Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

“House Democrats defy Obama on tax cut bill”

WHY ARE THEY HOLDING THE AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS HOSTAGE!

Here’s what the GOP needs to do: immediately call for an actual tax cut — beyond the continuation of the current decade’s long tax rates — on all those paying taxes on incomes up to, say, $1 million a year. Go with 5-10%.

And then they should follow Milton Friedman’s counsel and make the case for insisting those rates become “permanent” as a way to provide investors and businesses with real certainty going forward.

That is, they should fight to disarm the left of the class warfare rhetoric right now — even if it means waiting until the new Congress is seated to take care of a “compromise” on tax rates.

It’s time to pull the “progressives” toward us rather than allowing the political “center” to remain to the left of JFK.

(h/t Bob Reed)

71 Replies to ““House Democrats defy Obama on tax cut bill””

  1. cranky-d says:

    I agree. What they really should do is extend the entire current tax rate system immediately and then take the time to replace it with something else. I believe that there was a proposal to eliminate a lot of loopholes and then lower the entire tax rate for everyone. I like that idea, since the closer we all are to being taxed at the same rate, the less likely it is that special interests will distort the system. We also need to bring in more of that 50% that doesn’t pay Federal taxes, even if they only pay a relatively small amount.

  2. McGehee says:

    <munching popcorn>

  3. Joe says:

    Ouch!

    The vote comes a day after Vice President Biden made clear to House Democrats behind closed doors that the deal would unravel if any changes were made.

    “Wow did the [White House] mishandle this,” a senior House Democratic Source told CNN. “Breathtaking. Members have major substantive concerns and they should have gently guided people to the finish line.”

    Rep. Peter DeFazio of Oregon said: “They said take it or leave it. We left it.”

  4. sdferr says:

    Greg Mankiw observed on SquawkBox this morning that the compromise was, in his view, 85% what Obama wanted and 15% what the Republicans wanted. Mankiw was taking a ‘stimulus-ists’ stance on the thing at the time, closely akin so far as I could see, to the stance Dr K has taken the last few nights on FNC (is it still fair to label Mankiw a Keynesian?).

  5. Squid says:

    It’s a real problem when the Left is better at standing up for their principles (however misguided) than the so-called Right. I’d love to see the Republicans capitalize on this schism among the Left and use the opportunity force some real Change™ down their throats. It would be a surprise if they did, though.

    Here’s a hint, guys: you were given a mandate in November. Identify it, embrace it, and, for the love of all that’s holy, implement it!

  6. LTC John says:

    Clarity for the elctorate. Look you well, at what the Democratic Party has been reduced to…

  7. Bob Reed says:

    I agree entirely, and if it must wait for the 112th congress, well, so be it. But I don’t think that everyday folks are going to see this as the socialist Democrats getting behind the little guy, as is often their rhetoric ( http://tiny.cc/dh7s9 ), especially when the rate increases, in percentages, will disproportionately effect the economic lower and middle classes more than “the Rich!”…

    Hell, the lowest bracket will increase 50%!

  8. Pablo says:

    Gridlock now, blood on the floor later. So be it.

  9. sdferr says:

    Limbaugh is hammering the declaration by Summers yesterday (and Obama today) that a risk of “double-dip” recession lies in failure to pass Obama’s compromise. Obama himself, sans teleprompter we can assume, said in his Monday presser:

    In combination with the work we did in stabilizing the financial system, the work that the Federal Reserve did, that’s behind us now. We don’t have the danger of a double-dip recession.

  10. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Why are they holding the middle class hostage?

    Because they hate the children of the rich more than they love the children of the middle class.

    And really, why shouldn’t they? I mean, those other rich kids are the ones their kids are going to have to compete with, from prep-school all the way to the Ivy league. They’re just trying to eliminate the competition.

  11. LTC John says:

    I e-mailed McConnell, reminding him of his promise…

    “Thank you for sharing your thoughts with me. I make every effort to review comments and respond in a timely manner.”

    If I get a response, I’ll post it.

  12. Ernst Schreiber says:

    sdferr, he’s also hammered the point that the non-existent income tax cuts will nonetheless be called “cuts” so Obama can run on raising taxes because we’ll have “proof” that tax-cuts for the rich don’t work.

    So now I’m confused. Who’s the stupid party and who’s the evil party here?

