Political Animal
Blog
The Hill told readers this morning that Warren Buffett “indicated Friday he did not agree with the president’s proposal to raise taxes on millionaires.” Around the same time, Mark Halperin ran this headline: “Buffet [sic] Seems Cool to Buffet Rule.” House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s (R-Va.) office has been pushing the line all morning that Buffett doesn’t support the so-called Buffett Rule.
So, what’s the real story? Did Buffett break from the White House and reject the same idea he’d already endorsed? Cantor’s office may have successfully spun the media, but the truth is far more mundane. Pat Garofalo has the transcript of the exchange on CNBC this morning that’s caused such a fuss.
Q: Are you happy you said yes [to having your name on the Buffett rule]?
BUFFETT: Sure, I wrote about it.
Q: Are you happy with the way it’s been described? Is the program that the White House has presented — a million dollars and over — your program?
BUFFETT: Well, the precise program, I don’t know what their program will be. My program will be on the very high incomes that are taxed very low. Not just high incomes, some guy making $50 million a year playing baseball, his taxes won’t change. Make $50 million a year appearing on television, his income won’t change. But if they make a lot of money and they pay a very low tax rate, like me, it would be changed by a minimum tax that would only bring them up to what other people pay.
There may be some subtle policy nuances between the White House line and Buffett’s, but they’re clearly aiming at the same policy goal. Reports that Buffett is rejecting the administration’s line are pretty misleading.
What about this notion that actors and star athletes making $50 million a year won’t see a tax change? As Garofalo explained, this is “entirely consistent with the Buffett rule, since wages that athletes earn are taxed as income (at 35 percent), not as an investment (and therefore at 15 percent) like much of Buffett’s income. It’s that break on investment income that, in large part, allows the wealthy to pay lower tax rates.”
And for Republicans to suddenly look at Buffett as some kind of ally is just silly. A half-hour after the CNBC interview, the Berkshire Hathaway CEO did another interview, this time on CNN rejecting the conservative line even more forcefully: “[T]here has been class warfare the last 20 years, and my class has won. We are the ones that got their tax rates reduced dramatically.” Even in the CNBC interview, though Buffett did not endorse the entirety of the American Jobs Act, he was asked whether he disagrees with the plan to raise taxes on those making $250,000 or more. Buffett replied, “No, no, no, no.”
Those trying to argue that Obama and Buffett are somehow at odds just aren’t telling the whole story.
Facebook
Twitter
&p[url]=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonmonthly.com%2Fpolitical-animal%2F2011_09%2Fwhat_buffett_said_and_what_he032538.php&p[images][0]=http://s3.amazonaws.com/wamo/admin/logo_political_animal_2012.gif&p[summary]=The%20Hill%20told%20readers%20this%20morning%20that%20Warren%20Buffett%20%22indicated%20Friday%20he%20did%20not%20agree%20with%20the%20president%27s%20proposal%20to%20raise%20taxes%20on%20millionaires.%22%20Around%20the%20same%20time%2C%20Mark%20Halperin%20ran%20this%20headline%3A%20%22Buffet%20%5Bsic%5D%20Seems%20Cool%20to%20Buffet%20Rule.%22){kind=link}
DAY on September 30, 2011 1:33 PM:
Yes, but, he probably eats $16 muffins for breakfast.
(In the same modest Omaha house he has lived in for fifty years. . .)
martin on September 30, 2011 1:36 PM:
$50 million a year to appear on TV? Not many of those around anyway. Maybe we should call it the Charlie Sheen Clause.
Big Name Actors and Athletes generally do incorporate in order to protect their earnings, and consequently could as an individual, pay at a much lower rate than the average person. Their loopholes should be scrutinized as much as the CEO;s.
Lifelong Dem on September 30, 2011 1:37 PM:
That could have been the same interview where Buffett claimed he helped Al Gore invent the Internet.
Republicans always win these games because the media is full of liberals. And Mark Halperin is always a dick.
Zach W. on September 30, 2011 1:37 PM:
Hey look! Another day, another bald-faced lie from Eric Cantor. He is becoming a parody of himself.
