Obama's fiscal cliff strategy is tricky balance

WASHINGTON (AP) - Playing both sides, President Barack Obama is trying to balance his public pressure campaign on Republicans over the looming "fiscal cliff" with his private negotiations with GOP leaders.
The White House is loath to abandon the two-pronged strategy even as the Dec. 31 deadline nears. Obama's advisers see the carrot-and-stick approach as key to winning concessions from Republicans on taxes and reaching a deal to avert the series of year-end tax hikes and spending cuts.
But Obama's campaign to rally public support for his fiscal cliff positions has irked some Republicans. And continuing to publicly lambaste GOP lawmakers as obstructionists for not giving in to White House demands that tax rates rise on the top 2 percent of income earners could undercut trust between Obama and Republicans in their private talks.
For now, the White House says it plans to continue on both tracks. Asked whether the president would be more focused on his public efforts or private talks, White House spokesman Jay Carney said "both."
"We will continue to engage with leaders on Capitol Hill, we will continue to engage with a broader coalition of people who have a stake in this, and that includes ordinary Americans out in the country," Carney said.
But Republicans have made clear that they see the president's public campaign as a hindrance to private negotiations.
A spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said Tuesday that the White House appears to be placing "a higher premium on politics than the American jobs that are at stake." And Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has said that the country already knows "the president is a very good campaigner. What we don't know is whether he has the leadership qualities necessary to lead his party to a bipartisan agreement on a big issue like this."
Perhaps with that in mind, there are indications that the White House is scaling back its public campaign as negotiations enter a more serious phase. Unless Congress acts, taxes will increase on all income earners on Jan. 1, and a slew of spending cuts will begin to take effect the following day.
After holding a flurry of fiscal cliff-focused events in recent weeks - from a Twitter town hall to a photo opportunity in a Virginia family's basement apartment - the president is expected to spend much of this week out of the spotlight.
In the one public appearance he did make this week - a campaign-style rally at an auto plant in Michigan - the president held back his criticism of Republicans. Instead, he put the onus for reaching a fiscal cliff deal on Congress as a whole.
"We can solve this problem. All Congress needs to do is pass a law that would prevent a tax hike on the first $250,000 of everybody's income," Obama said, referring to his position that tax rates be increased on individual incomes over $200,000 and on family incomes over $250,000.
The president's restrained rhetoric was particularly notable given that his remarks came a day after he met privately at the White House with Boehner, their first one-on-one session in 18 months.
Both sides have agreed to not publicly discuss any details of that meeting, and White House officials wouldn't say whether Obama's dialed-back approach reflected any progress in the talks.
Even if Obama continues to retreat from his public cliff campaigning, he'll have plenty of surrogates to pick up the slack.
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee released new online and radio advertisements Wednesday targeting 21 House Republicans and urging voters in their districts to press them to not "hold the middle class hostage to get more tax cuts for millionaires."
And Obama's re-election campaign, which is still up and running more than a month after Election Day, emailed supporters asking them to call Republican lawmakers. In the email, deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter wrote, "Let's get one thing straight: If your taxes go up, Republicans will have made a conscious choice to let that happen."
Obama advisers came out of Election Day banking on being able to translate the enthusiasm - and massive database - it used to build support for candidate Obama to build support for a re-elected Obama's policies. It's something the president's aides acknowledge they failed to do during his first term, including during negotiations on the health care overhaul.
There is some evidence to support the Obama team's assertion that its public campaign is working. An Associated Press-GfK poll suggested that 48 percent of Americans want tax cuts to expire in January on earnings over $250,000 but continue for lower incomes. An additional 32 percent said the tax cuts should continue for everybody, which has been the view of Republican lawmakers who say raising taxes on the wealthy would squelch their ability to create jobs.
Some Republican-leaning groups also have sought to build public support for GOP efforts to continue tax cuts for all income earners. Crossroads GPS, the Karl Rove-backed conservative group, announced a $500,000 television advertising buy last week. The TV spots assert that the president's solution to reducing the deficit is "a huge tax increase" and urge the public to call the president and voice opposition to his proposals.
