president obama today called for a one-year extension of the bush tax cuts for families who make up to $250,000. for those families who make $250,000 or more, taxes would go up in january. >> i believe our prosperity has always come from an economy that's built on a strong and growing middle class. so my message to congress is this, pass a bill extending the tax cuts for the middle class. i will sign it tomorrow. pass it next week, i'll sign it next week. pass it next -- well, you get the idea. >> but how much would extending the tax cuts for the family's making under $250,000 help our economy? bear with me if you will. i want to start by showing you something that the president and most democrats and republicans agree on, and that is that letting all the tax cuts expire would hurt the economy. so if we let all the bush tax cuts expire, the rates go up for everybody as they are set to do by law on december 31st. we would increase tax revenue by $221 billion in a single year. that's a good thing, right? well, sure, it could help the deficit but not necessarily because it of course means less money for families to spend when they spend less, companies don't make as many things. they don't hire as many people and the economy takes a hit. now let's take the president's plan, extending the bush tax cuts only for those making less than $250,000. that will cost the government $150 billion next year. put another way, that's how much tax revenue the government will not get from those people and will need to borrow. washington will get $71 billion in additional money from people who earn more than $250,000. but obviously that $71 billion was, of course, counted in federal revenue already because the tax cuts are set by law to expire. and that $71 billion is a lot less than the $150 billion tax cut. the people who earn more who are now paying more in taxes have a little less to spend. obviously it doesn't hit them anywhere near as much as it would hit someone who earns less, but it does affect the economy. it would shave about 1% off of gdp. keep in mind that our economy is only projected to grow between 2.2% and 2.8% next year, according to the fed. so the president's plan would hurt growth, not by as much as if he ended tax cuts for everyone. if he continued them for everyone, but still a hit. forget whether you think the tax cut should be extended for everybody, no one or someone in between. even if agree with the president 100%, the numbers show that today's announcement was a lot about politics. you say, all right, he's a politician, of course. but this is a big play because he's kicking the can down the road, avoiding talking about or paying for other taxes that will go away next year, ones that will hurt the middle class, like the payroll tax cut extension, like unemployment benefits. keeping those, everybody, will cost another $121 billion on top of the $150 billion tax cut for people earning under $250,000. it's a lot numbers. i said, try to stay with us. of course then there's the $1.2 trillion and those automatic sequestration cuts to defense and social services. if implemented, that will slash growth by another 6/10 of 1%. you can see that growth number getting smaller and smaller. why is the president doing this piecemeal? "outfront" tonight, senator chris coons from delaware. i'm curious as to what you think about the fact that he makes an announcement about the bush tax cuts without dealing with all the other taxes that are very important for the middle class. >> erin, thanks for a chance to be on. as a member of the budget committee, i have to agree that what we need to get to is the much bigger, much harder problem of solving all the different changes, whether it's sequestration or changes in tax rates that are scheduled to kick in in january. what i liked about the president's announcement today is he simply said, let's move forward on what we can all agree on, everybody, republicans and democrats, house and senate, agree that we should not allow these bush tax cuts to expire on the middle class, on the 98% of americans who make less than $250,000. and as he said in his extended comments, we'll let the question of what the tax rate should be for millionaires and billionaires be decided by the election. i do think it's important for us to start giving some tax certainty to small business owners and families. if we could start by solving one small piece of it, that would show some forward progress toward the much bigger fiscal cliff facing families, companies and our economy in january. >> here's my question. you said the president said the election will decide about the millionaires and billionaires but what about the 3.7 million americans who are not millionaires but earn more than $250,000 as a family? he's made that clear, he's raising their taxes. >> there are between $250,000 and $1 million, that's the position the president's taking. in my view, it helps set the table for the general public. most folks would agree that 98% of americans represents a broad range, more than the middle class, up into the upper middle class. the number that i think the president chose today was designed to strike a balance. in the end, our tax policy, as you mentioned, is going to be about figuring out which tax breaks, which tax expenditures we can afford to continue. and what we have to do to restore some tax fairness that allows the broad run, 98% of americans to accept the cuts in federal spending that will almost inevitably have to come next year. >> right. and i think most people know that and accept that. all of us as a nation are dealing with that. but what about the jpmorgan analysis said, if this went away for everybody, you get $221 billion in revenue. extending the tax cuts for the under 250, it costs $150 billion. you're only getting $71 billion from the wealthiest americans. and i get to this point only because i'm trying to understand the reality of it is, you can't pay for this problem by taxing the wealthy. you can pay for a little bit of it. but you can't pay for all of it. that's the math. >> that's right, erin. it's not possible for us to either tax our way or spend our way or cut spending to solve the current problem we have. we have record low federal revenues and record high federal spending post-world war ii and we're in our 28th month of private sector job growth. to strengthen that job growth, we have to continue to make some smart investments. we have to invest in innovation and infrastructure and education. but we have to allow some tax expenditures, some loopholes to be closed or to expire so the broad run of