Sam on September 30, 2011 1:38 PM:
The lack of a competent media is destroying this country.
jjm on September 30, 2011 1:40 PM:
Gossip with a Goebbels flavor.
John Drabble on September 30, 2011 1:41 PM:
They should call this blog the Obama apologist rag.
At any rate I stopped by after seeing a very positive post by you elsewhere about Obama assassinating two American citizens in Yemen.
In that post you didn't mention that killing two American citizens without them being found guilty in a court of law and sentenced by a judge to death is just plain old MURDER.
Why do you hate the constitution Mr Benen?
Sam on September 30, 2011 1:41 PM:
By the way, I love how that supposed neutral interviewer on CNN used the "class warfare" line straight out of a Republican talking point memo and argued that since the Buffett Rule would not solve the entire deficit, we should just not do it at all. We are so screwed as a country.
dweb on September 30, 2011 1:43 PM:
Not only do the Dems need to do lots more messaging pointing out the fundamental differences in philosophy between the two parties (They refuse to increase taxes on millionaires and billionaires but think nothing of cutting funds for education, emergency response and home heating).
They need to begin daily messaging which points out that the Republicans are the cause of the President's inability to move forward: The crisis in judicial nominations, the number of filibusters this session versus any time in past history, Boehner, Cantor and McConnell statements that their goal is to block action by the President to make him a one-term office holder.
Why is this critical? Because a huge swath of the electorate does not pay the kind of attention we do to the arcna of politics. They may agree that Bush caused the economic chaos we face, but it is very easy for them to blame Obama for not cleaning up the mess. We need to trumpet what he has done, but also continually remind people that he is trying, but the Republicans are doing everything they can to avoid doing anything about unemployment, jobs creation, economic stimulus, judicial appointments or social safety net.
Eeyore on September 30, 2011 2:06 PM:
Maybe Cantor will come back and say "This was not intended to be a factual tweet."
Gandalf on September 30, 2011 2:13 PM:
John Drabble or should you be called John Drivel. Your a complete idiot. First off your post has as much relation to the article here as the sun does to concrete roads, They're both in the same universe. It's obvious that your not the least bit objective. Yes Benen is a liberal an yet he doesn't blindly agree with everything Obama does or says. So saying, your just an asshole. I'm pretty sure you can't produce one bit of evidence that you objected to Bush going to war in Iraq based on lies and subsequently not only being responsible for thousands of Americans deaths but tens of thousands of Iraqis deaths. Yet you have the unmittigated gall to get on Obama about having an avowed enemy of people of the United Staes killed. You are a slime.
Anonymous on September 30, 2011 2:23 PM:
"Those trying to argue that Obama and Buffett are somehow at odds just aren’t telling the whole story."
Actually, those trying to argue that Obama and Buffett are somehow at odds are DELIBERATELY LYING!
Cha on September 30, 2011 3:28 PM:
So the The Hill is full of shit, too. I already knew Halperin is crap. Whatever..now Warren can get the news out more Emphatically that yes he does agree with the President and ask why does does Eric Cantor lie as much as he breathes?
DenverRight on September 30, 2011 3:30 PM:
I like this post! If Buffett is proposing that there should be a "minimum alternative tax" on people earning over $200,000 (250 for couples), I'm ALL IN for that. Of course , I know we ALREADY have an Alternative Minimum Tax for incomes. But I would be happy to see the loophole of capital gains (as a substitute for income), eliminated. (We'll deal with the shell shock on Wall Street later).
Seriously. But let's remember that Obama's plan, to expire the Bush tax cuts ONLY on the top 2%, would have done NOTHING to eliminate that Capital Gains loophole that Buffett and the Wall Street brokers have enjoyed all these years.
Closing loopholes, eliminating exemptions and deductions, and treating investment income as earnings without a rate break, is a good way to ensure that "earnings" are taxed at a fair rate for the landed class.
Al Swearengen on September 30, 2011 3:30 PM:
Cantor will continue lying about it, the rightwing media will continue lying about it. They'll all continue lying about it, even after Buffett has said he supports the plan, because there's no consequence to lying in modern America. Hell, you can get rich doing it, just look at Limbaugh, Beck, and Fox News.