  13. happyfeet says:

    holding cupcakes hostage plus also lucky charms

    A single federal judge is wreaking havoc on the availability and price of sugar. I’ve written at length before about the rising price of sugar following an earlier ruling by U.S. District Judge Jeffrey White that effectively outlaws the nation’s supply of genetically modified beet sugar, which accounts for some 95% of all planted beet sugar in the United States.*

    ***

    The seed-producing beet plants affected by Tuesday’s judicial order, called stecklings, were intended for crops that would be planted in 2012 and beyond.

    Government experts predict there will not be enough conventional seed to go around. An environmental assessment by the U.S.D.A. predicts that sugar beet acreage could drop by 37 percent and total sugar production could fall by 1.6 million tons of refined sugar. Taking into account sugar from sugar cane grown in the South, total domestic production could fall about 20 percent.

    Because each spring’s beet planting produces sugar that is not consumed until the following year, the full impact on prices would probably not be felt until 2012, according to the assessment and industry experts.*

    2012 I believe is when bumblefuck is up for election again

    also, stecklings is a great word

  14. ThomasD says:

    I agree, this is the time to strike back with something bold. Something that draws a clear distinction between the choices we are facing. The current deal needs to be revealed for the pit-stop-on-the-road-to-failure that it is. We want (and need) more.

  15. Squid says:

    I guess North Dakota just learned what happens when you vote the Dems out of office.

    I think the sugar beet farmers should take over a couple of missile silos out around Minot. I seem to recall that being armed with nukes makes negotiating with the O!ministration a lot more productive…

  16. weimdog says:

    I thnk I like Denniger’s idea better:

    “Repeal the 16th Amendment and impose The Fair Tax. That instantly reduces the corporate and personal tax rate to zero. Tax is assessed on the first retail sale, but not on resale – of anything. With the corporate tax rate being zero every multinational corporation in the world would “re-home” right here, right now, and bring with them several million jobs. All those people would spend money, of course, so there would be an immediate and positive impact on the economy.”

    http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=174502

  17. Jeff G. says:

    Oh, I’m on record as wanting a flat tax, weimdog. But I’m talking about now, during the lame duck session, pressing for a tax CUT.

    WHY DOES THE LEFT HATE THE MIDDLE CLASS?

  18. Matt says:

    Ric Locke called it yesterday – Pelosi got involved and apparently helped torpedo the bill. I 100% agree with Jeff (now- I disagreed somewhat yesterday as 90% good and 10% is better than 100% bad) that since the democrats have shot themselves in the ass by rejecting this compromise, the republicans should simply say “ok we’ll work up something for after the 1st of the year, that will include all the good stuff for us and none of the stuff liberals wanted”. There are so many simple ways to solve this problem – reform the tax code, make cuts permanent, reduce or suspend capital gains tax. Yes, rich people will make money but they’ll make money by employing others to assist them in making money. The willful blindness to basic economics by the is perpetually frusrating to me, because basic economics is easy to understand. I keep telling liberals “Making money in t his day and age is about confidence and speculation” and they think I’m talking about hedge fund managers, instead of the corner grocery store or the mall department store. Mind boggling.

  19. […] stupid political stunts.More at Memeorandum, with blog commentary from Ed Driscoll, Red State and Jeff Goldstein at Protein Wisdom, who asks:WHY ARE [DEMOCRATS] HOLDING THE AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS HOSTAGE?!Allahpundit: ”As […]

  20. Matt says:

    I like flat tax but think the Fair tax might be too complicated. I do think any candidate who ran with one of his primary goals to scrap and revamp the tax code would be virtually unbeatable.

  21. Obstreperous Infidel says:

    weimdog, you and Denniger, are obviously jingoistic, xenophobic, racist nationalistic nazi nazis for advocating such a position. We are all citizens of the world, don’t you know!!11111!!!11

  22. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Actually, with taxes automatically going up after 12/31, we’re going to be in a stronger position to get a real cut in the next congress than we are now. Thanks Nancy.

  23. sdferr says:

    Are y’all taking this free vote in the Dem caucus as tantamount to an outright refusal to bring Obama’s bill to the floor? ‘Cause it isn’t entirely clear yet, I think.

    Rep. Jim Clyburn of South Carolina, the House’s No. 3 Democrat, said when asked what comes next, “I don’t know. We’ll wait and see.”

