David Axelrod: No 'Major Changes' To Tax Cut Deal As Van Hollen Calls For Estate Tax Vote

WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration on Sunday continued to hold firm on the idea that its framework for a deal on the expiring Bush tax cuts could not be changed in truly tangible ways.

"We have a framework, we have an agreement, and I don't anticipate that it's going to change greatly," White House senior adviser David Axelrod told ABC's "This Week." "There have been some changes that folks in the House were concerned about, the absence of an extension of an energy -- renewable energy tax credit. That is now included in the package. But in the main, I don't see major changes."

Axelrod's resoluteness was, in part, a response to the continued howls of discontent coming from several corners of the Democratic Party. On the Hill, in particular, Friday saw a lengthy (though largely symbolic) filibuster of the tax deal by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), the announcement of opposition to the framework by the Congressional Black Caucus, and incoming House Budget Committee Ranking Member Chris Van Hollen insisting that Democrats weren't bluffing when they demanded that the White House re-negotiate a provision on the estate tax.

Asked indirectly about Van Hollen's concerns, Axelrod again refused to budge. "The nature of compromise is that you have to accept things that you don't like in order to get things that are very important," he said. "This is a good package for the middle class, this is a good package for the economy."

The White House, as its sternness suggests, does seem to hold the majority of the cards in these negotiations. Provided that House Republicans vote en mass for the tax deal, the president only needs 40-or-so Democratic votes for passage. Even then, there may be an avenue to satisfy both parties. Van Hollen, on Sunday, acknowledged that the party wouldn't stop the entire deal, provided that they put an amendment to the estate tax provision up for a vote.

"We're not going to hold this thing up at the end of the day, but we do think that simple question should be put to the test," he told Fox News Sunday. "We're going to make sure the question is put to the test. We are going to ask the Republicans and others, are they going to block this entire deal, in order to protect $25 billion. That is the question."

Comments

[bluecrewman]

02:27 PM on 12/14/2010

Protect 25 billion? And they voted down 9-11 responders for 10 billion?

[bluecrewman]

02:03 PM on 12/14/2010

Estate tax giveaway = 25 b for walmart heirs. They need that money to create more high paying greeter jobs for the poor elderly who can't count on the SS for a net. At least the food stamps will still be around.Riiight.

[breakfast]

02:37 PM on 12/13/2010

Wow, Obama is finally digging in his heels, fighting back, and taking a stand based on principal. The principle is: "When I sell out, I stay sold out."

[RudyHaugeneder]

11:33 AM on 12/13/2010

In two years, after getting kicked out of the White House, Obama will join a Wall Street firm as an "official" well-paid adviser to a well-know firm -- goldman sachs anybody.

[EdCorner]

11:16 AM on 12/13/2010

Now they've garnered an army of shills that support this bill - and none of them are known for their high moral character and wise choices. Cum-bay-ahma needs to back off and take a lesson from those with a backbone in Congress. No compromise!

[rosiebond007]

11:14 AM on 12/13/2010

It's still early days in December - let the damn bills expire and start working on it in January.

That way the Republicans will get the FULL SHARE of the blame.

[teaserpony]

11:42 AM on 12/13/2010

Yes it's called HARDBALL or Smash mouth football.

[rosiebond007]

11:10 AM on 12/13/2010

Of all people at Obama's side, you David should have been our daily eyes and ears.

Or are you already too removed from us foks in the middle class ?

You could have done so much more.

[Greybeard53]

11:08 AM on 12/13/2010

Banks have taken to foreclosing after 1 or 2 missed payments. This is a continuation and acceleration of a massive land grab. Banks saw citizens accumulate too much equity, and they want it all for themselves. Our late lamented President is helping them steal with both hands.

[rosiebond007]

11:11 AM on 12/13/2010

Makes you wonder what they're going to do with their huge catalogue of decrepit houses.

There will be ghost towns sprouting up all over America courtesy of the banks !

[Klarsonent]

11:59 AM on 12/13/2010

Agreed. Sales on any of these homes will diminish, due to the more stringent underwriting standards for getting a home loan. My guess: foreigners will come in and buy a lot of them for investment properties.

[caleb36]

11:23 AM on 12/13/2010

Great post. Makes one wonder if the mortgage crisis was manufactured.

[Klarsonent]

11:59 AM on 12/13/2010

The same thought has crossed my mind.

[Twayn]

12:30 PM on 12/13/2010

How can you have any doubt about that anymore?