The White House is loath to abandon the two-pronged strategy even as the Dec. 31 deadline nears. Obama's advisers see the carrot-and-stick approach as key to winning concessions from Republicans on taxes and reaching a deal to avert the series of year-end tax hikes and spending cuts.
But Obama's campaign to rally public support for his fiscal cliff positions has irked some Republicans. And continuing to publicly lambaste GOP lawmakers as obstructionists for not giving in to White House demands that tax rates rise on the top 2 percent of income earners could undercut trust between Obama and Republicans in their private talks.
For now, the White House says it plans to continue on both tracks. Asked whether the president would be more focused on his public efforts or private talks, White House spokesman Jay Carney said "both."
"We will continue to engage with leaders on Capitol Hill, we will continue to engage with a broader coalition of people who have a stake in this, and that includes ordinary Americans out in the country," Carney said.
But Republicans have made clear that they see the president's public campaign as a hindrance to private negotiations.
A spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said Tuesday that the White House appears to be placing "a higher premium on politics than the American jobs that are at stake." And Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has said that the country already knows "the president is a very good campaigner. What we don't know is whether he has the leadership qualities necessary to lead his party to a bipartisan agreement on a big issue like this."
Perhaps with that in mind, there are indications that the White House is scaling back its public campaign as negotiations enter a more serious phase. Unless Congress acts, taxes will increase on all income earners on Jan. 1, and a slew of spending cuts will begin to take effect the following day.
After holding a flurry of fiscal cliff-focused events in recent weeks - from a Twitter town hall to a photo opportunity in a Virginia family's basement apartment - the president is expected to spend much of this week out of the spotlight.
In the one public appearance he did make this week - a campaign-style rally at an auto plant in Michigan - the president held back his criticism of Republicans. Instead, he put the onus for reaching a fiscal cliff deal on Congress as a whole.
"We can solve this problem. All Congress needs to do is pass a law that would prevent a tax hike on the first $250,000 of everybody's income," Obama said, referring to his position that tax rates be increased on individual incomes over $200,000 and on family incomes over $250,000.
The president's restrained rhetoric was particularly notable given that his remarks came a day after he met privately at the White House with Boehner, their first one-on-one session in 18 months.
Both sides have agreed to not publicly discuss any details of that meeting, and White House officials wouldn't say whether Obama's dialed-back approach reflected any progress in the talks.
Even if Obama continues to retreat from his public cliff campaigning, he'll have plenty of surrogates to pick up the slack.
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee released new online and radio advertisements Wednesday targeting 21 House Republicans and urging voters in their districts to press them to not "hold the middle class hostage to get more tax cuts for millionaires."
And Obama's re-election campaign, which is still up and running more than a month after Election Day, emailed supporters asking them to call Republican lawmakers. In the email, deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter wrote, "Let's get one thing straight: If your taxes go up, Republicans will have made a conscious choice to let that happen."
Obama advisers came out of Election Day banking on being able to translate the enthusiasm - and massive database - it used to build support for candidate Obama to build support for a re-elected Obama's policies. It's something the president's aides acknowledge they failed to do during his first term, including during negotiations on the health care overhaul.
There is some evidence to support the Obama team's assertion that its public campaign is working. An Associated Press-GfK poll suggested that 48 percent of Americans want tax cuts to expire in January on earnings over $250,000 but continue for lower incomes. An additional 32 percent said the tax cuts should continue for everybody, which has been the view of Republican lawmakers who say raising taxes on the wealthy would squelch their ability to create jobs.
Some Republican-leaning groups also have sought to build public support for GOP efforts to continue tax cuts for all income earners. Crossroads GPS, the Karl Rove-backed conservative group, announced a $500,000 television advertising buy last week. The TV spots assert that the president's solution to reducing the deficit is "a huge tax increase" and urge the public to call the president and voice opposition to his proposals.
obama's way or the highway. Â What a worthless excuse for a president. Â I for one am looking forward to going over the cliff. Â Oh God, what will the deadbeats do if that happens? Â After all they are responsible for him being elected and reelected, so he can't possibly renege on their deal. Â I mean he guaranteed them a free ride if they voted for him. Â
From what I have seen of this, Obama's strategy has been to make demands and to toss aside any Republican counter proposals without even looking at them. Then he and the liberal media blame the whole mess on the Republicans. I have seen little to no willingness of the President to negotiate, cooperate, compromise, or care.
