Clyburn: Obama to focus on revenues
April 11th, 2011
10:47 AM ET
12 years ago

Clyburn: Obama to focus on revenues

Washington (CNN)– Democratic Rep. James Clyburn, the assistant minority leader, suggested Monday that revenue issues will be a focus of the debt plan President Barack Obama will lay out on Wednesday.

"Well my plan going forward would be, let's get rid of these subsidies for big oil companies…Let's get rid of these tax breaks of people who are creating jobs overseas," the South Carolina congressman said on CNN's American Morning on Monday. "I think that's what the president is going to be talking about when he talks about revenues and expenditures. He's going to be talking about closing these loop holes. He's going to be talking about getting rid of these subsidies and putting our fiscal house in order."

Preparing for the upcoming debt-ceiling drama, Clyburn, who in 2009 introduced the Access for All Americans Act, which sought to increase the number of community health centers and provide medical care to low-income patients, said he does not plan to vote on eliminating health care reform and vows to look at the proposed bill in a comprehensive way.

"We should not go back to discriminating against people with preexisting conditions and to getting people kicked off their health insurance policies as soon as they get real sick. That's not what a compassionate government ought to be about," Clyburn said.

Republicans have signaled a willingness to exchange their support on raising the debt ceiling for concessions in health care and environmental policy, but Clyburn
stressed the importance for ongoing talks not to stray far from the pivotal issue at hand. The congressman said that now is not the time for ideological debates such as abortion that "have no place being tied to budget talks."

"None of that should be tied to the budget. We should be working on getting people back to work. Here we are, one hundred days now come April 14th and they have not brought forth one single job-creating piece of legislation," Clyburn said. "So that's what we ought to be doing here. People don't want us arguing over what should or should not be their moral underpinnings."

Congress must find an agreement in mid-May before the United States reaches its legal borrowing limit of $14.29 trillion. Even though the U.S. isn't going "gangbusters" yet, Clyburn is optimistic that there is enough bipartisan support to eliminate the deficit, as he helped do during the Clinton administration.

"We've created 1.8 million new jobs in the last 13 months," Clyburn said. "I think that's moving in the right direction."

Filed under: Budget • James Clyburn
soundoff (22 Responses)
  1. Mark from Louisiana

    Will they also go after GE? Will they also go after General Motors whom thanks to it's one of a kind structured bankruptcy ordered by the obama administration, will not pay any taxes for ten years or more, thanks to being able to carry many years of looses over into the new company?
    Will they go after the millions of able people collecting disability checks? Will they go after people who could work but instead sit on the porch and collect welfare?
    Will they go after the millions of people driving $50,000 SUV's to the grocery store and paying for their food with food stamps?

    April 11, 2011 10:55 am at 10:55 am |
  2. ThinkAgain

    Just because Republicans don't want to deal with reality, doesn't mean our country should suffer.

    The ONLY way to balance the budget is to raise taxes on those entities (personal and corporate) that can most afford it.

    Here's a starting list:

    1. Raise the top individual income rate from the current 36% to 39% (what it was under Reagan).

    2. Eliminate the $60 BILLION annual subsidy to the oil industry (they are making record profits, I'm sure they'll be fine).

    3. Raise the FICA income limit from the current $106,000 to $250,000 (this will help keep Social Security solvent; with our aging population, this is just common sense).

    4. Change the tax laws so companies like GE that made BILLIONS in profits last year actually pay federal tax. Last year they even got a multi-BILLION dollar refund! (They use infrastructure like roads, bridges, sealanes, police, fire, EMT and expect an educated populace to work for them and buy their products; the least they can do is help PAY for all of this!).

    5. STOP cutting programs that help the most vulnerable among us. That is not only morally wrong, but all you have to do is take a look at the recent unrest in Egypt and elsewhere to see the end result of denying opportunity and a living wage economy to the average citizen.

    April 11, 2011 11:02 am at 11:02 am |
  3. ThinkAgain

    Ronald Reagan cut taxes on the wealthy and increased military spending, saying that "trickle-down" economics (give the wealthy enough money and at some point it trickles/tinkles down on the rest of us) would create a balanced budget.

    GHW Bush referred to this as "voodoo economics," citing the obvious fact that when you cut revenue and raise spending, you end up with deficits.

    Well, what do you know: That's exactly what happened. Under Reagan, our debt-to-GDP ratio hit 50%. And Reagan accepted this reality and RAISED TAXES (including a large tax increase on business in 1982, higher payroll taxes enacted in 1983 and higher energy taxes in 1984). He raised taxes a TOTAL OF 9 TIMES DURING HIS PRESIDENCY.

