Apparently corporate jet owners and Big Oil aren’t the only ones about to be screwed by Obama’s jobs plan. A key part of his plan to pay for the $447 billion package is to limit the charity write-offs for wealthy donors. Right now, a wealthy person can write-off up to 35 cents of every $1 donated to charity. Under Obama’s plan, deductions would be capped at just 28 cents of every $1 donated.
From Philanthropy.com:
In effect, Mr. Obama’s plan means that a donation of $100,000 would save a donor $28,000 in taxes, $7,000 less than he or she would save today.
…
The president, who has proposed similar changes to the charitable deduction several times throughout his presidency, has faced stiff opposition from nonprofit leaders. They say that limiting the value of the tax break would cause wealthy people to reduce their giving.
But, then again, in the Land of Obamanomics, financial incentives (disincentives) don’t affect personal behavior.
Neil Rosekrans is a founder and partner of StateBrief.com. He has been a guest political commentator for the Arizona Law Channel, NBC's Sunday Square Off and The Terry Gilberg Show on KFYI. Neil earned his undergraduate degree from Cornell University and earned his MBA and Masters in Public Policy, with an emphasis in International Relations, from Pepperdine University.
Neil and his wife, Beth, live in Scottsdale, Arizona. 
The jobs bill will never become law. That said, capping the charitable deduction is just another means of transferring power from the private (in this case, nonprofit) sector to the public sector. Obama believes government should be the primary provider of programs and services, and needy citizens (or non-citizens) should be dependent on and beholden to the government. It’s a power grab, pure and simple.
I agree with you that it won’t become law. It’s a sham bill to set up some political blame-shifting for 2012.
After two and a half years of blaming Bush, Obama will shift the blame for the stalled recovery to Congress, specifically tea party freshmen. It’s a strategy that worked for Truman in 1948, and with at historically low approval (polling 12%), it just might work with some Independent voters.