that took a hit - so get off your poor pitiful rich crap - and get down here with the rest of us - you played and now you get to pay!
Eric in Salinas:

Wake up, Jack. The handwriting is on the wall and it ain't George Walker Bush's.
Here is a story line some needs to look into.
July 2007 SEC changes the rules regulating short selling. Stock markets have been in a downward trend starting two months after the rules were changed. The rules had been in place since 1938 and were designed to prevent shot sellers from intentionally driving the market down. Who was responsible for this change and if the rules had been effective why where they suddenly deem outdated? We know the SEC has been asleep at the wheel for the last nine years, but did the SEC intentionally open the door to give the foxes access to the chickens?
Part of being an American is helping others and our country when necessary. I will definetly be paying more taxes under this budget. I am fine with that. If it helps get medical care for all people, if it helps all children get an education, if it helps move us from oil to alternate energy, than I am proud to be part of moving this country forward.

The greed is good mantra from the 80's is so yesterday. We all need to rethink our responsibilities and obligations to each other. We rise and fall as one country.

Those who will be taxed more, suck it up! My standard of living is not going to change that much.
Anyone else notice this is an attack on married people?  As an individual you can earn up to
$249,999 gross and not pay the "hate the rich" tax.  A married couple, each earining $125,000 suddenly under Obamanation, has to pay not only the increase income tax burden, but also, illogically, gets fewer deductions that mr. single who earns $1.00 less.  It is entirely possible that said married couple will have LESS take home pay, after they get through paying for others health care, that mr. single.  Good plan, Obamanation, you are targeting this one directly at your voter.

New age of responsibility - HA!  More like %5 of the earners are responsible for the other %95 holding their hands out.

Once again the liberals want to punish the sucessful and reward the failures.  Especially if they are (gasp!) married. Is that the American way?  It is in the Obamanation!

Bob Smith, Obamanation, USSA (Sent Thursday, February 26, 2009 9:41 AM)
***************************************************
your entire argument as a few good points, but i don't agree with the conclusion that you have arrived at.

honestly, most of the people on the quarter mil bubble will find ways to reduce their taxable income below the threshold where their taxes go up.  the vast majority of people who fall into this tax bracket are making far above $250,000 and don't apply to the scenario that you are outlining.  and those who cry about the small business that makes over 250,000 a year and will get crushed need a small dose of reality.  any business making that much will have ways to reduce their INCOME under that threshold by investing in their business.  if your accountant and business manager can't do that you have hired failures and should rethink your hiring decisions...

95% of peope are not looking for a handout, just a hand up to get off the ground that phony bookkeeping and games of hide the spending have created.

this is not about punishment or reward.  this is about taxes, and paying your way in the country that has allowed you to become successful.  my wife and i have struggled to make $30,000 combined, and we would have no problem paying half our salary in taxes if we are still bringing home $90,000.  anyone who needs more than that to live on has adjusted to a "lifestyle of the rich and famous", and has no business telling me that i'm looking for a handout when i've worked just as hard and not gotten a break...  its about personal responsibility and community responsibility, something that is severely lacking in our greed fueled me first gimme gimme gimme society.  
I am going on record right now, that even at my secretarial salary, and under Clinton I did, would be more than willing to pay more taxes to make my couuntry more modernized, safe and competitive in the World...
To Tzalaran and Barbara C, I wholeheartedly agree with you.  I am 67, retired but still have to work full time to supplement my SS income so I can pay my mortgage. I make about $1,900 a month, which is a whole lot more than a lot of my friends make so I count myself lucky. I worked hard all my life to raise my family, sometimes working 2 and 3 jobs to do it, but like sooooo many others like me. . I succeeded. I, like Barbara C would be more than willing to forego this last tax cut to make my country more modernized, safe and competitve and reform health care.
To Obamanation. . I am one of the 95% you are calling a failure with my hand out.  Better to be a failure in your eyes than what you represent to me in my eyes, a greedy, selfish me first . . . .
All spin and equivocation aside, remember that the majority of these "evil", "heartless" people that make up the 250k and over crowd own the companies that employ us all.  Its class warfare at its most dishonest.

Speaking of lies, Obama's tax increase begins at less than 210k of taxable income, not the 250k he promised.  But why run a story on a blatant falsehood?  Oh yeah - he's a Democrat.
A Very Simple Warning: As Government Grows, Liberty Recedes.

The Size of Government, and Liberty, are Inversely Proportional.
To Tzalaran and Barbara C, I wholeheartedly agree with you.  I am 67, retired but still have to work full time to supplement my SS income so I can pay my mortgage. I make about $1,900 a month, which is a whole lot more than a lot of my friends make so I count myself lucky. I worked hard all my life to raise my family, sometimes working 2 and 3 jobs to do it, but like sooooo many others like me. . I succeeded. I, like Barbara C would be more than willing to forego this last tax cut to make my country more modernized, safe and competitve and reform health care.
To Obamanation. . I am one of the 95% you are calling a failure with my hand out.  Better to be a failure in your eyes than what you represent to me in my eyes, a greedy, selfish me first . . . .


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=1811343

First Read e-mail alerts


Sign up for First Read alerts
The first place for key political news and analysis

Syndicate This Site

Add First Read to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google