  24. weimdog says:

    Agree with Ernst. Let it all expire and HR1 in the new congress can be retroactive tax and spending cuts. HR2 can be the repeal of the 16th Ammendment and the introduction of the Flat Tax.

  25. Ernst Schreiber says:

    WHY DOES THE LEFT HATE THE MIDDLE CLASS?

    Haters hate?

  26. pdbuttons says:

    why do fools
    fall in love?

  27. sdferr says:

    I do think any candidate who ran with one of his primary goals to scrap and revamp the tax code would be virtually unbeatable.

    Which is why Democrat strategist William Galston was advocating Obama grab the opportunity yesterday I’d guess.

    Obama should seize the initiative by moving comprehensive tax reform to the center of his agenda. He could argue—correctly, in my view—that the current tax code is far too complex, treats millions of average families unfairly, and constitutes an impediment to economic growth. Building on an emerging bipartisan consensus, he could go on to advocate a plan that broadens the base of the system while reducing rates—a formula that applies to both individual and corporate taxes. And he could challenge both parties to join with him to make a reformed code the law of the land during the 112th Congress.

    Jen Rubin noticed, but says it’ll never happen:

    William Galston is nearly always right. If the Democrats ever start listening to him, the GOP will be in trouble. […] That, and sign on to the Ryan-Rivlin entitlement reform plan. I know, it’ll never happen.

    So, not to worry? Hmmm, maybe worry a little.

  28. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Since today’s Democrats are temperamentally incapable of recognizing that letting people keep more of what they earn encourages them to earn still more, the only way they can see to broadening the tax base would be to tax the poor. They’re not going to go for that any more than they’re going to go tax cuts for the eevilll rich. Too many sacred cows to be turned into hamburger.

  29. Matt says:

    Sdferr I get your point but I can’t imagine the democrats under any circumstances doing anything to simplify the tax code. The more complex it is, the more they can get around paying their fair share. I always just assume Democrats will cheat in every aspect of their life when given the chance and will also stack the deck in their favor to make the cheating as easy as possible (being fundamentally lazy).

    Plus, the Won has not listened to anyone with a clue yet so I’m not expecting him to wake up and smell the tax reform.

  30. Big Bang Hunter says:

    – WASHINGTON – The Senate moved Thursday to delay a politically charged showdown vote on legislation carving out a path to legal status for foreign-born youngsters brought to this country illegally, putting off but probably not preventing the measure’s demise.

    Facing GOP objections, Democrats put aside the so-called Dream Act and said they’d try again to advance it before year’s end. They’re short of the 60 votes needed to do so, however, and critics in both parties quickly said they won’t change their minds in the waning days of the Democratic-controlled Congress.

    – So what we have so far is nothing is a done deal – yet.

    – I’ve read that one of the strongest objections the Dem caucus/Pill-losi had to the compromise was that they were not consulted. Now if the Dems just keep the intercine fighting going, who knows.

    – One potential twist is Bummblefuck is gathering more and more of the Clintonesta’s around him. He might be maneuvering for a lurch to the right, Clinton style,

  31. happyfeet says:

    where is Mr. B Moe I haven’t seen him in a worrisome amount of time

  32. Drumwaster says:

    Here’s what the GOP needs to do: immediately call for an actual tax cut — beyond the continuation of the current decade’s long tax rates — on all those paying taxes on incomes up to, say, $1 million a year. Go with 5-10%.

    Your words to Sarah Palin’s ears…

  33. geoffb says:

    None of this debate is over “tax cuts”, tax rates, or tax revenue. It is over something that must always remain hidden. It is about control, power. It is about how much of you is owned, owned by the same people who are charged with deciding the extent of their ownership of you and yours.

    To those who say “Well with my deductions and tax credits I get to keep all/most my income, maybe even get some extra back.”, I say you too are owned. Those exemptions, deductions, credits are simply the expression of the ownership. They are hoops that you must jump through.

    The higher the nominal tax rates are raised, the stronger is the compulsion to jump through those hoops. Hoops that can then be raised ever higher, made to be on fire with knives around the edges.

    Jump boy. Good boy. Here’s your treat.

  34. Squid says:

    Jump boy. Good boy. Here’s your treat.

    You named your dog “boy?” That’s bound to end in tears.

