Getty Images
Boehner, Cantor take a firm stand for the wealthy's tax breaks
Last week, the Senate made its statement on taxes: the majority supports a plan that would extend tax breaks for all income up to $250,000, while returning to Clinton-era rates on higher income. A Republican alternative -- extending all tax breaks without any budget offsets -- was defeated.
Yesterday, the House offered its response, approving the Senate GOP plan that was already defeated.
The House votes pitted a straight extension of all the expiring Bush tax cuts against a Democratic plan, passed by the Senate, that would allow taxes on income, capital gains and dividends to rise on earnings over $250,000, increasing revenues by around $100 billion. It was not close. The Democratic plan failed 170-257, with 19 Democrats voting no. The Republican plan passed 256-171, again with 19 Democrats throwing in their support. One Republican, Representative Timothy V. Johnson of Illinois, who is retiring, opposed it. [...]
The House vote Wednesday and Senate passage of the Democratic plan give the parties some political cover during an August recess when each will blame the other for an economic crisis expected in January when more than $500 billion in tax cuts are set to lapse.
The result was not unexpected, but the competing House and Senate votes keeps policymakers on track for an interesting showdown.
For his part, President Obama has already issued a veto threat, vowing not to sign the Republican plan, and the White House issued a statement after the House vote: "At a time when we need to make tough choices to reduce the deficit, we can't afford another massive tax break for the wealthiest two percent of Americans. We've tried this approach, and it didn't grow the economy or strengthen the middle class.... [The president] will continue to call on Republicans in the House to stop holding the middle class tax cuts hostage and the House needs to follow the Senate's lead and get this done."
The references to holding tax cuts "hostage" is of particular interest, because it helps summarize exactly what Republican lawmakers are arguing: additional tax breaks for the wealthy or tax breaks for no one. That's the message the GOP is taking into the August recess and the 2012 election season.
Efforts to strike some sort of agreement -- if one is even possible -- probably won't begin in earnest until the fall, but it's worth noting that the unyielding Republican position faces considerable opposition. The White House, the Senate, and a clear majority of Americans back the Democratic approach, not the GOP plan, which gives Dems some additional leverage.
Indeed, one of the striking aspects of this debate thus far is just how many Democrats are standing firm on this. Republicans hoped the mere possibility of attack ads labeling Dems "tax raisers" would be enough to force Democrats to cower in fear, but that hasn't happened -- the vast majority of Dem lawmakers believe the American mainstream is on their side.
If the pattern holds, GOP leaders may soon realize their hostage strategy, premised on the assumption that Democrats will cave, may fail -- and it will be Republicans who are on the hook for higher tax rates on everyone in 2013.
Leave a Comment:
No more handouts to the rich. The Bush tax cuts for the rich must killed immediately. Our country cannot afford such welfare for the rich. The one percent must be held accountable and made to pay their fair share. This is what real Americans are demanding from this this do-nothing Congress. Incomes for the top percent of taxpayers have shot up at an obscene pace even as incomes and wages for the vast majority of Americans have fallen. Poverty is at record levels while the rich get big tax breaks on their market investment and corporate jets. Hit 'em in the pocketbook and stop forcing deficit reduction on the backs of the middle-class. PP
Just to clarify your rant, the tax rates are for all, BO wants to raise taxes based on a group of people who make more.
And to clarify your clarification, BO agrees with most Americans that the "group of people who make more" should pay a proportionatley fair tax rate, instead of a lower rate than those of us in the middle class.
Eric, please feel free to turn off FAUX NOISE. To be fair even the top 2% will receive a tax cut on their first $250k, above that the rates will return to the Clinton era rates. This is about fairness and balance, the budget cannot be "balanced" on the backs of the shrinking Middle Class, whose stagnant wages no longer have the purchasing power that they once did. Those making more have done quite well over the last decade, now it's time for them to contribute to the collective that they have been leaching on via subsidies and depreciation (welfare) of the tax payers largesse.
Where's Mr. Mitty to tell us how the Laffer curve is a Dirac delta function at zero?
