Redstate

By California Yankee Posted in 2008 | Barack Obama | Budget | Center | Shift | taxes — Comments (9) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

UPDATED

After running a primary campaign from the far left, Obama is now trying to shift right toward the center.

Obama is impeded in this shift by his extreme left wing positions and the voting record that earned him the tittle of the most liberal senator in 2007.

According to Bloomberg:

In recent weeks, Obama said he supports gun-ownership rights, backs legislation giving immunity to telephone companies that participated in an anti-terrorism surveillance program and would consider cutting corporate taxes. On July 3, he said he would ``continue to refine my policies'' on the Iraq War.

Obama built his candidacy on the support of his party's liberal base, which favors restrictions on guns and wiretapping, raising taxes for companies, and pulling U.S. forces from Iraq. As an Illinois state legislator, he voted against a law carving out self-defense exceptions to local handgun bans; as a U.S. senator, he opposed business tax cuts and extending warrantless eavesdropping, and backed tougher gun laws. On Iraq, he has long focused on ending the war and withdrawing troops.

Obama denies that he trying to shift his extreme left wing positions toward the center:

"I get tagged as being on the left and when I simply describe what have been my positions consistently, then suddenly people act surprised," Obama told reporters in Ohio on July 1. There haven't "been substantial shifts," he said.

Read on, there is more.

Gun control emerged as an issue last month after the Supreme Court struck down Washington's handgun ban. McCain, 71, quickly praised the decision.

Obama was on the defensive because of past support for more restrictive laws. In addition to the 2004 state vote on the self- defense bill, which critics said might eviscerate local handgun bans, Obama in 2005 voted as a U.S. senator to expand the types of banned ammunition and against a measure protecting gunmakers and sellers from lawsuits.

Consider Obama's attempt yesterday, to "shift," some would say flip flop, on the Democrats' budget, which raise taxes on Americans earning $32,000 or more.

Obama voted in favor of the Democrats' FY 2009 budget resolution twice: (S. Con. Res. 70, CQ Vote #85: Adopted 51-44: R 2-43; D 47-1; I 2-0, 3/14/08, Obama Voted Yea; S. Con. Res. 70, CQ Vote #142: Adopted 48- 45: R 2- 44; D 44- 1; I 2-0, 6/4/08, Obama Voted Yea)

The Democrats' budget, allows "more than 20 million middle-class taxpayers to be hit by the Alternative Minimum Tax" after next year.

Yesterday, Obama and his top economic adviser downplayed the significance ff Obama's budget votes, which raise taxes on Americans earning $32,000 or more:

Obama: "The budget resolutions are not tax votes. They are, and everyone in Washington knows this, the budget process screwy as it is in Washington, not one that by the way I designed, and frankly I think has to be fundamentally reformed. The budget resolution is to give some parameters in terms of what in fact, what the budget is going to look like in the upcoming year, but it does not purport to actually be a tax bill and every observer who looks at this has said that this is a phony issue on the part of the McCain campaign." (Sen. Barack Obama, Media Availability, St. Louis, MO, 7/7/08)

Watch Obama downplay his in the following video:

Obama's economic adviser Jason Furman called Obama's tax raising budget votes just "some senate vote."

In March and June Obama didn't think his tax raising budget votes were just "some senate vote." No, then Obama praised the tax raising budget votes:

In June 2008, Obama said "the senate voted to stand up for working families in Illinois and throughout the nation" by passing the Democrats' final budget resolution:

Obama: "Today the Senate voted to stand up for working families in Illinois and throughout the nation by rejecting the failed policies of the Bush Administration and moving our country back on track to fiscal discipline. This budget provides for middle class tax relief while making critical investments in education, energy independence, support for our veterans, and job-creating infrastructure.

I am particularly pleased that the budget includes an amendment I offered to ensure sufficient funds to expedite review of cases where service members may have been erroneously discharged as a result of a Post Traumatic Stress Disorder or Traumatic Brain Injury.

Our country needs change, and this budget is an important step in the right direction. I commend House and Senate leaders for working together to move this legislation through Congress."(Sen. Barack Obama, "Statement Of Senator Barack Obama On The Senate 's Passage Of The FY 2009 Budget Resolution," Press Release, obama.senate.gov, 6/4/08)

In March 2008, Obama hailed his vote for the budget as "significant progress:"

Obama: "The budget passed by the Senate tonight makes significant progress in getting our nation's priorities back on track. ... We need change in this country, and this budget is an important step in helping bring it about." (Sen. Barack Obama, "Obama Statement On The Senate's Passage Of The FY 2009 Budget," Press Release, obama.senate.gov, 3/14/08)

Just words.

UPDATE: FactCheck.org says I got the $32,000 thing wrong:

* The resolution Obama voted for would not have increased taxes on any single taxpayer making less than $41,500 per year in total income, or any couple making less than $83,000. The $32,000 figure is approximately the taxable income of a single person making $41,500 per year, after all deductions and exclusions.

* Obama's vote (for a non-binding budget bill) does not change the fact that his own tax plan would provide a tax cut of $502 for a non-married taxpayer earning $35,000.

[. . .]

What Obama voted for was a budget resolution that would have allowed most of the provisions of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts to expire. In particular, the resolution would allow the 25 percent tax bracket to return to its pre-2001 level of 28 percent. That bracket kicks in at $32,550 for an individual or $65,100 for a married couple. (The McCain campaign relies on an AP article which puts the cutoff at $31,850, but that figure is from 2007, not this year.) So the McCain campaign claims that anyone making "as little as $32,000" would be affected by the rate increase.

But as those of you who have filled out a 1040 know, that's not actually how income taxes work. We don't pay taxes on our total earnings; we pay them based on our "taxable income." The Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center's Eric Toder told FactCheck.org that "people with taxable income of $32,000 would have a total income greater than that." In 2008, anyone filing taxes with single status would be entitled to a standard deduction of $5,450, as well as a personal exemption of $3,500. So to have a taxable income high enough to reach the 25 percent bracket, an individual would need to earn at least $41,500 in total income, while a married couple would need a combined income of at least $83,000.

It would have been more accurate to say Obama's budget votes raise taxes on Americans with a taxable income of $32,000 or more.