americans believe that this system is getting fairer. >> why wouldn't you go for that, then? why not just go for that and do a deal where you close the loopholes, lower rates but the wealthier end up paying more, you deal with this fairness issue instead of taking the politically easy path of raising taxes on some people and not others and not dealing with the loopholes at all? this thing he said today doesn't do anything with that, nothing. >> my real hope is that we will move forward from this proposal to the broader and more challenging work of trying to engage in comprehensive tax reform. it broadens the base, lowers rates and raises revenue. i'm someone who generally supports the bowles/simpson framework. there are dozens senators, republicans and democrats, work withing together now to try to work out a framework that we can use to reduce legislation that would deal with all of these very tough questions. >> you're very lowering rates? you would be for -- >> as long as we close loopholes to pay for it. >> you're saying you can't get there right now so do this. but once you extend the tax cuts, that makes it more difficult, doesn't it, for some people rather than others? >> it pushes it into next year. the question of what the tax rate will be for the middle class. that's right. but i also think we have to show that in the congress, we can come together and solve some of these problems. just last week, we managed to finally pass a bipartisan highway bill, something that invests in putting people to work that, invests in strengthening our infrastructure. it took months longer than it should have. but i think it's important that we are still passing legislation that the president is signing into law so that as folks who aren't worried about the election, they're worried about job creation and about our economy, get some positive signals from what we're doing in washington. that's what i hear from the state of delaware. folks want us to make principled comprehensive, improve the fairness of our tax code and strength tennessee competitiveness of our economy. >> thank you for taking the time. let's bring in john avlon. and, of course, he was honest there, it pushes it into next year. kicks the can down the road. he was very direct about what this does. >> absolutely. and you asked why is the president adopting a piecemeal approach? and the answer is, presidential campaign politics. >> politics, right. >> this is first of all no grand bargain is going to get done. i think there are things congress can agree upon. but in election year, the grand bargain ain't going to get done. the president's trying to draw a contrast that's politically beneficial to him. he's trying to say, look -- he's trying to campaign as the defender of the middle class. he's saying, can we agree to extend the bush tax cuts for the middle class. if not, why not? why does that remaining 2% have to put a giant question mark over the rest of the economy? but it opens him up to the republicans' attack that segmenting off that 2% is class warfare. that's the debate they want. >> and looking at these numbers, the numbers we got from various economists, extending them for the middle class americans under $250,000 and not for everyone else takes a full percent off gdp. looking at a an economy that's lucky to grow 2% to 3%. you're tact a third to the half of your gdp could go away by not extending them for everyone. the growth does not support, at least on that specific analysis, the point. >> that's why this is ultimately about campaign narratives and campaign contrasts. if the focus is growth and at the end of the day, everyone agrees there needs to be growth, this is about drawing a clear contrast. the real question for democrats is this may poll well. but isn't the real issue, if it's a household making $250,000, that's not rich in many parts of this country. and so it becomes the question, it's not just a question about the growing gap between the super rich and the middle class but families getting caught in the gray area. and whether with that may alienate some very influential voters. >> a lot of independents in the wealthy suburbs in this country. thanks very much to john avlon. texas fought for its voter i.d. law in court today which could keep more than one million people from voting. we'll tell you why it may hold up in court. a mysterious illness has killed dozens of children in cambodia. we first brought you that report last week. tonight on the scene live, what that deadly illness might be. and george zimmerman is in a safe house and we're going to tell you who's actually paying the bill. the postal service is critical to our economy, delivering mail, medicine and packages. yet the house is considering a bill to close thousands of offices, slash service and layoff over 100,000 workers. the postal service is recording financial losses, but not for reasons you might think. the problem ? a burden no other agency or company bears. a 2006 law that drains $5 billion a year from post office revenue while the postal service is forced to overpay billions more into federal accounts. house bill 2309 is not the answer. do you have any idea where you're going ? wherever the wind takes me. this is so off course. nature can surprise you sometimes... next time, you drive. next time, signal your turn. ...that's why we got a subaru. love wherever the road takes you. the global ready one ? yeah, but you won't need... ♪ hajimemashite. hajimemashite. hajimemashite. you guys like football ? thank you so much. i'm stoked. you stoked ? totally. ... and he says, "under the mattress." souse le matelas. ( laughter ) why's the new guy sending me emails from paris ? paris, france ? verizon's 4g lte devices are global-ready. plus, global data for just $25. only from verizon. our second story "outfront," the state of texas tries to enforce an id law that could keep more than 1 million people from voting in the presidential election. it's one of 11 states with new laws requiring voters to show a photo id. a justice department lawyer says 1.4 million people in texas don't have a photo id. states with a history of voting rights violations need permission from the justice department before they can change election rules. so today, the two sides took the issue to federal court. roland martin is here, cnn contributor and alice stewart, republican analyst. great to see you both. roland, explain the basics. people with a driver's license have a picture, they may be saying, i don't understand this. how could 1.4 million people not have a photo id? tell me who these people are. >> well, a lot