"Now, the president would like to do tax reform, which would obviously lower rates for most people in America and make the tax code fair and get rid of loopholes and special treatment. But absent tax reform, the president believes the right way to get our fiscal house in order is ask the wealthy to pay their fair share"

David Plouffe expresses a dual approach to addressing fiscal policy and tax reform in the United States. He first refers to the president’s intentions to overhaul the tax system, aiming to lower tax rates for the majority of Americans. The underlying goal of this tax reform is to create a more equitable system by eliminating loopholes and reducing special treatment that often favors particular groups or industries. This suggests a desire to simplify tax laws and ensure that no segments disproportionately benefit from obscure or preferential rules. There is an implicit criticism that the current tax code is riddled with unfair privileges that favor some over others, thereby eroding public trust and economic efficiency.

Plouffe acknowledges, however, that comprehensive tax reform may not be immediately achievable. In the absence of such reform, he outlines an alternative measure: focusing on those with greater financial means, specifically the wealthy. The suggestion is that the affluent segment of society should contribute more to resolving the country’s fiscal challenges. By stating that the wealthy must pay their “fair share,” Plouffe appeals to a popular notion of fairness and shared responsibility, particularly in times when government finances may be strained. This rhetorical approach emphasizes the moral argument that those who benefit most from economic opportunities should proportionately contribute more to sustaining public goods and services.

The passage also reflects a strategic flexibility in policymaking. While comprehensive reform is ideal, practical governance sometimes requires incremental or targeted actions. Plouffe’s remarks mirror broader debates about tax policy, fairness, and economic equity. The phrasing seeks to reassure most citizens that reforms would benefit them, while signaling to policymakers and the public that, until systematic change is possible, immediate action is needed to address budgetary gaps by asking the wealthiest Americans to bear a larger portion of the responsibility. The overall effect is an argument for pragmatic solutions anchored in fairness and fiscal responsibility.