I've always wondered if Republican's are so concerned about tax cuts reducing their ability to create a job then how about a specific provision that allows tax cuts to companies that create US jobs? I dont think the repuclican party would support such a bill.
Â
And on the grander scheme of things tax cuts for US jobs basically means the federal government is subsidizing those jobs.
Â
It's always easy to poke and prod at people but coming up with a solution is no easy task.
Does't really matter Bernanke just sealed the fate of the dollar yesterday anyway. We are so screwed!
Why is the left wing media (most all media) keeping silent about Michigan State Representative Douglas Geiss's comment yesterday when he angrily stated "THERE WILL BE BLOOD"? Where in the heII is Obama calling for "calmness" and "reason"? Why do these Liberal Democrats and Union thugs get away with these threats?
 @last boyscout ... Let's hope the latest in Michigan will continue to be a domino effect with the other 24 states adopting right to work, with one exception: CA where it will never happen.
@KHEB @last boyscout Ya ! cause we can't wait for a plutocracy
Â
Just in case you don't understand...
Â
Plutocracy (from Ancient Greek ÏλοῦÏοÏ, ploutos, meaning "wealth", and κÏάÏοÏ, kratos, meaning "power, dominion, rule"), also known as plutonomy or plutarchy, is rule by the wealthy. Its first known use was in 1652.[1] Unlike systems such as democracy or anarchism, plutocracy is not rooted in an established political philosophy and has no formal advocates. The concept of plutocracy may be advocated by the wealthy classes of a society in an indirect or surreptitious fashion, though the term itself is almost always used in a pejorative sense.
 @last boyscout Here's what he said:
Â
"Weâre going to pass something that will undo 100 years of labor relations and there will be blood. There will be repercussions.â ----- This is where Fox and the conservative media cuts off the quote, but it has one more sentence --- "We will relive the Battle of the Overpass."
Â
What's the Battle of the Overpass? See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Overpass
Â
It was a labor demonstration that was peaceful until several union leaders posed for a photograph, and then "[w]hile they were posing, men from Ford's Service Department, an internal security force under the direction of Harry Bennett, came from behind and began to beat them." The blood came from the union members.
Â
So in other words, Geiss wasn't making a threat. He was predicting that the legislation would lead to demonstrations and that the demonstrators would be attacked.
Â
Some context might help nurse you through all your fears.
 @Max Quinn Thanks for the info. Interesting. Still, the language that Douglas Geiss used is very inappropriate.
I guess he was speaking to the people of michigan who know about their plight against plutocracy and formation of unions, not board commentors from oregon hey ?
Â
But then again, couldn't fauxe nooze have done just a little journalism and put forward the whole meaning....afterall, that seems "fair and balanced"....D'OH !
 @last boyscout He should have known better. You're right about that.
2.5 trillion in spending in 2006 and 3.8 trillion in spending in 2012, but there's not a government spending problem???Â
If the Republicans don't like what Obama is doing in going public with his plans and strategy, then they should be doing the same thing to let the American people know what the Republicans want to see happen. So, why haven't they? Aren't they supposed to be representing their constituents in this situation - and part of that would be giving us their version of what they feel needs to be done to avert this 'fiscal cliff'.Â
The problem with the republiCON plan is cuts ONLY to domestic spending AND a "broader tax base" which is code words for "more taxes on the middle and lower wage earners" and NO CUTS to defense.
Â
Ask yourself, "how did rome fall"...look it up, it was not due to "social programs" it was an enormous increase in defense AND their empire building....what are we doing right now..hmmm
@catherine.henry  You are forgetting that all negotiations are to be held in private according to the White House. They "can't do a good job negotiatiing with the public bickering over "every little thing".
Â
The White House has had 4 years to present a budget that even his own party can agree on. The only one presented was rejected by 100% of his own party. I'd say OBAMA is the one who is holding this nation hostage, not the GOP.