Zora, we don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. We could make the tax rate double for the top 2% and it wouldn't dent the deficit. Why do we think the Gov't can do better with our money or anyone's than we can? Would it be used to shrink the debt? How do we know that? OR would it be wasted on a Solyndra? And thank you for not disappointing with the Fox news reference, I swear you guys much watch that more than MSNBC since you know what is on it.
Eric, despite what you think let me try and explain a few things. Remember that "Stimulus" money that given to the states by the federal government for those "shovel ready" projects - you do realize that most of those Congress critters that inveighed against it all requested some of that "stimulus" money for those "shovel ready" projects in their districts to help with "job growth". Those newly employed people turned around and spent that money on food, shelter, gas, daycare, maybe they even took in a movie - thereby cycling that money thru the economy, which in tern created a bit of demand.
Now, let us extend your analogy of how we have a "spending problem" - I will agree that spending on subsidies (WELFARE) to BIG OIL/COAL/PHARMA/AG & Defense need to be cut, I also think that closing those tax loopholes to the rich and corporate are definitely needed; however, bridges, roads, schools- infrastructure is very necessary because most of ours are in desperate need of not just repair but rebuilding, upgrading our energy grid, and our transportation system - these are things for the common usage and therefore should be paid for with our tax dollars.
Also, contrary to every GOTP talking point Social Security - DOES NOT CONTRIBUTE 1 PENNY TO THE DEBT, period! And if just maybe we can get the for profit insurance industry out of the way we can bring down the costs of health care which would cut down on costs to Medicare & Medicaid.
Psst, Solyndra was actually funded during the Bush II mis-administration. But yes we do need to develop alternative energy options because OIL/COAL won't always be around, and they are contributing to "Climate Change", and we as a society need to invest in alternatives.
Oh btw, I can't normally take more than 5 min. of any FAUX NOISE show cause that's about how much time before someone says something that insults my intelligence....
Eric is incorrect about the tax rates and deficit. Ending the Bush tax cut for the rich and the automatic budget cuts on January 1, 2013, will bring down the deficit in a very significant way. It was the Bush tax cuts, two unfunded wars by Bush and the Medicare prescription expansion that ballooned the deficit and pissed away the Clinton surplus. One war has ended and the prescription expansion is now rolled into the health care law with various cuts and cost controls. That leaves only the Bush tax cuts. If we double the tax rates on the rich, it would likely eliminate the deficit in a decade. But I forgot, the rich are job creators. And I have bridge to sell you.
Eric's not merely incorrect about the tax rates. Like all Republicans, he's incorrect about everything. That's what happens when you live in the alternate universe of Faux Snooze World.
Oh, I really hate this "we have a spending problem" bullshhit! To be this far into the economic mess 30+ years of failed conservative ideas and policies have caused, you'd thing that the MittForBrains wingnuts would have learned something. Good grief. Educate yourselves, wingnuts;
- The Truth About Federal Spending
- Sources of the Budget Deficit - NYTimes.com
- Obama spending binge never happened - Rex Nutting
- MarketWatch Column On Obama's Spending Restraint Stands Up To Attacks
- Obama Presided Over a Tax Revenue Drought, Not a Spending Binge
- Economic Downturn and Bush Policies Continue to Drive Large Projected Deficits
- Off the Charts Blog | What’s Driving Projected Debt?
There's a whole lot more if any wingnut is still stupid enough to not understand after those beat downs.
Listening to the "debate" on the floor of the House yesterday, I was struck by the repeated pleas of the Republicans. "Just extend the tax cuts for a year."
Yes, because in a year they will still hold the House and quite possibly win the Senate. And have their very own Rubber Stamp in the oval Office!
I hope the Democrats actually learn how to play hardball, and don't repeat their history of caving to the GOP's demands. I am skeptical, but hopeful.
Ditto. We keep coming back to the same game of chicken, and we will continue to until the Republicans find out that we're not going to cave.
Everyone should write to Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and tell them to stick to their guns.
The acid test of whether or not the Dems stick to their guns in spite of being on the side of angels will be when the gazillionaires start pouring mega-bucks into ads attacking them for standing in the way of maintaining the status quo tax cuts and allowing them to expire. One side in this battle has the only weapon that matters against an ignorant electorate - media.
What KJ,CR,IA said , and write your reps , gop or dem , they do listen when they get enough feed back , doing it NOW here!!!!!!!!
