Polls: Obama holds the edge in Florida, Ohio and Virginia

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

As chaos in the Middle East continues, President Obama and GOP presidential hopeful Mitt Romney are each trying to project strength on national security. NBCs Peter Alexander reports.

By Mark Murray, Senior Political Editor, NBC News

After two political conventions and heading into the post-Labor Day sprint, President Barack Obama leads Republican nominee Mitt Romney in the key battlegrounds of Florida, Ohio and Virginia, according to new NBC News/Wall Street Journal/Marist polls of each of these three states. 

Click for poll results: Virginia | Ohio | Florida (pdfs)

In Ohio, the president’s lead is seven points, 50 percent to 43 percent.In both Florida and Virginia, Obama is ahead of Romney by five points among likely voters (including those leaning toward a particular candidate), 49 percent to 44 percent.

Ed Andrieski / AP

President Barack Obama waves after speaking at a campaign rally in Golden, Colo., Thursday, Sept. 13, 2012.

Among a larger pool of registered voters, Obama’s advantage over Romney slightly increases to 7 points in Virginia, 8 in Florida and 9 in Ohio.

“You’d rather be in Obama’s shoes than Romney’s in these three critical states,” Lee Miringoff, director of the Marist College Institute for Public Opinion, says of the poll results.

First Thoughts: A tricky situation

But he adds that Obama’s leads are not “insurmountable,” especially as the two candidates prepare for their first presidential debate on Oct. 3 in Colorado.

Charles Dharapak / AP

Mitt Romney embraces women wearing traditional Vietnamese "ao dai" dresses as he campaigns at Van Dyck Park in Fairfax, Va., Thursday, Sept. 13, 2012.

These states – all of which Obama carried in 2008 but which George W. Bush won in 2004 – represent three of the most crucial battlegrounds in the 2012 presidential election. And according to NBC’s electoral map, Romney likely needs to capture at least two of these states, if not all three, to secure the 270 electoral votes necessary to win the presidency.

By comparison, Obama can reach 270 by winning just one or two of these battlegrounds  – on top of the other states already considered to be in his column.

(Obama also has an additional path to victory without any of these three states if he wins the toss-up contests of Colorado, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, and Wisconsin.)

What’s particularly striking about these polls, Miringoff observes, is how most voters in these battleground states have already made up their minds, with just 5 to 6 percent saying they’re undecided, and with more than 80 percent signaling that they strongly support their candidate.

“Those who are thinking of voting have pretty much picked sides,” he says.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The Romney campaign is on defense, facing criticism from within the Republican Party, and from President Barack Obama that the GOP presidential nominee politicized a foreign policy crisis. Romney campaign adviser Vin Weber discuses.

Economy vs. foreign policyIn Florida and Virginia, Obama and Romney are essentially tied among likely voters on the question of which candidate would do a better job handling the economy, although Obama has a four-point advantage on this question in Ohio.

But when it comes to handling foreign policy, the incumbent Democratic president enjoys a double-digit lead over his Republican challenger.

Also in the polls, Obama’s job-approval ratings – 50 percent in Ohio and 49 percent in Florida and Virginia – exactly match his ballot position against Romney in these states.

And in each of these three battlegrounds, a majority of likely voters say the country is on the wrong track, while more than 40 percent believe that it’s headed in the right direction.

Jason Reed / Reuters

First lady Michelle Obama visits with young children in after-school care at the Rappahannock Area YMCA in Spotsylvania, Va., on Sept. 13, 2012.

Looking at the Senate racesThe polls also measure the key U.S. Senate contests in these three states, all of which could determine the balance of power in that chamber.

First Read: Michelle Obama echoes convention testimony in solo campaign stop

In Florida, incumbent Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson leads Republican challenger Connie Mack among likely voters by double digits, 51 percent to 37 percent.

In Ohio, incumbent Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown is ahead of GOP challenger Josh Mandel by seven points, 49 percent to 42 percent.

And in Virginia, Democrat Tim Kaine and Republican George Allen are tied at 46 percent each.

The NBC/WSJ/Marist polls of Florida, Ohio and Virginia were conducted from Sept. 9-11 of nearly 1,000 likely voters in each state (about 30 percent by cell phone), and they have a margin of error of plus-minus 3.1 percentage points.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The former Republican Florida governor explains his support for President Barack Obama but says he's not ready to declare himself a Democrat just yet.

A likely voter is determined based on interest in the upcoming election, the chance of voting, and prior participation in past elections.