    Conservatives need to start dealing with reality like their sainted Reagan did – AND SUPPORT INCREASING REVENUE BY RAISING TAXES!

    April 11, 2011 11:07 am at 11:07 am |
  4. annie s

    Thank you Rep. Clyburn. Now, please convince the American people that we should not achieve budget cuts and deficit reduction solely on the backs of women, the poor and the middle class. The Republicans want to bring us back to their failed reverse Robin Hood policies of taking from everyone else to give to the wealthy and corporations.

    April 11, 2011 11:08 am at 11:08 am |
  5. AZ DEM

    The republicans have done nothing to create jobs while they have been in Congress even though this was one of their main pledges in the 2010 mid-terms. They are showing everyone exactly who they are fighting for and if you aren't as wealthy as many of them are then ITS NOT YOU. As long as the unemployment rate stays where it is and President Obama continues to portray to the American people that he is the voice of reason between the two parties he should be sitting pretty nice come 2012.

    April 11, 2011 11:10 am at 11:10 am |
  6. Mikey

    If we are to solve our long term fiscal issues we need a solution that addresses all facets of the problem. That means taxes, social security, medicare, defense, and discretionary spending. We have been beating up discretionary spending (12% of the overall budget) and there is only small room for improvement there. How about if we do the following:
    1. Bring individual taxes back to the levels in the 1990s, when we had a budget surplus AND a booming economy under Clinton.
    2. Reform the corporate tax system to make sure large corporations doing business in the U.S. pay their fair share regardless of where they are domiciled or what tricks they play.
    3. Develop a plan to address the long-term structural issues with social security, medicare and medicaid that is fair to people in or close to retirement.
    4. Move toward a smarter, leaner military that protects American interests without busting the budget. We spend as much as the rest of the world combined on military.
    5. Cut waste and ineffective programs.
    6. Ensure we invest in the education, infrastructure, and the technologies of the future.

    April 11, 2011 11:11 am at 11:11 am |
  7. Tom

    "We've created 1.8 million new jobs in the last 13 months," Clyburn said. "I think that's moving in the right direction."

    Giving a one-year shot-in-the-arm to states to avoid teacher layouts doesn't count as "creating jobs." Get ready for lies and more lies in the upcoming weeks...

    April 11, 2011 11:11 am at 11:11 am |
  8. Anonymous

    Good. Corporations should not get tax breaks to send our jobs overseas.

    April 11, 2011 11:15 am at 11:15 am |
  9. Name king

    Hey, reality is we live in a supply and demand capitalism economy, the private sector especially small businesses rely heavily on the public sector demand power, since they can't do like the big corporations do, with their robots that are replacing people, pick up and move over seas to find demand. We need a demand stability within our local communities to speed growth and job creation, if the owners are being taxed a little bit more, but customers keep flowing through their doors, they won't feel a difference, if especially if they are getting tax break for their businesses. If the repugs cut away the customers money,NAND their jobs, then the owners have to make a decision when less customers are coming through their doors. They either lay folks off to let ends meet, or they shut down and see if their is anywhere else with demand money to open shop. More than likely that won't help, because government cuts will be everywhere.

    April 11, 2011 11:20 am at 11:20 am |
  10. Rudy NYC

    Let's face the facts. The Bush tax cuts did not create as many jobs as foretold. The Bush tax cuts were criticized as being unsustainable when they were proposed, and have long since proven that they are not sustainable.

    We actually add a budget surplus when they were enacted, and were in the process of paying down the national debt. For some reason, some felt that the economy needed a stimulus. True, the economy slowed some after the WTC attacks, but that was mainly due to temporary disruptions for Wall St. firms. increases in the price of oil, and other economic disruptions associated with the attacks and the Afghan War. The economy really didn't need stimulating at that time, it was moving along just fine.

    April 11, 2011 11:28 am at 11:28 am |
  11. Four and The Door

    "We've created 1.8 million new jobs in the last 13 months," Clyburn said. "I think that's moving in the right direction."
    Actually, the unemployment really started coming down in the last month. Thank you American voters. And thank you House Republicans for stepping up and getting government back in support of economic growth instead of economic disaster.

    April 11, 2011 11:28 am at 11:28 am |
  12. Rudy NYC

    Rep. Ryan claims to have $6T in spending cuts. He needs to check his math. Tax cuts are spending, which the GOP consistently ignore. Factor in the tax cuts and he has almost no cuts in spending, especially when you consider that he purports that unemployment will drop below 3% in a few years. HA!