Let them suffer through their own mandated cuts when they fail to reach a reaonable agreement. Arrogance should be rewarded.
Ok, we tried trickle-down economics by enacting the Bush tax cuts in 2003 and where did it get us - to the brink of economic collapse in 2008. So, we tried it, it failed. Didn't work. Try something else. Obama's economics? Ok, not perfect, but from the depths of the hole the Republicans dug for us as we were drowning during the Bush years at the very least Obama is treading water. So this November do we as a nation say "Hey, let's try that Bush plan again! After all, don't all economic plans deserve a second chance?". Or do we stay with the status quo of the Obama plan and methodically restore our economic health, painful as it is, via proven economic strategies?
While finishing my master's degree, I took a course in Entrepreneurism. One of the key things taught in the class was that a business built for long term success is one that grows very gradually over time. Those that grow too quickly usually fail before long.
So I have no problem with what is happening under Obama's economic plan. Slow and steady wins the race. Of course we want prosperity, but Obama warned us in 2008 that it will not come back overnight. Americans have gotten way too caught up in expecting immediate gratification, immediate results, and haven't learned that cutting corners to get somewhere quicker is bad policy.
Romney wants to cut corners - get rid of regulations that were put in place for good reasons, just so his corporate masters can reap more profits at the expense of labor, the environment, etc. And Bartender is right; nothing trickles down as promised. The wealth gap just widens.
That crashing noise you heard in 2008 was the economy hitting the ground. Painful.
But, the fall was a long one-years- and, except for a few people screaming on the way down, largely ignored by the ones who could do something about cushioning the landing.
Like Humpty Dumpty, we had a great fall. And it is going to take more than all the King's horses and men to clean up the mess. Maybe we need to go find a new chicken to lay a new egg. (Reform the G. D. Tax Code!)
You know I actually have to agree with DAY here. Reform the tax code. Get rid of those loopholes and breaks for special interest and we'll actually start seeing a rise in revenue without having to tax anyone into the stone age.
Reforming the tax code is not enough to reverse the failed conservative ideas and policies that resulted in the worst inequality and economic class mobility since the Great Depression. Not even close.
Just getting rid of loopholes and breaks for special interests will do what Romney and the Republicans already plan to do: reverse Robin Hood yet again.
Right, tax rates and deductions are NOT the only problem with the American economy/deficit.
Another big problem is Trade Policy. I've been told that our import duties are around 2% when almost all other advanced nations have rates of 20-25%. And we give tax breaks to companies that move/have factories overseas when they want to bring their profits here to give to management (bonuses) and shareholders.
It has been 30 years since Regan said that we could be a "service economy". It is not possible to fix a problem in a year that has been 30 years in the making.
And Eric, You claim that raising tax rates on the wealthy is not enough to solve the deficit problem. Assume that your numbers are correct, how is it better to let the wealthy keep more of their money (that they do NOT use to create jobs here, but do use to subvert democracy with massive ad campaigns of lies)? And do not say they are the job creators, we tried that and they DID NOT and still DO NOT use their money to create jobs here. Every dollar we let them keep is a dollar added to the deficit.
Other nations (like Germany) have more social spending and their economy's are doing good (I can't say "fine" now, but there is a world wide recession going on). They find a way to raise enough money with taxes to support their social spending without damaging their economies, WE CAN TOO! If we fix the trade policy mistakes of the past.
The dems usually cave because they reap the same benefits the teapubs get out of it. The teapub idea of compromise is the dems caving. They want to extend it one more year, why? To get more padding in their pockets. That's what they say every year. The teapubs can't keep their word, never have, never will except to the rich/big corporations. Trickle down economics has been in effect since Reagan and the only thing it does is make the rich richer and the middle class poor and the poor dirt poor.
These people we elect are not representing us and haven't for a long time. It's time they got their taxpayer welfare cut. Everyone wants to cut out the poor from getting help with food stamps and welfare, but keep giving millions to the rich and big business. I wish all those people that have that mindset would lose their jobs and find out what it's all about. I'd pay to listen to them cry. They have the Rush Limpbrains reasoning. He wanted all druggies to be tossed in jail and the key throw away until HE got caught. Then he cried like a baby saying it was a sickness. That's how the teapubs think. Do as I say, not as I do.