@erudite "The only one presented", He's presented a budget every year in which he has been required to. He got the first one passed, but it wasn't the only one he presented.
 @sargerator The only way we can hope to get any sort of balance from the news is to look at Fox as well as the others. If you think ABC, NBC, CNN, etc. are presenting anything like objective, balanced news, I express my condolences for your departure from reality. Fox may be conservative leaning but that only partially offsets the far left leanings of the other media outlets.
You have to pardon eru, for he is a fauxe nooze viewer...you know, fair and balanced..D'OH
 @catherine.henryÂ
Agreed.
Â
Not that this is a case of "one-upmanship" but more of a "hey that's his idea, this is ours" sort of thing.
Â
A letter to Congress from the National Taxpayers Union, signed by 180 economists, urges members to refrain from approving any tax increases.
Â
âIncreasing taxes would likely slow or reverse our nationâs fragile economic recovery and undermine long-term growth,â the letter says. It recommends spending cuts instead. That âwould help stabilize the governmentâs fiscal imbalance and create a more conducive environment for robust expansion.â
Â
âIn particular, Congress should avoid raising marginal tax rates on income and taxes on investment, such as capital gains and dividends taxes,â the economists state. âThese types of taxes most directly and meaningfully affect job creation.â
Â
http://www.ntu.org/
Obama's "Chicago Style" negotiating of "My Way" or you and grandma both get pushed off a cliff is a precurser of things to come as we race to beat Greece for the bottom. Obama says GOP are ready to "Surrender". Like hell.Â
 @erudite Yes, slashing government spending has done wonders in Europe.
Â
Like Great Britain - they slashed government spending because doing so âwould help stabilize the governmentâs fiscal imbalance and create a more conducive environment for robust expansion" and scored a brand new recession, instead.
Â
A Nobel winner has another take on this: http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/11/delusions-of-wisdom/
Â
The same folks advocating spending cuts and lower corporate taxes today are the ones who:
Â
"- Believed that financial deregulation was a great idea, because bankers had really learned to manage risk
- Did not believe that there was a housing bubble
- Insisted that budget deficits, even in a depressed economy, would send interest rates soaring any day now
- Insisted that austerity measures would promote recovery, not hurt it, because of the confidence fairy"
@Max Quinn
This 4 year hostage of our government, running up a staggering uncontrolled debt, by a President who I wouldnât let balance my check book let alone be qualified to bring a balanced budget to the nation, is NOT about "robust expansion, nor flourishing economy".
Â
He has purposefully and strategically prevented a budget for 4 years. It has always been my way or the highway.Â
Â
This is about creating a controlling atmosphere of government dependence akin to the old Kings and serf days. Anyone who thinks differently is delusional. Soros has gleefully taken great pride in his effort to see Greece and other European countries grovel as they are now.
Â
Printing more money now and borrowing the rest only digs this trench deeper so the eventual "real fall" will be permanent, which is what the UN and our "one World" government advocates are orchestrating.
Â
Quoting a Nobel Prize winner has no qualifying authority in my opinion, when they give out awards to people like Obama and Gore simply for political reasons! This is like giving Oscar awards in Hollywood.
Â
NONE of what is going on at the White House is about building a strong future or being responsible, it is to drive this nation into a complete Nationalized Society.
 @erudite He's only delivering what Soros is paying him for...
 @erudite  Just for kicks, point to some of your European sources for "realistic" (good use of quotes) information. I'm guessing you're not talking about the BBC... Soros owns that, doesn't he?
Another PPS:  Re Krugman.....you are right. I am NOT impressed. He is and has pushed his Marxist ideology far too often. Being from a warped edge of Princeton and is published in the New York Times etc, does NOT make him right or on the side of a Republic for which WE STAND, with a Democratic Constitution. He wants it changed, like Obama, and does not mince his words about it.
@Max Quinn
Â
There is no conspiracy "theory". Looking at the US from a World view is "realistic". I get more factual information from European media than our own, and find it a good source to use toward validating sources in the US outside of our main stream media.
