Obama champions American resolve over “declinists”

“Obama makes pitch for economic fairness in State of the Union address

By Lucy Madison

In his third State of the Union address on Tuesday, President Obama made a strong pitch for economic fairness in America, outlining a plan that painted a stark contrast between his vision for the nation's future and those of many Republicans -- both sitting before him and running for president. 

Speaking before a joint session of the bitterly divided Congress, Mr. Obama described America as he hopes to see it become. "Think about the America within our reach: A country that leads the world in educating its people. An America that attracts a new generation of high-tech manufacturing and high-paying jobs. A future where we're in control of our own energy, and our security and prosperity aren't so tied to unstable parts of the world. An economy built to last, where hard work pays off, and responsibility is rewarded," he said.

"We can do this," Mr. Obama said. "I know we can, because we've done it before."

Keeping America's "promise alive," Mr. Obama said, is "the defining issue of our time."

According to the president, however, that question is about making sure that in the economic sector, "everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules."

"We can either settle for a country where a shrinking number of people do really well, while a growing number of Americans barely get by," he said. "Or we can restore an economy where everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules. What's at stake are not Democratic values or Republican values, but American values. We have to reclaim them."

Mr. Obama pledged his commitment to working with Republicans and Democrats alike to "build on" the strengthening U.S. economy. But, he pledged, "I will oppose any effort to return to the very same policies that brought on this economic crisis in the first place."

"No, we will not go back to an economy weakened by outsourcing, bad debt, and phony financial profits. Tonight, I want to speak about how we move forward, and lay out a blueprint for an economy that's built to last - an economy built on American manufacturing, American energy, skills for American workers, and a renewal of American values," he said.

He reiterated his call for Congress to impose the so-called "Buffett rule," which would implement atax overhaul requiring that capital gains and dividends be taxed at the same rate as income earned from work. To underscore his point, Buffett's secretary, Debbie Bosanek, sat with First Lady Michelle Obama during the speech.

"Right now, because of loopholes and shelters in the tax code, a quarter of all millionaires pay lower tax rates than millions of middle-class households," Mr. Obama said. "Right now, Warren Buffett pays a lower tax rate than his secretary."

"Do we want to keep these tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans?" he continued. "Or do we want to keep ourinvestments in everything else - like education and medical research; a strong military and care for our veterans? Because if we're serious about paying down our debt, we can't do both."

Mr. Obama said he was willing to "rein in" the costs of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, "so long as those programs remain a guarantee of security for seniors."

In return, however, he reiterated a familiar demand: "Tax reform should follow the Buffett rule: If you make more than $1 million a year, you should not pay less than 30 percent in taxes. And my Republican friend Tom Coburn is right: Washington should stop subsidizing millionaires. In fact, if you're earning a million dollars a year, you shouldn't get special tax subsidies or deductions."

The plan is one that has previously gained no traction with congressional Republicans, most of whom oppose tax hikes of any nature - but it drew a particularly sharp contrast on Tuesday between the president and GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney, who earlier in the day released tax returns showing that he paid a 14.5 percent tax rate on $42 million in earnings in the past two years. (Most of those earnings came from profits, dividends or interest from investments, which is why he was able to benefit from the low tax rate.)