Joan Entmacher, Vice President for Family Economic Security

The White House just issued a statement declaring President Obama’s intention to veto H.R. 3630. It’s short and to the point and posted in full below; if you want more details about the flaws in the bill, you can read our posts about it.

STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION POLICY

H.R. 3630 – Middle Class Tax Cut Act of 2011 (Rep. Camp, R-Michigan, and 5 others)

The Administration strongly opposes H.R. 3630. With only days left before taxes go up for 160 million hardworking Americans, H.R. 3630 plays politics at the expense of middle-class families. H.R. 3630 breaks the bipartisan agreement on spending cuts that was reached just a few months ago and would inevitably lead to pressure to cut investments in areas like education and clean energy. Furthermore, H.R. 3630 seeks to put the burden of paying for the bill on working families, while giving a free pass to the wealthiest and to big corporations by protecting their loopholes and subsidies.

The super-committee could not agree on a plan to cut the deficit by $1.2 to $1.5 trillion. Some in the media are calling it a failure – but we’re relieved that there were members who rejected plans that were unbalanced and unfair. Here are five reasons why:

1. The most immediate deficit the nation faces is the lack of jobs—and further spending cuts would have made that deficit worse.

   Yes, the nation faces a long-term fiscal imbalance. But the most urgent economic problem is unemployment. Since the “recovery” started in June 2009, the job market has made only modest gains— unemployment is still at 9 percent—and women have actually lost jobs, largely because cuts to public sector services have disproportionately eliminated jobs held by women. More spending cuts would have meant more job losses. In contrast, providing more help to struggling families boosts the economy, and thus can help reduce long-term deficits. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that extending emergency unemployment insurance and providing additional refundable tax credits in 2012 for lower and moderate-income people “would have the largest effects on output and employment per dollar of budgetary cost.” And growing the economy reduces the fiscal deficit as well as the jobs deficit; workers with jobs need less from safety net programs and pay more in taxes.