    April 11, 2011 11:31 am at 11:31 am |
  13. Fair is Fair

    "Well my plan going forward would be, let's get rid of these subsidies for big oil companies…Let's get rid of these tax breaks of people who are creating jobs overseas"

    Really, Clyburn? Really??? Hey, I agree with getting rid of the oil subsidies and the outsourcing. But quite honestly, the amount is paltry compared to the overall deficit. So YES... do the EASY thing get rid of them... and do your JOB and make the HARD decisions on the meatier things in the budget.

    April 11, 2011 11:40 am at 11:40 am |
  14. Ryche

    I love how the political winds in obamas head are constantly changing... He must sit back and watch the media and whatever it is the media is talking about that day, good old ear leader will jump on it with his laser like focus and is talking about he'll fix that one thing.. it's all BS... now all of a sudden he's a defecit hawk and is going to get our "fiscal house in order".. what a joke... He's a lightweight and has no real principles.. just depends on how the wind is blowing that day... Btw mr clyburn, what happens to gas prices and any oil based product prices when you stop subsidising big oil.. Well they will go up.. the oil companies will pass that price onto the consumer.. that means you and me... so instead of 4 dollar a gallon gas like you have now, you will have 5 or 6 dollar gas... once again, a typical democrat who has NO CLUE what unintended consequences really means...Typical democrat, with only one linear thought ever... Tax the rich... Take from those who have and give to those who have not...

    April 11, 2011 11:49 am at 11:49 am |
  15. Biggge

    Now that sounds great.. I see how this Morning the media is trying to steer clear of the budget issue. We remember what cuts the GOP tried to make on.

    Assult on women health
    Assult on medicare
    Assult on the working class
    The continued assult on the poor
    Assult ob Education....
    Not one budget cut proposal on the wealthy of Corporate tax....
    Outragous......2012 should be very interesting....can't wait... GOPers....

    April 11, 2011 11:52 am at 11:52 am |
  16. Aaron

    Mr. Clyburn shouldn't get his hopes up. Obama doesn't have the backbone to stand up to Repubs and insist that the rich and oil companies pay their fair share of taxes.

    April 11, 2011 11:57 am at 11:57 am |
  17. smithie12

    I agree !!! the budget cannot be balanced on the backs of the poor, middle class and the elderly !!! the wealthy can afford a higher tax rate, subsidies for oil and gas drilling must be ended and finally no American corporation should be allowed to use accounting "magic" to avoid taxes altogether !!!

    April 11, 2011 12:01 pm at 12:01 pm |
  18. john

    Omama needs focus on one thing, STOP SPENDING OUR TAXPAYER MONEY (PERIOD)

    April 11, 2011 12:03 pm at 12:03 pm |
  19. rob

    Rep Ryan's plan addresses the tax loop holes for corporations in a way that would create a better tax environment in the US. By reducing the corp tax rates, they will repatriate billions in revenues that are being kept overseas where the tax rates are better. If President Obama focuses solely on "Revenues" moving forward and not bring forward a real plan to reduce the long term issues of entitlements, debt and spending, it shows he is not serious about solving the financial crises we face.

    April 11, 2011 12:04 pm at 12:04 pm |
  20. Rudy NYC

    Rep. Ryan, like most conservatives, wishes to do away with Health Care Reform passed by Obama. They wish a return to insurance companies denying people coverage with pre-existing conditions, or any other reason they could rationalize. This is the exact reason why Medicare was created in the first place.

    Insurance companies have no wish to insure those who are sick, frail, or have pre-existing conditions. Most seniors in this country have a health concern of one form or another. By the standards set by the health insurance industry, most seniors are undesireable and therefore uninsurable. So, the US goverment became their guaranteed insurer.

    Rep. Ryan wants to remove that guarantee and issue seniors a voucher to be used purchase health insurance on the private market. He wants seniors to purchase insurance from the same companies that he wants to re-enable the ability to deny coverage to anyone they choose.

    So what do you think this means for Ryan's voucher program? We will have millions of uninsured seniors subject to the whims of the "Death Panels" of the private insurers.

    April 11, 2011 12:04 pm at 12:04 pm |
  21. Jerry

    Isn't too little too late? Just asking! Mr. Clyburn, I know you are in love with President NObama, but isn't it time you stop the love fest and back kissing, and became somewhat more realistic?

    April 11, 2011 12:05 pm at 12:05 pm |
  22. Dutch/Bad Newz, VA aka ConservaFascists

    I hope the President does go after these oil subsidies. I keep hearing the phrase "shared sacrifice" but the middle class are the only one's sacrificing. Paul Ryan's budget is the epitome of fascism. The last time wealthy people had a 25% tax rate, a Great Depression followed.

    April 11, 2011 12:08 pm at 12:08 pm |