Obama's muddling solution to the deficit

His proposal is certain to please almost no one - a combination of budget cuts that the left doesn't want and tax increases that the right won't even consider. He also called for yet another commission to study the deficit problem (you could almost see the eyes rolling). No wonder this guy's approval rating keeps falling. From the Washington Post:

He set a goal of one dollar in increased tax revenues for every three dollars of spending cuts. Increased taxes would come from eliminating deductions as well as boosting taxes on the rich. Obama also called for a series of modest changes to Medicare and Medicaid to achieve greater savings, but did not embrace a policy that would limit the number of people eligible for coverage or the type of treatment they could receive. The president said that he would support mandatory and automatic across-the-board spending cuts and tax hikes if his goals aren't being met by the middle of the decade. This "debt failsafe," however, would exempt Social Security, Medicare and programs for low-income people.

Meantime, NYT columnist Dave Leonhardt suggests that the best approach might just be to do nothing.

If Mr. Obama wins re-election, he could simply refuse to sign any budget-busting tax cut for the rich -- who, after all, have received much larger pretax raises than any other income group in recent years and have also had their tax rates fall more. Republicans, for their part, could again refuse to pass any partial extension. And just like that, on Jan. 1, 2013, the Clinton-era tax rates would return. This change, by itself, would solve about 75 percent of the deficit problem over the next five years. The rest could come from spending cuts, both for social programs and the military. Over the longer term -- 20 years -- letting all of the Bush cuts lapse would close only about 40 percent of the budget gap. But 40 percent is a great start.