More than 1,300 registered voters were surveyed in each of the three states, and the margin of error for those voters is plus-minus 2.7 percentage points.

Social: A look at the candidates through social media

Commentary: Another reason to fear the fiscal cliff

By Charles S. Konigsberg @CNNMoney August 7, 2012: 5:08 AM ET

Lawmakers are fooling themselves if they think they'll be able to quickly and simply clean up the mess if they go over the "fiscal cliff," argues budget expert Charles Konigsberg.

Charles Konigsberg, policy chief of NEMA, was the director of the Domenici-Rivlin Bipartisan Debt Reduction Task Force and served as assistant budget director in the Clinton White House.

If Democrats and Republicans fail to figure out a way to avert the fiscal cliff before the end of this year, they are fooling themselves if they think they'll be able to clean up the mess easily when Congress gets back in January.

Some may assume that it will be a simple matter to roll back the tax hikes and un-wind the spending cuts before significant damage is done to the economy. They are wrong.

First, reinstating some or all of theBush tax cuts won't be easy. Why? For the same reason lawmakers are having a hard time coming to an agreement now.

Related: Fiscal fight is on, economy suffers

Democrats will only want to reinstate today's rates for incomes up to $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for joint filers (or something similar). And Republicans will still push for today's rates to stay in place for everyone.

Passage of a new tax bill in the Senate requires 60 votes to avoid a filibuster. That's always tough to achieve and could be even tougher next year, if the body becomes even more narrowly divided than it is now.

Some suggest that tax cuts could be reinstated using a fast-track "budget reconciliation bill," which only requires 51 votes in the Senate. Realistically, though, such a bill would not be completed until late spring or early summer because it must be preceded by a full debate on a congressional budget plan. And in a narrowly divided Senate, getting 51 votes could still prove tough.

Commentary: How to avoid 'lunatic' fiscal cliff

Second, unwinding the automatic spending cuts scheduled to take effect on Jan. 2 won't be easy.

Defense spending -- except that for military personnel, which President Obama has exempted -- will be cut by about 11% across-the-board to achieve the required $55 billion in defense savings for 2013.

Domestic discretionary programs -- except certain low-income and veterans' programs that are exempt -- will be hit with across-the-board cuts of about 8% to achieve the required savings.

And Medicare, which is always hard to negotiate, faces a 2% cut.

Practically speaking, the funds being cut will be canceled immediately on Jan. 2. That means Congress would then need to negotiate and pass a new appropriations measure to restore them.

Such negotiations would not be short or simple.

That's because the decision to repeal or replace the cuts will be just as fraught with political roadblocks as it is today. Imagine trying to convince lawmakers on the ideological right to restore the non-defense funds, and trying to convince those on the ideological left to restore defense funding.

Bottom line: If the fiscal cliff isn't resolved by early January, the U.S. economy could fall into a recession, complete with higher unemployment.

Should that happen, lawmakers will have no one to blame but themselves. 

Deficit hawks: Now's not the time for austerity

By Jeanne Sahadi @CNNMoney August 1, 2012: 5:08 AM ET

Some independent deficit hawks are calling for more stimulus in 2013.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Now is not the time for austerity.

That's a message many independent fiscal hawks are sending as Congress continues to dawdle on a deal to avert pay in taxes

Quiz: What the rich 
really pay in taxes

That cliff is made up of a staggering amount of tax increases and spending cuts that would hit the economy simultaneously starting in January 2013.

Going over the cliff could reduce deficits by an unheard of $7 trillion over a decade -- a number that would go a long way to curbing growth of the country's huge federal debt.

But such sudden, widespread fiscal restraint would come at a stiff cost to the economy and even spark recession, economists say.

That's why fiscal experts say Congress should devise a smart plan to reduce deficits more gradually.

And some hawks are even invoking the S-word.

"Stimulus would help a lot," said William Gale, a scholar on federal economic policy at the Brookings Institution. "I find the whole lack of discussion about having a stimulus to be disappointing. ... Republicans don't want to acknowledge that stimulus could help. Democrats don't want to acknowledge that we need another stimulus."

Related: Fiscal fight: Missing the big picture

The perils of the self-inflicted fiscal cliff are not the only risk facing the economy. There's also the debt crisis in Europe, the housing overhang in the United States and the uncertainty facing financial markets and institutions, said Joseph Minarik, senior vice president of the Committee for Economic Development.

"We need to get our economy on a sound footing before it again is tripped up by one of those three lingering risks," Minarik added.

