Shocker: Obama’s “Balanced” Deficit Reduction Plan Is 73% Tax Hikes


“[A]ccording to Obama’s math, his ‘balanced’ plan cuts the projected cumulative debt by $4.4 trillion over ten years with 36% of the reduction coming from a $1.6 trillion tax increases — 80% from wealthier Americans, 20% from business,” reports Jim Pethokoukis. “So, basically, $2 in spending cuts for each $1 in tax hikes.”

The problem? Well, President Obama doesn’t do honest math. As you can see in the ledger of Obama’s deficit reductions, he’s count over $1 trillion in cost savings from ending our “overseas contingency operations” (or “wars” as they’re traditionally called) in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Obama has already claimed to have ended the war in Iraq, and to be in the process of winding down the war in Afghanistan. Those are policies already in place. Counting savings from ending those wars into the next decade is an accounting fiction, as is counting the cuts in discretionary spending that were already part of the Budget Control Act passed by Congress and signed into law by President Obama.

If we remove those spending cuts, we’re left (as Pethokoukis points out) with just $577 billion in spending cuts and $1.6 trillion in tax hikes, and just $2.177 trillion in deficit reduction over a decade.

Not only is that a paltry sum of deficit reduction, but since when did giving the government more money result in the politicians slowing down spending?

Rob Port is the editor of In 2011 he was a finalist for the Watch Dog of the Year from the Sam Adams Alliance and winner of the Americans For Prosperity Award for Online Excellence. In 2013 the Washington Post named SAB one of the nation's top state-based political blogs, and named Rob one of the state's best political reporters.

Related posts

  • A Citizen

    Buckle up kids. This plan doesn’t come with KY.

  • SigFan

    Lean Forward – He’s not done yet.

  • matthew_bosch

    Reagan related govenrment to a gluttonous big baby. I would describe government as a goldfish. Like a goldfish, government has and endless appetite and no cognitive ability to retrain itself from feeding. Two consequences occur when feeding is not regulated by the owner, one, it outgrows its bowl, two, it dies. Our goldfish has already outgrown its bowl, should we continue to feed it?

    • Snarkie

      Raygun said, “Social Security is totally funded by the payroll tax levied on employer and employee. If you reduce the outgo of SocialSecurity that money would not go into the general fund to reduce the deficit. It would go into the Social Security Trust Fund. So, Social Security has nothing to do with balancing a budget or erasing or lowering the deficit.” Oct. 7, 1984

  • HG

    Absolutely ridiculous proposal.

    I thought the President said he would reach across the isle to work with Republicans?
    I know it was a lie, but can’t he at least pretend to?

  • ND in MD

    Well, a few weeks ago he did say math above an 8th grade level is above his abilities, I guess he was being honest.
    How did this guy get into Harvard?

    • Uh, What?

      Affirmative Action (But we don’t actually know because he doesn’t want to share that info with the American Public)

    • banjo kid

      that would be a first for Obama to be honest .

  • Uh, What?

    How does one stop spending on two wars (that are currently deficit spending) and then “apply” that to “deficit reduction” overall?

    I think this is called “balance transfer.” It is when people use one credit card to pay off another.

    What we need is called “budgeting” and “living within our means” but of course, that isn’t going to happen…

  • chris

    I have my doubts regarding your claim. Will he really raise the taxes by 73% on the middle class or upper class, or are you just using more conspiratorial “Obama is evil” fearmonging tactics that got you in trouble many times before? Also, you have to take into consideration that he proposes having 2 dollars of spending cuts for every 1 dollar of tax increase. If this is true, then it seems to be balanced to me.

    • HG

      He pointed out the increases are 80% on the wealthy and 20% on business.
      Why is it so hard for you to believe Obama wants to raise taxes by 1.6t?

      • chris

        IF that’s what he said, it’s clear that 80% of the 1.6T will be on wealthy and 20% on business. It doesn’t mean, however, that the rich will see an 80% tax hike. See how words can get twisted around?

        • HG

          You’ve twisted them. Nobody ever said what you’re saying. 80% of the 1.6t tax increase will be on the wealthy and 20% on business. That is pretty straight forward.
          Why do you want to argue the fact?

  • Geoff

    For the benefit of all: give the libs exactly what they want. Let there bill come to the floor, all repubs should vote not present, the bill will pass, and our country will inevitably become insolvent in a short short time. Then they can no longer blame anyone but themselves. Once bankrupt we can then start rebuilding. If the status quo continues it will only prolong what we all know is coming (insolvency). The sooner it happens, the sooner we can get a fresh start.

