Despite Weaknesses In The Economy, Obama Has Called For Tax Increases That Would Impact Job Creation And Slow Growth:

The Wall Street Journal: Obama's Tax Increases Would Impact Job Creation, And Would "Likely Produce Unimpressive Growth And Job Numbers In The First Year Of The New Obama Presidency, And Likely Beyond." "The reality is that the creators of new jobs in the economy are more likely to be rising entrepreneurs or filers under Subchapter S, who typically pay taxes at individual rates. Hanging three or four tax millstones around their productive necks in January if the economy is weak will likely produce unimpressive growth and job numbers in the first year of the new Obama Presidency, and likely beyond. That in turn could drag down the Democrats in Congress who will get credit for voting these higher taxes into law." (Editorial, "ObamaTax 3.0," The Wall Street Journal, 9/9/08)

The [Manchester, NH] Union Leader: Obama's Planned Tax Increases Would "Have Negative Economic Effects." "Sen. Barack Obama knows that tax increases harm the economy. So why does he still plan to raise taxes if he is elected President? Obama plans to let a big portion of President Bush's tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 expire. That in itself would be a monumental tax increase. It also would push the U.S. corporate tax rate -- already the highest in the world -- higher. ... The sad part is: Obama knows that his plan will have negative economic effects. But he's push ing it anyway because populism wins votes, regardless of whether it's actually good for America." (Editorial, "Obama's Admission: Tax Hikes Hurt The Economy," The [Manchester, NH] Union Leader, 9/11/08)

The Las Vegas Review-Journal Called Obama's Tax Hikes "A Recipe For Economic Disaster." "[Obama] wants to the raise tax rate on the top income bracket from 35 percent to 39.6 percent, nearly double the tax rate on capital gains and dividends, and eliminate all tax breaks for the gas and oil industries and private equity firm managers. Talk about a recipe for economic disaster." (Editorial, "More Class Warfare," Las Vegas Review-Journal, 9/20/07)

Obama Would Raise Taxes On Small Businesses And Seniors:

Two-Thirds Of Small Business Income Would Be Subject To Obama's Significantly Higher Tax Rates. "The conservative argument (and that of the John McCain campaign) is that Obama's stated plan to raise taxes on households making $250,000 or more in income is a tax increase on small business. The simple answer to this dilemma can be found in the IRS Statistics of Income Bulletin (Table 1.4, for those who are interested). So what do the data say? In 2006 (the latest year available), $706 billion of such income was reported to the Internal Revenue Service. Of this, about half was reported by households in the top marginal income tax rate. Interestingly, two-thirds of this income was reported by households making $250,000 per year or more -- the very same households that Obama wants to increase taxes on. The Obama campaign maintains that the number of small-business owners is what's important. Economists kn ow what matters is the tax rate that's applied to the bulk of small-business income. Make no mistake about it: Obama's plan to raise taxes on households making more than $250,000 will raise taxes on most small-business profits in America." (Grover G. Norquist, Op-Ed, "An Argument Against Obama's Tax Plan," The Politico, 7/11/08)

According To An Analysis By The Tax Policy Center, Obama Would Raise Taxes On Nearly 10 Million Senior Households. "Even though Senator Obama's plan eliminates individual income taxes for seniors with incomes less than $50,000, his plan would raise taxes for almost 10 million senior households, over a third of the total." (Len Burman, Surachai Khitatrakun, Greg Leiserson, Jeff Rohaly, Eric Toder, and Bob Williams, "A Preliminary Analysis Of The 2008 Presidential Candidates' Tax Plans," www.taxpolicycenter.org, 6/20/08, p. 28)

• "On Average, Seniors Would Face A Tax Increase Of About 2 Percent Of Income." (Len Burman, Surachai Khitatrakun, Greg Leiserson, Jeff Rohaly, Eric Toder, and Bob Williams, "A Preliminary Analysis Of The 2008 Presidential Candidates' Tax Plans," www.taxpolicycenter.org, 6/20/08, p. 28)

Obama's "Patriot Employers" Plan Would Impose Significant Tax Increases That Would Make "U.S. Companies Less Profitable And Less Competitive World-Wide":

