The Times Helpfully Reminds Voters of Obama's $7-a-Week-Tax Cut
As the November 2 congressional elections loom, a vote widely predicted to render a negative judgment on the Obama administration two years in, Michael Cooper provided a front-page look Tuesday at how good working class people have it under Barack Obama: "From Obama, the Tax Cut Nobody Heard Of."
Significantly, Cooper went to a Republican rally in North Carolina and asked a half-dozen guests what had happened to their taxes under Obama. Cooper found ignorant voters who had failed to realize that their taxes have plummeted by $400 a year (that's $7 a week!) thanks to a Obama administration change in the tax withholding rate in people's paychecks.
Bush did something involving a similar amount of money involving tax rebate checks in April 2008: $600 for those making under $75,000 a year. Strangely, the Times didn't run any front-page stories reminding voters of Bush's largesse in the run-up to the 2008 elections.
What if a president cut Americans' income taxes by $116 billion and nobody noticed?
It is not a rhetorical question. At Pig Pickin' and Politickin', a barbecue-fed rally organized here last week by a Republican women's club, a half-dozen guests were asked by a reporter what had happened to their taxes since President Obama took office.
"Federal and state have both gone up," said Bob Paratore, 59, from nearby Charlotte, echoing the comments of others.
After further prodding - including a reminder that a provision of the stimulus bill had cut taxes for 95 percent of working families by changing withholding rates - Mr. Paratore's memory was jogged.
"You're right, you're right," he said. "I'll be honest with you: it was so subtle that personally, I didn't notice it."
Few people apparently did.
In a troubling sign for Democrats as they head into the midterm elections, their signature tax cut of the past two years, which decreased income taxes by up to $400 a year for individuals and $800 for married couples, has gone largely unnoticed.
There was more muted mockery of ignorant Republicans:
Many volunteered that they thought the Bush tax cuts should be extended for all taxpayers, even for the wealthy ones whom Mr. Obama would like to exclude. But few had heard that there had also been Obama tax cuts - which will also expire next year unless extended, but have generated far less public debate.
Bob Deaton, 73, who wore a "Fair Tax" baseball cap, was surprised to hear that there were tax cuts in the $787 billion stimulus bill, which was wildly unpopular with many at the rally even though roughly a third of it was in the form of tax cuts.
"Tax cuts?" he asked. "Where were the tax cuts?"
Near the end Cooper mentioned Bush's rebate checks and the fact that by one measurement, those were actually more "stimulative" than Obama's tax cut.
But at least one prominent economist is questioning whether the method really was more effective. Joel B. Slemrod, a professor of economics at the University of Michigan, analyzed consumer surveys after the last rebate checks were sent out in 2008 by the Bush administration, and after this tax cut, called Making Work Pay, went into effect under the Obama administration.
After the 2008 rebates, he found that about a quarter of the households surveyed said they would use the money primarily to increase their spending. After the Obama tax cut took effect, he said, only 13 percent said they would use the money primarily to increase their spending. The Obama administration believes that people did spend the money, and cites analyses calling the cut one of the more effective forms of stimulus.