of people don't have it because you're not necessarily required. you're talking about senior citizens. you're also talking about any number of minorities because if you're not having a checking account, you're not showing it. i'm a native of texas. i'm in houston right now. they also don't allow a student i.d., erin. now, the georgia law allowed for the public university students to use their student i.d., but not private schools. but in texas, you can use your gun permit i.d. to be able to vote, but not a student i.d. that's what's so crazy. but also the legislature in passing this bill bypassed the normal procedure of two-thirds voting to approve the bill. they bypassed that to get this in. and so it raises the question, why would you do that -- why would you go against your normal procedure to pass this bill compared to others? >> alice, let me ask you a question. because obviously i don't need to be a genius to recognize what roland was saying. gun permit pictures are okay, and student i.d.s aren't, that will skew republican. >> first of all, the whole purpose for this is to prevent voter fraud and to combat a culture of election fraud and to bring about free and fair and lawful elections. and the good thing about the law in texas, these voter ids are free of charge and also when you go to the polls, there's a provision where you can go -- if you go to the polls that day and you don't have your id, you can cast a provisional ballot and you have, depending on what state, you have six to ten days to present your i.d. so no one's turned away from voting. you can vote, you just have to get your proper i.d. voting is a privilege in this country. and there are certain requirements that we all have, all three of us here, we have certain requirement that is we need in order to cast a ballot. >> what she just said is shameful, erin. when you say voting is a privilege, these are the same people when we talk about our troops overseas fighting for the american way, democracy, our power and our vote, all of a sudden now it's a privilege? no. any republican, any democrat, any independent should be saying, voting is a fundamental right in this country. erin, what also is troubling about this, the american legislative exchange group, the shad yo we group out of d.c., there are lots of corporate funders, change.org began to expose them. they begin to lead these efforts. the reality is, it's a partisan issue. we've seen these laws all of a sudden crop up since 2010, many statehouses flip to the gop. what's also interesting in terms of what they're pushing and talking about it's a privilege is when you deny 1 million people and then you're saying the corruption of voter fraud, the national republican lawyers only found 340 cases of voter fraud over a ten-year period in all of america. so you're saying -- >> give alice a chance to respond to that. >> -- there's not a million people? what percentage? >> he has a fair point here, alice. >> just to make sure we get all the facts out there, texas itself has already tried 50 cases and currently in texas alone, there are almost 250 cases pending that are to be investigated that involve dead people casting ballots. and keep in mind, we're not talking about huge presidential elections that are decided by tens of thousands of votes. many of these races come down to just a handful of votes. we're talking about state house races that are critical. if you're a candidate on either side of the aisle, you want to make sure these elections are fair and lawful. >> i remember a time when i was 17 years old and a guy that i'd known my whole life, he was almost 60, he was african-american, he'd never voted and he was intimidated and intimidated about reading the ballot. so we spent all summer working on him getting to vote. he actually voted that time, he voted for president clinton. and i always remember that when i hear these stories. people are afraid and it shouldn't be that way. and don't you think that some of these laws make people more afraid? >> no, i think -- that's great that he was able to cast his ballot. that's fantastic. but it's very important -- no one's turned away. anyone can go get a free id and go to the polls and vote. you just have to get your i.d. this is to help make elections for everyone, make sure every vote is fair and it's lawful. >> erin, what she's not -- >> follow all the laws that are on the books in every state. >> quick final word, erin 37. >> what she's not staying is many counties -- there are a number counties in texas that don't have a department of public safety office to get your i.d. where do they get it? the other deal is, people who are illegal immigrants can get a driver's license in texas. how can you pass that law but then say you can have a driver's license to vote but you pass that law, then you say voter fraud -- well, that makes no sense. >> we'll leave it on that note. thanks to both of you, appreciate it. let us know what you think on twitter. there's a number of reasons "fifty shades of grey" has become an economic powerhouse. and mitt romney doesn't have anything to do with "fifty shades of grey," mitt romney is under fire for his offshore bank accounts. why does he have them? we'll be back. ♪ you want to save money on car insurance? no problem. you want to save money on rv insurance? no problem. you want to save money on motorcycle insurance? no problem. you want to find a place to park all these things? fuggedaboud it. this is new york. hey little guy, wake up! aw, come off it mate! geico. saving people money on more than just car insurance. of single mile credit cards. battle speech right? may i? [ horse neighs ] for too long, people have settled for single miles. with the capital one venture card, you'll earn double miles on every purchase, every day! [ visigoths cheer ] hawaii, here we come. [ alec ] so sign up today for a venture card at capitalone.com. and start earning double. [ all ] double miles! [ brays ] what's in your wallet? can you play games on that? not on the runway. no. ♪ why do you whisper, green grass? ♪ [ all ] shh! ♪ why tell the trees what ain't so? ♪ [ male announcer ] dow solutions use vibration reduction technology to help reduce track noise so trains move quieter through urban areas all over the world. together, the elements of science and the human element can solve anything. [ all ] shh! [ male announcer ] solutionism. the new optimism. more than a year after its release, america is still hot for "fifty shades of grey." i have not read the books. but i'm not as bad as "outfront's" chris maloney who thought this book was about sen