  • chris

    If anything, there will be a 73% tax hike if there is no compromise and we go off the fiscal cliff.

    • Onslaught1066

      We need to raise taxes on the rich, don’t we?

      • chris

        yep. Tax them and not the middle class.

        • Onslaught1066

          But if a few middle class families have to take it up the A$$ in order to “Get the Rich” isn’t that a very small price to pay, after all?

          In fact was it not your esteemed vice presmadent who said, among other things, that it is the patriotic thing to do, pay high taxes?

          Are you going to accuse the middle class of unpatriotic behavior?

          Why do you hate America?

          Let me ask you, will a middle class tax cut increase revenue?
          Has cutting spending ever fed a hungry child?
          Will you make the perfect the enemy of the good?
          If raising taxes on the rich is a good thing then should we not do so “At any cost”?

          Or are you a flaming hypocrite?

          Don’t answer that, process crime and all.

          • Snarkie

            Aw poor baby. Did someone just lose an election because all they do is bitch and they have no real solutions and they refuse to stop pitching some idealistic utopian bullsh*t?

          • Onslaught1066

            Aww poor baby did someone kill his wife and now can’t get a date so he spends his days sniffing glue?

            What a buttfuckle, your still not as coherent as Lime Krushednutz or whatever he calls himself these days.

            Say buttfuckle, why don’t kill some random woman on the street, it’ll cheer you up.

  • chris

    I just saw in the news that in FRANCE there will be a 73% tax increase on the wealthy. Are you sure you guys didn’t confuse countries, either mistakenly or intentionally?

    • HG

      Chris. You’re struggling with the obvious. Don’t try so hard. It’s not a 73% tax increase, rather, it is a proposed reduction in the projected deficit 73% of which comes from tax increases (1.6t). That means there is no reduction in spending below the baseline increases. In fact, if you look at the President’s budget, you’ll see the proposed deficit spending increases the nation’s debt over ten years by another 6t. This is ridiculous. It is nothing approaching responsible budgeting. It is more irresponsible deficit spending.

  • Waski_the_Squirrel

    If taxes must be raised, they should be accompanied by at least equal cuts in spending. Part of the problem has been overspending, so this seems to me a reasonable compromise. I would prefer to go further yet: demonstrate a serious commitment to reform by making major cuts before asking for more money.

  • Neiman

    When they make that tax or taxes into law, we will absolutely enter into another major recession and the jobless rate could easily top 9%. When Obamacare is factored in, we are in for a real crisis, as these employers will not hire people whose very presence force them to pay for healthcare insurance or a hefty fine, so it is more and more part-time at lower wages, less hiring and more hoarding of the wealth to weather the economic storm. Lord Obama and his children are rejoicing now, but those smiles will be turned to sorrow when the economy tanks. For those few business caving in, their prices will have to soar, they will sell less products and services and go belly up and their employees will be out of work.

    As to Republicans if they go along with such tax increases they will pay at the voting booth, so they can only vote no and have Obama enact them by dictate (Executive Order).

    By the way, California a state losing businesses and their tax money by the bunches, just passed their own cap-and-trade, driving more businesses out of the State and cutting their own throats. The tax proposition that just passed, will assess those tax increases for LAST YEAR, it is taxing money already earned and that were earned under a lower tax rate.

  • Snarkie

    Shocker: GOP idiots think that spending without paying for it is just fine. And then they complain about deficits. How ya gonna fund that military that you poptarts refuse to cut? And before you start screeching about social security, perhaps we ought to remember what Raygun said about that, “Social Security is totally funded by the payroll tax levied on employer and employee. If you reduce the outgo of Social
    Security that money would not go into the general fund to reduce the deficit. It would go into the Social Security Trust Fund. So, Social Security has nothing to do with balancing a budget or erasing or lowering the deficit.” Oct. 7, 1984

    Happy hunting you crybaby f#cknuts who cannot do math and believe that money miracles will allow you to spend like fiends without taxing anyone. Grow the f#ck up, get your heads back in the game, or face a more brutal a$$ kicking the next time around.

  • $16179444

    i truly hope that anyone that voted for this asshat gets taxed until they have nothing left….reap what you sow.

    • banjo kid

      The welfare people that I know are already screaming bloody murder over the 50 bucks worth of stamps they no longer get. Guess who they voted for?

  • banjo kid

    It is amazing to see the liberals who think that business people will sit there and take what ever the government throws at them and just pay up and go along their merry way , the business people will look for ways to cut costs and one way is to not have any insurance for any of their employees and to make part time out of full time. Congratulations Obama you have started the snow ball down the hill, now all we have left is to watch it grow as it heads toward the bottom .