Gale thinks Congress should actually go over the cliff -- including letting the Bush tax cuts expire -- so long as lawmakers simultaneously implement a temporary stimulus package consisting of a temporary payroll tax cut, temporary aid to states and more infrastructure spending.

That, he believes, would then free up both parties to have a serious discussion in 2013 about how to address medium- and long-term deficits in ways that won't upend the economy.

Related: The risks of more Fed action

Even if the country weren't facing a fiscal cliff, Gale would still advocate for more stimulus. "The economy is recovering weakly and slowly. And the cost of borrowing is practically zero."

Minarik would like to see the Bush tax cuts replaced with a very large income tax rebate -- or, if lawmakers extend the Bush tax cuts, then a smaller income tax rebate. "On net we should be stimulating the economy in either event," he said.

And if Congress can't agree to postpone the sequester of across-the-board spending cuts for one year, he'd rather they be replaced with a more thoughtful selection of cuts.

Of course, not all independent deficit hawks are pushing for measures to boost growth.

"I am not in favor of extra stimulus right now. I would probably change my mind if we see a negative quarter of GDP growth," said Rudolph Penner, a former Congressional Budget Office director.

Bob Bixby, who runs the Concord Coalition, isn't pushing for more stimulus either, but wouldn't oppose it under certain conditions. "Any short-term assistance to the economy would be more credible and effective if it's paired with a long-term budget deal," Bixby said.

That squares with the view expressed by Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. But she would like to see specific measures earmarked in that long-term plan to pay for the stimulus over the next five to 10 years.

"The risks of excessive debt and a possible fiscal crisis are just too great to keep borrowing with no plan to bring the debt back to sustainable levels," MacGuineas said. 

How Congress is hurting jobs

By Jeanne Sahadi @CNNMoney June 15, 2012: 12:06 PM ET

Lawmakers are expected to take their time deciding how to replace the sequester of automatic cuts scheduled for next year. Experts say prolonging the uncertainty will hurt hiring this fall.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Everyone in Congress says they want to help create jobs and economic growth.

But federal agencies and government contractors in the private sector, which actually hire people, may find that ironic. They are still in the dark about future funding levels because lawmakers have not said whether they will replace heavy-handed automatic spending cuts set to take effect next year.

The so-called sequester -- which no one in Congress likes but can't agree on how to replace -- would total about $110 billion next year alone. Half the cuts would come from defense and the other half from nondefense spending on domestic programs.

Most don't expect lawmakers will reach a decision until the lame-duck session of Congress after Election Day, and possibly not until early 2013.

The problem is that prolonging the uncertainty is likely to cause serious hiring slowdowns and possible layoffs, experts and businesses said.

Related: Fiscal cliff likely to cause recession

"If the deleterious consequences ... are to be averted it must be done before the lame duck. Indeed, since most elected officials will spend most of the fall campaigning, the [cuts] must be dealt with by September," according to a recent report from the Bipartisan Policy Center.

Businesses and agencies need to plan for the year ahead, and they simply can't because they don't know how many contracts will be funded and how many programs they'll need to cut back on.

The point is not lost on Democrat Carl Levin, who chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee.

"[T]hat uncertainty which is created by ... the specter of sequestration ... is a real threat to this economy. So not only must we avoid sequestration ... we must do it in time to avoid a severe weakening to this economy," he said at a National Press luncheon.

Those in the defense industry say the sequester is already having a chilling effect.

"In the past we'd add head count [in summer] to prepare for new work. This year, we'll clearly take a more conservative approach until we see what's going to shake out," said Samuel Strickland, CFO of defense contractor Booz Allen Hamilton during a recent investor call.

At Lockheed Martin , the largest U.S. defense contractor, the story is similar. "We are already taking action by not hiring and training new workers, not investing in new plants and equipment and not investing in new R&D," said company chairman and CEO Robert Stevens during a Senate caucus lunch in March.

But Stevens also warned that if he doesn't get clarity soon, he may be forced to issue notice this fall of possible layoffs in 2013. The federal WARN Act requires businesses with more than 100 employees to notify workers at least 60 days in advance of a mass layoff or plant closing.

 

Boehner's 'line in the sand' on debt

Since the sequester takes effect Jan. 2, 2013, the WARN Act requirement could mean layoff notices come out a few days before the Nov. 6 election.

But layoff notices are likely to be a measure of last resort for both federal agencies and private sector contractors, said government contracts expert Dan Gordon, who used to run the White House Office of Procurement.

Instead, he said he is expecting "a dramatic slowdown in hiring" this fall.