Â
From your many posts I would think you may have rose colored glasses on and lead a fine life. If you did much volunteer work or have been without income as many families I know who are homeless and/or are working at minimum wage just for basics outside of food, which the government helps on and are still homless.
Â
You must not have watched very many interviews of Soros, nor read the UN agenda or publicized words of their records.
Â
What was pushed in 2011, cannot be considered a budget. It was an agreement to spend. Obama did the same thing he is doing now and waited until the clock almost struck before closed door "negotiations" were broadcast as successful. The game is rigged, just like the elections. PPS: I am not a "Party" member of any political club including Unions which are akin to mini Democrat 'clubs". @erudite "He has purposefully and strategically prevented a budget for 4 years. It has always been my way or the highway."
Â
That makes no sense. The 2011 budget was a product of Obama negotiating the House Republicans. Remember when he agreed to extend all of the Bush tax cuts even though he didn't want to?
Â
Okay, so you're a conspiracy theorist. I didn't grasp that until now. We've got Soros, the UN, serfdom (as in the road to). All the standard paranoid drivel.
Â
And I suspected that since Paul Krugman as a firm hold on reality, you'd not be impressed by him.
 @Max Quinn  @erudite Krugman is a joke and nothing more than a partisan hack. His Nobel Prize is nothing more than a cookie for being a good liberal who agrees with the leftists who run the Nobel Committee. I watched him in person in 2008, when Bush was President, say that the crushing debts of the Bush admin were the downfall of the American economy, only to reverse course as soon as Obama was in office and spending like a drunken sailor.Â
@sargerator I think keynesian economics is a bunch of bull spit. I was just stating Krugman had it wrong.
@kramr "Keynesian economics  is higher tax rate during good economic times"
So gdbya, did the opposite and we don't have the cash so we...????
Â
As for FDR, most economists agree, he stopped the "stimulus" plan spending far too early in 1937....
Â
Your facts are not correct...oh and take a look at the graph, pretty much shows , "tax heavier in good times AND have surplus, tax lower in recession and carry deficit"...pretty simple AND happens to be keysian which was the standard practice until uncle ronny and the goofy "supply side economic" theory began!
Â
http://zfacts.com/node/85
 @kramr    @moej First, that's why Krugman despised the Bush tax cuts - no need for them in a functioning economy. Second, no, Keynesian economics allows for deficit spending in the face of a depression - no one likes it, but it's a better option than Hooverish do-nothingism.
You need an economic class, "when the economy is booming , you carry a surplus"...."when the economy is in recession, you carry a deficit"
Â
Really, get a clue !
@Max Quinn @moej @erudite  """"""After the crash, he argued that the government needed to step in keep the recession from becoming a depression""""""
Â
Your boy Krugman doesn't quite have the keynesian drill down. An important part Keynesian economics  is to heavily tax during good economic times to create a rainy day fund  so during the economic downturn the feds would lighten up on taxes and then would spend money THEY ALREADY HAD.   Borrowing money to stimulate the economy is like taking water out of the deep end of the pool and putting in the shallow end in hopes of raising the level of the water...... IT DOESN'T WORK, just like  FDR proved after SEVERAL YEARS OF BORROWED STIMULUS SPENDING was an economic flop.Â
 @moej  @erudite Yea, did you notice the financial crash in September of 2008?
Â
Krugman is a Keynesian, so he was against the deficits before the recession because there was no need for them. After the crash, he argued that the government needed to step in keep the recession from becoming a depression. He's been perfectly consistent. He relies on facts and logic, and both those have a liberal bias.
obama wont cut anything. Â He wants to put the country more indebt.....He is destroying the country.
They don't call 'em TAX & SPEND Democrats for nothing. To cut something would more than likely hurt the people who voted for Obama, but to tax someone would more than likely not hurt Obama's base since few of his supporters pay taxes. So Obama could care less if it all was shazit canned next year. That's why he is stalling.
 @FreedomRocks @TimBurrÂ
Â
I am not saying that. If I were in complete control this is what I would do.
Â
Reduce many tax exceptions and simplify the tax code. Have a progressive rate tax system where the top pays more than the bottom in direct proportion to the income difference.