So much for GOTP wailing about deficits. WE both working Americans and this nation can NO longer afford or tolerate tax cuts skewered toward the top 2% - its unfair, its injustice, and its created the greatest wealth inequality since before the Great Depression! It's also why people like Mittens, the Koch brothers, Sheldon Adelson and the rest feel more entitled to believing that they shouldn't have to pay any taxes at all!
Wake up people these so called "job creators" are NOT creating jobs in America! The real "job creators" are those small "mom & pop" stores that are being put out of business by the BIG BOX conglomerates! And simply because YOU are not suffering through a job loss, and your economic picture is comfortable right now - do you really think that misfortune cannot land on your door? That line about "freedom & liberty" has been used to separate US one from another, and has lead to a selfishness beyond measure. And nowhere is this selfishness more apparent than in our current do-nothing-but-obstruct-progess GOTP led Congress!
Despite the obstructionist Congress President Obama has managed to grow the economy, pass Health Care, ended the war in Iraq, support working women by signing the Lilly Leadbetter Act, take out the top leadership of al-Quiada, repeal DADT, and more - imagine how much farther down the road to recovery WE could be if he actually had a Congress that WE all could work with!
VOTE OUT THE GOTP IN NOVEMBER!!
Exactly right, Zora, except I would mildly disagree on who is/are the job creators. Th real job creators are the middle class, as pointed out in this speech by Nick Hanauer at the TED conference last March: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBx2Y5HhplI
Demand is the key to hiring more employees. Whether that demand is from the consumer wanting to buy more of your product, or the demand created by securing a new contract requiring more workers to complete. This latter one is exactly why we need to take this opportunity to rebuild and repair our infrastructure. And that's ony one example. The private sector is sitting on trillions, but because there's no demand, they're not hiring. Who can blame them?
Yeah, yeah, the government can't create jobs. I've heard that BS way too many times. Government can and it does. Recently there was an article in the Arizona Republic concerning the defense budget cuts citing job loss estimates in this state of 50,000 workers. I think we spend too much of our budget on defense, but I'm also aware of the many companies (Boeing, Raytheon, General Dynamic to name a few) that exist and prosper because of government contracts. http://tinyurl.com/bpjbkah
And guess what? For each of those jobs created by government demand, that employee will spend his/her paycheck in the economy, thus creating even more demand.
Please take the 'we have a spending problem, not a revenue problem' and sell it to the idiots. Anyone capable of holding an original thought, or thinking more than two seconds knows better.
Dems should be clobbering the Republicans and Tea Party over their bill that is not paid for. Use the fact that the bill increases the deficit without paying for it as an election issue. This would be considered hanging them by their own petards. Alternatively, make them commit to specific budget cuts before the election. They will lose in a landslide for the Dems when people see what the Republicans and Tea Party want to cut.
Could someone explain what a "FAIR SHARE" is? And also, why the proposals to increase taxes don't designate that increased revenue toward deficit reduction? The issue is the tax code, put into place over years by both parties. Not the tax rate.
Tom, if you want to pay more taxes to help the rich to pay less taxes, fine.
If you believe in a party that will end medicare, a program that you depend on, fine.
But don't keep coming on this thread spouting right wing talking points without accepting the fact that you are defending a point that only harms you and your bottom line.
Just saying.
Donna,
I think Tom and some of the other right-wingers out here know that they can't possibly sway any votes to the GOP. I think they're out here because they secretly wish to be pulled over to the left, or at least the middle, so they can internally justify voting for Democrats.
C'mon, Tom, like the old commercial said - "Try it, you'll like it!"
Oh, and to Tom's question about "fair share":
Tom, the wealthy generally make very little of their money through a wage or salary, which as you know, is what your income tax rate hinges on. Instead, they make much of their money through investments. When it comes to taxes, investment income is treated very differently. So differently that when it's all said and done, their effective tax rate is less than many others who make much less money but through wages/salaries.
Is this making any sense to you?