[Roy Merritt old car guy]

11:06 AM on 12/13/2010

I was really afraid that George Jr. would get the partial Social Security privatized and that would be the end of Social Security. Almost no one saves enough money for retirement because they don't understand that to do so would mean you don't buy the new car or boat or live in anything but a 3 bedroom rambler. You do without to retire but if you save some or have a company pension plus Social Security you can plan for a modest retirement. This bill is the back door way of killing Social Security by cutting the funds to it then the fight will be on to restore the funds with the Republicans winning on that again. If we could get the senate down to just ten Republicans they would win because the Democrats don't know how to fight or are just as beholding to the 400 billonaires as the Republicans. If you are a small business person or a working person how do you vote Republican? It is like we have a nation that suffers from masochism.

[rosiebond007]

11:12 AM on 12/13/2010

How come the Dems don't see this and stop this montrous move ?

[Twayn]

12:33 PM on 12/13/2010

Because many of the Dems, too, are controlled by Big Finance and Big Business via the Democratic Leadership Council.

[fisherdmin]

11:06 AM on 12/13/2010

Let me see if I understand this correctly. Our President (for whom I enthusiastically voted) believes in compromising with the Republicans, but refuses to extend the same courtesy to his own party? Couple this observation with the clip I saw the other day of a Fox reporter supporting Obama while a Democratic senator gave a scathing review of Obama and I am beginning to doubt my sanity/sobriety.

[teaserpony]

11:00 AM on 12/13/2010

We got just less than two short years to elect a real democrat in the White House. This bunch of Bush clones MUST go. The new polls show Obama is dropping like rock with his "base", no movement upward with the indies and the right no need to ask.

[garymc8]

10:56 AM on 12/13/2010

Sure seems stupid to PISS OFF YOUR ENTIRE BASE.
2012 will prove to be a great year for the progressive/independant

[Twayn]

12:34 PM on 12/13/2010

It's not just the base he is angering. Independents don't like this tax cut deal either.

[NotMcCain]

10:56 AM on 12/13/2010

I don't understand Axelrod's message. Here's the summary:

"We completely ostracized Congressional Democrats from the tax cut negotiations with Republicans. Republicans "wouldn't budge" so we gave in on, basically, everything they wanted.

In exchange, they gave us unemployment benefit extensions that they would have voted for anyway before adjourning.

Then we tell Democrats in Congress to "Shut up and accept it. No changes."

Pretty outrageous position, imo. Congressional Democrats are elected to REPRESENT us. Telling them, "Shut up and accept our Republican giveaway" is pretty shocking.

I support the President, but maybe some criticism will bring about a re-examination of the kind of mindset in the WH that thinks the above scenario is a-okay.

[Dave Thinkster Paulson]

10:49 AM on 12/13/2010

Isn't it amazing how "stern" Obama can be with Democrats, yet how accommodating he is with Republicans? Well not really. Not when you understand that this entire "tax deal" is just so much political theater. If it was anything else, we would have seen a fight.

Instead we heard the President consistently messaging against tax cuts for the rich, and then before negotiations ever began, cave and give the Republicans everything they want and more. He not only hands them the income tax cuts for the top 2%, the very cuts he was elected campaigning against, but he piles on a $88 billion gift for the richest one-tenth of one percent -- that's the top .1% -- .001 -- WTF?

Obama's argument is that this was the best we could get, that relief for those suffering most from the economic extraction perpetrated by Wall Street can only be gained by gifting those who have far more than they can even use, much less need. So, Americans again take the bitter pill and accept that Obama tried but Republicans were intransigent.

The problem is that the only thing in this deal for the average American is another injection of morphine. The American middle class is suffering from a virus that gains strength from every "deal" that's made. The disease that killing our nation is GREED, and the symptom is concentration of wealth. This "deal" feeds the virus while failing to treat the symptom and instead only prescribes temporary pain management.

What

[Artos]

10:40 AM on 12/13/2010

Wow think of the irony. The White House refuses to budge. When dealing with uncompromising Rethugs they budge wider than the Grand Canyon, but when it comes to saying "F**k Off " to their constituency they have not a problem in the world and they refuse to budge. Imagine that.

[garymc8]

10:57 AM on 12/13/2010

TWO WAY ATREET. COME 2012 WE WON'T BUDGE FROM OUR HOMES OR WE WON'T BUDGE THE DEM HANDLE ONLY THE PROGRESSIVE HANDLE.