"It's very slow and expensive to cut back on the government's commitment under an existing contract. For both [federal agencies and private contractors] it's always easier to stop hiring than to lay off existing employees," Gordon noted.

Related - Fiscal cliff: Market sting may come sooner

He also expects federal agencies over the next seven months to be very reluctant to enter into new commitments with contractors, even though government has become more heavily reliant on contractors to do everything from guarding office buildings to running IT departments.

"Why make a commitment that might end up being costly to you?" said Joseph Minarik, senior vice president of the Committee for Economic Development.

Like Gordon, he believes hiring freezes are the greatest risk on the jobs front this fall.

But more than anything, Minarik said, for everyone in the public and the private sector "all the time being spent on planning for this situation is pure economic waste." 

First Published: June 15, 2012: 5:48 AM ET

33,000 told to flee as volcano erupts near Guatemala tourist zone

Moises Castillo / AP

Smoke rises from the Fuego volcano in Palin, Guatemala, on Thursday.

By NBC News and wire services

A Guatemalan volcano erupting Thursday for the sixth time this year triggered evacuations of several towns, with more than 33,000 expected to flee.

The Fuego volcano started spewing lava some 2,000 feet down two slopes, while ash flew two miles upwards. Ash was covering homes and buildings several miles away, the government's disaster agency said.

While Fuego had erupted five times earlier this year, one scientist in Guatemala said today's eruption was the biggest since 1999.

Seventeen towns with 33,000 people are in the precautionary evacuation zone, the country's emergency response director said. By midday, more than 10,000 had fled, officials said.

The volcano sits just 6 miles southwest of Antigua, a colonial city popular with tourists. Antigua was not in the evacuation zone.

Extremely hot gases were rolling down the sides of the volcano, which was entirely wreathed in ash and smoke.Cinders spewing from the volcano were settling a half-inch thick in many places, government volcanologist Gustavo Chicna said.

The emergency agency warned that flights through the area could be affected.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

May 21: Guatemala's Fuego volcano sent lava and black ash into the sky, leading the government to issue an airplane advisory. Msnbc.com's Dara Brown reports.

There was a general orange alert, the second-highest level, but a red alert south and southeast of the mountain, where, Chicna said, "it's almost in total darkness" due to the ash and smoke.

Teresa Marroquin, a Guatemalan Red Cross coordinator, said the organization had set up 10 emergency shelters and was sending hygiene kits and water.

"There are lots of respiratory problems and eye problems," she said.

The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report.

White House details fiscal cliff spending cuts

By Jeanne Sahadi @CNNMoney September 14, 2012: 4:39 PM ET

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Under pressure from Congress, the Obama administration on Friday detailed for the first time how more than $100 billion in spending cuts slated for January will ripple out across thousands of federal programs and projects.
The White House budget office, in a report mandated by Congress, said the cuts "would have a devastating impact on important defense and nondefense programs."

As a result of the so-called sequester, deficits would be reduced by nearly $1 trillion over 10 years. At the same time, economists say it could help push the country back into recession by abruptly pulling so much money out of the economy. (Related: CBO warns of fiscal cliff recession)
Cuts in domestic spending would affect everything from government salaries and private-sector contracts to research, air traffic control, border patrol, food safety, the FBI, housing programs, food assistance, after-school programs and education grants, according to the report.
Efforts by the Federal Emergency Management Agency to respond to terrorism or other catastrophic events would be undermined.
Military personnel and the Department of Veterans Affairs will be exempt from the budget ax. What's more, the Department of Defense would be able to shift funds so that critical military readiness would not be impaired, the report said.
But, it added, the scheduled defense cuts would reduce the readiness of many non-deployed units, delay investments in new equipment and facilities, cut back on needed repairs and reduce services for military families.
Top defense officials have warned that further cuts to defense could hurt national security. And defense contractors have been saying for months that the cuts could result in significant layoffs in their industry.
The White House budget office didn't estimate how many workers -- in the government or private sector -- would be fired or furloughed because of the cuts.
A senior administration official did allow that "this would have a significant effect on the federal workforce."
While some programs would be exempt from the cuts, most would not since the sequester calls for a largely across-the-board slashing of funds. Those cuts would fall disproportionately on discretionary programs and projects -- or those that Congress funds year to year.