Obama's Proposal Penalizes Most American Companies That Have Subsidiaries Abroad With "A Big Tax Increase." "Under Mr. Obama's plan, 'patriot employers' qualify for a 1% tax credit on their profits. To finance this tax break, American companies with subsidiaries abroad would have to pay the U.S. corporate tax on profits earned abroad, rather than the corporate tax of the host country where they are earned. Since the U.S. corporate tax rate is 35%, while most of the world has a lower rate, this amounts to a big tax increase on earnings owned abroad." (Editorial, "Obama's 'Patriot' Act," The Wall Street Journal, 2/27 /08)

• "Put Another Way, U.S. Companies Would Suddenly Have To Pay A Higher Tax Rate Than Their Chinese, Japanese And European Competitors." (Editorial, "Obama's 'Patriot' Act," The Wall Street Journal, 2/27/08)
• "Apparently Mr. Obama Believes That By Making U.S. Companies Less Profitable And Less Competitive World-Wide, They Will Somehow Be Able To Create More Jobs In America." (Editorial, "Obama's 'Patriot' Act," The Wall Street Journal, 2/27/08)

Obama Voted In Favor Of The Democrats' FY 2009 Budget, Which Raises Tax Rates For Americans Earning $42,000 Or More:

Obama Voted Twice In Favor Of The Democrats' FY 2009 Budget Resolution. (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 Raises Taxes On Individuals Earning Approximately $42,000 Or More. "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." (FactCheck.org, "The $32,000 Question," www.factcheck.org, 7/11/08)

NOTE: The Democrats' Budget Raises Tax Rates On The 25, 28, 33 And 35 Percent Brackets. For 2008, The 25 Percent Bracket Begins At The Taxable Income Level Of $32,550, Which Is The Figure After All Deductions And Exclusions Are Subtracted From Total Earnings. ("2008 Individual Income Tax Rates, Standard Deductions, Personal Exemptions, And Filing Thresholds," www.taxpolicycenter.org, 11/4/07; Andrew Taylor, "Presidential Hopefuls To Vote On Budget," The Associated Press, 3/13/08)

Aside From Calling For Higher Taxes, Obama Still Lacks A Coherent Economic Message:

This Late In The Game, It Is Still Unclear What Is Obama's "Ideology" On Economics. "Obama, on the other hand, has ... a less obvious ideology. Well before this point on the presidential calendar, it's usually clear where a candidate fits within the political spectrum of his party. With Obama, there is vast disagreement about just how liberal he is, especially on the economy. ... Some of the confusion stems from Obama's own strategy of presenting himself as a postpartisan figure. A few weeks ago, I joined him on a flight from Orlando to Chicago and began our conversation by asking about his economic approach. He started to answer, but then interrupted himself. 'My core economic theory is pragmatism,' he said, 'figuring out what works.' This, of course, is not the whole story. Invoking pragmatism doesn't hel p the average voter much; ideology, though it often gets a bad name, matters, because it offers insight into how a candidate might actually behave as president." (David Leonhardt, Op-Ed, "How Obama Reconciles Dueling Views On Economy," The New York Times Magazine, 8/24/08)

• "For All His Skills As A Storyteller And A Speaker, He Has Not Settled On A Compelling Message About How To Put The Economy On The Right Path." (David Leonhardt, Op-Ed, "How Obama Reconciles Dueling Views On Economy," The New York Times Magazine, 8/24/08)

Obama's Lack Of An Economic Message Has Contributed To His "Worst Moments" On The Campaign Trail, And Resulted In Policies "That Seem More Political Than Economic." "The lack of such a message [on the economy] has contributed to several of his worst moments over the last year. Most recently, the campaign has come out with a series of small-bore, populist energy plans -- a windfall-profits tax on oil companies, a crackdown on speculators, a partial opening of the strategic oil reserve -- that seem more political than economic. The most glaring misstep on this score was his comment this spring about bitter rural voters clinging to guns and religion. It was, in effect, an admission that his own message about the economy hadn't yet broken through." (David Leonhardt, Op-Ed, "How Obama Reconciles Dueling Views On Economy," The New York Times Magazine, 8/24/08)