So by mere virtue of the fact that the wealthy can make money in a different way than most, without actually working for it, they get to pay a lower rate. And spare me the argument that "they're taking risk with that money;" any investor worth his own spit knows how to diversify and minimize their risk in the market, plus they are always free to adjust their portfolio to raise or lower their risk exposure; nobody is forcing them to take risks.
The "fair share" we're talking about basically amounts to this; you make a million dollars, you pay a percentage of that in taxes. Doesn't matter how you made it; no preferential treatment for certain types of income, no loopholes. Just a tax rate.
The rate means a lot though... if you increase it to much people won't take the profit (whether from income or other investments) and invest it. And that's what we need.
If you have not noticed the last 30 years , they have not taken their massive profits and invested then in america
But what always get brushed under the rug in the supposed INVESTMENTS argument , investors have not invested in employees or the health of communities , and the out come is stagnate wages and a stagnate economy ... even in smaller companies , when they do not pay people properly , the community and economy will tank over time
That is where a responsible constitutional gov steps in to keep its nation strong , other wise we end up with surfs and kings , which we are not far from now
David James
It's not so much as the Dems want to raise the Upper Classes Tax Rate. Getting rid of the Bush Tax Cuts, is simply closing the Loopholes in the Tax Code for them. The rate they pay is going to go up. But it's not essentially "Raised". It's just going back to what it should be minus the tax breaks and loopholes they have now. The GOP keeps saying it's raising taxes. But it's really just forcing them to pay the Taxes they should be paying anyway. Yes they are paying more taxes, but no their taxes are not going up, per say.
Calvin is right. And it seems most have forgotten that the Bush tax cuts were put in place as a temporary measure to spur the post-9/11 economy. It was probably the right thing to do at that time, but it is certainly not the right thing to keep doing just because we like having lower taxes. The Tea Party fails to realize that our income tax rates are the lowest they've been in decades.
OT: The Boner/Cantor pictures always amuse me. they are never smiling unless they're up to no good or making demeaning or debasing statements on POX snooze. Considering how they've had the country's middle class by the balls for the last two years one might think that they would be smiling incessantly! Nope, no joy there, that colored guy in the White House is still hindering their true happiness and for that I say good. I can't wait for this tax break crap to expire and I think it should be across the board; I want the god damn roads fixed again! I want police back on the street fighting crime, I want to hear simpleton tea-tards cry me a fecking river over T.E.A. because that whole premise is horse@!$%# and I would like to see an actual surplus once again like in the "good old days". And please, tax the living @!$%# out of the Mitt Rmoney permanently and/or convince him to rescind his citizenship so we never have to see that liar/smiling jackass in an election ever again!
well said trollop
If Democrats would learn to stand up to bullies, Wingnut World would be dead in two years and this country could solve its problems. And it could help beginning solving the worst problem the world has ever known: global warming.
Bottom line - who will get the majority vote in November 2012? If one is not of the top 2% of this nation, one would do well not to vote for Willard Romney.
Yet, many a voter in the working and middle class will succumb to the relentless lies coming from the Romney camp, and the Koch Bros. inspired super-PACs, and no doubt vote against their own interests, and then piss and moan when their plight gets worse should they help elect this corporate puppet!
Democrats and their allies should be taking it to the Republican brand as aggressively as they can to hold the ADD American voters focused on the need to cast their votes against Republican candidates. The voter ID laws state Republican lawmakers have passed have also worsened the chances for a free and fair election.
If the Republican brand prevails in November of 2012, Whale Oil, Beef Hooked! -Kevo
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God."
Where does it say that they will only do what the Party line dictates. McConnell, Boehner, Cantor, Ryan and the rest may have been elected by Republicans in their district and state, but when they come to Washington they represent all the people in their district. When they vote on bills and/or amendments their vote impacts all of us, Republicans, Democrats and Independents - show me where in your oath it states where you only represent your party. This is why you have to compromise because your vote impacts "We the People".
Start representing "We the People" and not your own political ambitions and your Party's ideology. Time to grow up and put your Big Boy Pants on.
Regarding the tax debate, I'm wondering whether the framing of it as a tax cut for people making less than $250k/yr makes the point as much as saying, "Tax cuts for EVERYONE on the first $250k/yr!" Inclusive! Who could argue with that?