Fiscal cliff: What's really in it

But some mandatory programs would feel the knife's edge as well.
Among programs subject to reductions, those in discretionary defense would be cut 9.4%. And nondefense programs would lose 8.2% of their funding.
Medicare would be reduced by 2%, but those cuts would only affect providers not benefits. Other mandatory programs would be cut between 7.6% and 10%.
The report is likely to be greeted with predictable horror by both Democrats and Republicans. That's because no one in Congress or the White House thinks the spending cuts are a good idea.
Passed as part of the Budget Control Act -- which put an end to last summer's bitter debt ceiling fight -- the automatic cuts were designed to be noxious to both sides of the aisle.
The intent was to force lawmakers to negotiate a bipartisan debt-reduction plan to replace the so-called sequester. But partisan division over taxes and other issues has thus far prevented any such negotiation from taking place. (Related: Now not the time for austerity)
"[N]o amount of planning can mitigate the effect of these cuts," the White House report stated. "Sequestration is a blunt and indiscriminate instrument. It is not the responsible way for our nation to achieve deficit reduction."
No one expects Congress to even begin to seriously address the issue in earnest until after the presidential election. And then lawmakers will have left themselves only a few weeks to both figure out how to replace the sequester and how to handle an unprecedented number of tax increases slated to go into effect next year.

First Published: September 14, 2012: 2:25 PM ET     

771

 comments

Fiscal cliff: What's really in it

By Jeanne Sahadi @CNNMoney August 6, 2012: 5:11 PM ET

It's still unclear what lawmakers will do to address $7 trillion in looming tax increases and spending cuts. If they do nothing by Dec. 31, here's what will happen.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- If lawmakers cannot agree on how to address the pending "fiscal cliff," $7 trillion worth of tax increases and spending cuts will begin to go into effect in January.

The smart money says Congress won't come close to an agreement before the November election, and that lawmakers may not even be able to reach one until early next year. At that point, of course, they'd need to undo at least some of the tax increases and spending cuts that went into effect.

In the meantime, uncertainty about just what Congress will do will weigh on the economy.

Here's a rundown of what happens if lawmakers fail to act before Jan. 1, 2013.

Automatic spending cuts

Since Congress has failed to reach abipartisan debt-reduction deal, the Budget Control Act requires automatic spending cuts to commence on Jan. 2 that will amount to $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction over 10 years.

Defense: $55 billion will be cut in 2013 from projected levels of discretionary defense spending. That translates into at least a 10% cut to every program, project and activity that's not explicitly exempt.

Nondefense: $55 billion will be cut from projected levels of nondefense spending, which includes things like education, food inspections and air travel safety. Budget experts estimate the cuts will result in at least an 8% cut to programs, projects and activities.

Bush tax cuts

The Bush tax cuts, the eternal partisan trip-wire, are all set to expire Dec. 31. As a result:

Income tax rates: Rise to 15%, 28%, 31%, 36% and 39.6%, up from 10%, 15%, 25%, 28%, 33% and 35%.

Capital gains rate: Rises to 20% from 15% for most filers.

Qualified dividend rate: Rises to one's top income tax rate, up from 15% for most filers.

PEP/Pease limitations: Restored. High-income households may not be able to take some itemized deductions and personal exemptions in full.

Child tax credit: Falls to $500 per child from $1,000. The refundable portion also reduced.

American Opportunity Tax Credit: Expires. The lesser value HOPE tax credit for college tuition is reinstated. Several smaller education tax benefits also expire.

Earned Income Tax Credit: Expansion of eligibility for the credit expires.

Marriage penalty relief: Expires. Effectively that means a low- or middle-income two-earner couple will owe more to the IRS than they would if they were single making the same income.

Estate tax:Parameters revert to pre-2001 levels. The exemption level falls to $1 million from $5 million; and the top tax rate on taxable estates rises to 55%, up from 35%.

AMT patch

Won't be renewed. Income exempt from the Alternative Minimum Tax in 2012 -- for which taxpayers will file returns next year -- falls to $33,750 for individuals and $45,000 for married couples. That's down from $50,600 and $78,750, respectively, if the exemption amounts had been adjusted for inflation.

As a result more than 30 million people will be hit by the so-called "wealth" tax, up from 4 million to date. (Related: Missing the big picture)

A bipartisan bill from the Senate Finance Committee proposes a patch for 2012 and 2013 but it has not passed the Senate or House yet.

Payroll tax holiday

Expires. The Social Security tax rate reverts to 6.2%, up from 4.2%, on the first $110,100 in wages. Effectively, someone making $50,000 will pay another $1,000 in payroll taxes next year.

