If Dems won the election, why is ANYONE talking about a 3:1 ratio of spending cuts/tax increases???

[maui902]

2. As one famous Democrat said, "Arithmetic."

President Obama ran on the notion that the Bush tax cuts should expire, but only on those making more than $250,000. Along with the other changes to the tax code he has proposed (raising the rates on capital gains for example), and the stand that he would NOT let the Bush tax cuts expire on those making less than $250,000 (the vast majority of Americans), the amount of additional tax revenue estimated to be raised over the next 10 years is somewhere between $700 billion and $1 trillion. To address the long term deficit/debt issue that Democrats and Republicans alike agree is a drag on the economy, according to many economists, we need to adopt a meaningful plan that proposes to cut the deficit by @ $4 trillion over the next 10 years. This $4 trillion to $ 1 trillion ratio is what led to the 3:1 ratio of spending cuts to additional taxes. If President Obama had run on the idea that tax rates should be increased on those making > $250,000 per year above those in effect during the Clinton years, President Obama likely would not have won the election. If he now proposes increasing taxes above what he proposed during the campaign, either by proposing much higher rates on the wealthy or raising taxes on the middle class, he will allow the Republicans in the House to block such legislation and give them a legitimate reason for doing so, as well as give voters a reason to vote against Democrats in 2014 and 2016. I don't like the 3:1 ratio of spending cuts to taxes, but any material change to that ratio is unlikely to pass.