Â
Raise SS, Medicare age availability, something about 1 year every two for the next 10. Leave Medicaid flat. Get rid of the retarded limitation on the feds getting competing prescription pricing. Reduce the defense budget by 2% each year for the next 10 years, tell the Pentagon to find ways. Do the same with education (although make it 0.5%) and get rid of most or maybe ALL agricultural, fossil fuel and mining/resource expansion deductions and subsidies.
Â
There is a whole host of individual things I would rid us of (No child, TSA, combine FBI and the ATF etc) but that line by line would get to long. I think you get the idea.
Â
I don't know where that would put us on the track to getting our heads above water, but it would at least make me fell good.
This comment has been deleted
 @wahooÂ
"constipated conservative"Â LOL, I'm amazed--floored. :-D
 @TimBurrÂ
Â
âThey don't call 'em TAX & SPEND Democrats for nothing.â
Â
No "they" don't call them tax and spend Democrats anymore then "they" call them hatin' grandma's retirement Republicans.
Â
And cutting spending ANYWHERE would hurt someone's constituency. Cut defense spending, Republican states get hurt. Cut domestic many Democratic states well no, Republican states, but still you get the point. Everyone has had their hand in the cookie jar and they ALL get a spanking.
Â
You could say that ALL lawmakers are spenders, just some want to tax and others want to create "fees".
Â
And actually NONE of them want their constituency to pay for the things their constituency gets.
Â
Â
 @Repoman  @TimBurr So just how do you propose we balance the budget when taxing the hell out of everyone making more then $250k will only provide about 10% of the money needed?
Â
Cutting is the only way and Obama would rather turn us into Greece then make a cut...
Obama, unless he is a total idiot, and is intentionally trying to harm the U.S. economy, knows that spending must be cut. So why is Obama refusing to suggest where to cut. Is he incompetent or just a fool in a suit.
This comment has been deleted
 @wahoo  @last How is Obama getting us out? Increase in the national debt from 9 trillion to over 16 trillion since he took office. He has fixed nothing, he has just kicked the can down the road to future generations.Â
 @wahoo  @last Hmm seems the Dems were in control of the purse strings (House) while Bush/Cheney were in office so how again is it all Bushes fault?
Â
What about the idiots running Fanny and Freddy giving loans to drunks on burnside to buy homes....oh wait those were DEMS to...
 @last boyscout I would suggest both.
Everyone knows spending has to be cut . The cut's will be extremely unpopular so the GOP want Dems to name the cuts and Dems want the GOP to name them. That way it will make the other side look bad. It really looks like that is what this fight is all about.
 @special effects
Â
I didn't think that's what the fuss is over.
Â
My understanding is that it is over higher revenue.
Â
The Democrats want to raise rates on the highest earners leaving other "Bush era" rates and most tax exceptions and Republicans want to eliminate just those tax breaks that donât help investment, keep all the âBush eraâ tax rates, and cut only domestic spending.
Â
I donât think they have even GOTTEN to spending cuts talks yet.
 @Repoman  @special effects The DEMS are doing that because that is what they sold the sheeple on to get re-elected. Doing it does not even solve the spending problem for two weeks. So this is all just a giant liberal charade to make people feel like we really slammed it to those successful people...
 @special effects And to be honest, which cuts are the most popular to be cut, and which are the least popular? Seems like it would be easier to tell which of your children who the favorite is.
Poor Republicans. Here's the president trying to rally public support for his ideas. That's not fair.
Â
I remember after the 2004 election when W let us know that he was going to invest his political capital in privatizing Social Security and he then launched upon a six-month campaign of rallies and speeches to drum up support. Republicans hated that, too. I remember a teary-eyed John Boehner saying that a president just shouldn't ever go before the public to seek support.Â
 @Max QuinnÂ
Is this is one of those do as I say not as I do?
Â
Or it works because youâre likeable so it's not fair.
Â
Maybe it's a don't push your agenda because I disagree with it.
Â
Yeah that's it.
Â
Don't press your ideas because even if the majority might agree with you, I don't therefore what you are doing is bad.
Â
Sounds like a childish way of doing things.
Â