Unemployment benefits extension

The federal extension expires. That means workers who lose their jobs after July 1, 2012, will only receive up to 26 weeks in state unemployment benefits, down from as many as 99 weeks in state and federal benefits that had been available until recently.

Tax extenders

A host of smaller individual and business tax breaks will have expired. A bipartisan bill from the Senate Finance Committee proposes to extend many of them, but it has not passed the Senate or House yet.

Medicare doc fix

Expires. Medicare payment rates for physician services drops by 27%.

Other

Some budget experts count as part of the fiscal cliff the onset of a newMedicare surtax on high-income households under health reform.

But unlike the other fiscal cliff tax provisions, the new tax was not written into law as a wink-wink "temporary" provision. It is, however, included to reflect the magnitude of tax increases set to take effect simultaneously in 2013.

A 0.9% surtax will apply to wages on earned income over $200,000 ($250,000 if married). That's on top of the 1.45% Medicare currently owed on all wages. Those making between $200,000 and $500,000, for instance, will only pay about $633 extra while households making $1 million or more would pay another $11,242.

A 3.8% Medicare surtax will also apply for the first time to at least a portion of high-income households' investment income. 

First Published: August 6, 2012: 5:03 AM ET

Obama's 30% millionaire tax

By Jeanne Sahadi @CNNMoney January 26, 2012: 8:26 AM ET

I am re blogging this Because I feel it important, t is time to have taxes that are fair for everyone, specifically the rich, who just keep getting rich, and do not feel they have to pay anything extra.  And I am not saying all of the rich are like that.  But they have loop holes we middle class will never know what it like.  And we should all learn from Mr Romney.  Because now he doesn't have to show us his tax returns.  And he is getting away with it and who knows how much more.

President Obama further defined the 'Buffett rule' during his State of the Union address. In attendance: Debbie Bosanek, secretary to billionaire investor Warrren Buffett.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- President Obama this week defined what he believes should be the minimum "fair share" for millionaires and billionaires to pay in taxes. His answer: At least 30% of their income.
"If you make more than $1 million a year, you should not pay less than 30% in taxes," Obama said during his State of the Union address.

The 30% marker is the first real detail Obama has offered since proposing the so-called Buffett Rule last September. That rule is a guideline intended to ensure that the very wealthy don't pay a lower percentage of their income in taxes than anyone in the middle class.
It's named, of course, after billionaire investor Warren Buffett, who has repeatedly asserted that he pays a lower percentage of his income to the IRS than his secretary.

The Congressional Research Service this fall estimated that a quarter of millionaires don't pay enough in federal taxes to satisfy the Buffett Rule. The CRS arrived at the number after considering what filers pay in federal income, payroll and corporate taxes combined.

Billionaires with 1% tax rates

It's not clear, though, whether the president wants the rich to pay a minimum of 30% in federal income taxes alone or on a broader swath of taxes like CRS measured. Nor is it clear how he defines $1 million in income. Is it gross, adjusted gross, modified adjusted gross or taxable income?
Obama also called for an end to tax deductions for millionaires on home, health care, retirement and child care. It's not clear how that might work in conjunction with the 30% rule.
The White House did not respond to requests for more details. Obama is set to submit his 2013 budget proposal to Congress on Feb. 13, when he might flesh out his new millionaire tax proposal.
Obama's 30% "fair share" rule raises many other questions as well.

The lessons of Romney's taxes

Among them, would it operate as a kind of alternative Alternative Minimum Tax? If so, a wealthy taxpayer might need to calculate his tax liability three times instead of just two and pay the highest tax bill of the three.
Then again, the president often talks about the Buffett rule in conjunction with tax reform. But a full-blown overhaul of the tax code is often proposed as a way to make it simpler and more efficient.
In that context, the Buffett Rule would fail the simplicity test.
"We're not simplifying the tax code here," said Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center. "Anytime you say, 'I'll follow the rules except when the rules aren't good enough,' it complicates things."
Of course, many see tax reform as an opportunity to make the tax code fairer, however they define it.
In that sense, Obama might get some support for a 30% rule, although not necessarily enough in Congress to pass it anytime soon.

At least one billionaire who could be hit hard by the 30% rule came out in support of the idea this week.
"I think it's fair," hedge fund manager George Soros told CNNMoney's Poppy Harlow at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. "There are a lot of people like me ... in the 1% who feel this is appropriate."
As for the charge that Obama is pursuing class warfare? "Well, that's what my fellow hedge fund managers are saying," Soros said. "But I think it's because they don't like to pay taxes." 

First Published: January 26, 2012: 5:31 AM ET