  35. JD says:

    I never thought I would thank SanFranNan for anything. I wonder if she would bring this to the floor over the objections of her caucus.

  36. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Regardless of what the Democrat leadership does or does not do, it would behoove the Republican leadership to say and do nothing to help pass Obama’s tax plan.

  37. Ernst Schreiber says:

    If the Democrats want a top bracket of 39.6%, We should want a top bracket of 25%. Better chance of getting back to 28% that way.

  38. John Bradley says:

    From the “shit that’ll never happen” file: howzabout a Corporate Income Tax rate of 0%. Leaving aside the argument that it’s double-taxation and shouldn’t exist in the first place, there’s a pragmatic argument to be made.

    Looking at the budget, the Corporate Income Tax accounts for something along the lines of $200 billion – virtually chump change in today’s world. Hell, weren’t we just promising to throw that amount of money (1.5% of GDP) to the UN to combat a thing that doesn’t exist. (So beating it will be easy, but expensive nonetheless.)

    Anyway, that $200B is only around 10% of Federal Revenue. I’m more than a little confident that if we had no corporate income taxes, the influx of new business could grow the economy enough to cancel that out, and then some. In relatively short order.

    OF course, since it’s all about control

  39. happyfeet says:

    corporate income taxes are retarded whoever thought of them is a dickface

  40. steph says:

    DICKFACIST!

  41. geoffb says:

    Drudge may have broken Roll Call over this.

    Profanity, Anger Spill Over in House Democratic Caucus Meeting

    * By Anna Palmer
    * Roll Call Staff
    * 2:29 p.m.

    The frustration with President Barack Obama over his tax cut compromise was palpable and even profane at Thursday’s House Democratic Caucus meeting.

    One unidentified lawmaker went so far as to mutter “f— the president” while Rep. Shelley Berkley was defending the package the president negotiated with Republicans. Berkley confirmed the incident, although she declined to name the specific lawmaker.

    “It wasn’t loud,” the Nevada Democrat said. “It was just expressing frustration from a very frustrated Member.”

    Rep. Jerrold Nadler (N.Y.) was also overheard saying that “we can’t trust him” not to cave to Republicans and extend the tax cuts again in two years, according to a Democratic source.

    The anger aimed at the bill was widespread. As Democrats moved to block the bill from coming up on the floor, chants of “Just say no!” could be heard by reporters outside the room.

    Berkley is one of the few Democrats publicly supporting the package. While she said it wasn’t necessarily how she would have written it, the bill should go forward in her estimation because it is “chock full” of tax cuts that will help the working class in her state.

    “I’m not willing to play Russian roulette to see who blinks first,” Berkley said.

    Steven T. Dennis contributed to this report.

  42. cranky-d says:

    Governments like business taxes because it’s a way to gain revenue indirectly from the people, while having many people cheering on “sticking it to business.”

    The country, and world, is full of fools.

  43. steph says:

    One unidentified lawmaker went so far as to mutter “f— the president”

    Will this lawmaker attend the coming State of the Union Address!

  44. JD says:

    Steph – that lawmaker is clearly a racist. Prolly a Team R plant.

    Have you heard from BMoe recently?

  45. Mike LaRoche says:

    Guess that lawmaker didn’t like the crease of Obama’s pants.

  46. Slartibartfast says:

    House Democrats defy Obama

    Old news.

    Oh. Defy, not deify. Nevermind.

  47. steph says:

    #44 – no, but I think you have me confused with someone else. I do not know BMoe, other than as a poster on this site. Sorry.

  48. Jeff G. says:

    Gran Turismo 5 arrived today. I’ll see you guys when I get back from Rome.

  49. happyfeet says:

    that is most unparliamentary language*

  50. Big Bang Hunter says:

    – Heh – Drudge has a pic of Obama up with just “F O” as the lede.

    – Couldn’t get the page to come up thought.

    – Hope that’s what the Dem caucas told him to do.

  51. sdferr says:

    Colts. ColtsColtsColts. git some.

    oh, and the fuck so-and-so stuff? Marlo Stanfield Barry Obama isn’t going to take it too well, is he? Off to the vacants with ’em.

  52. newrouter says:

    The story’s at Roll Call, but I think maybe Drudge just linked it because it won’t open no matter how many times I refresh.

    Here’s a very brief blurb from another source.

    “It was just expressing frustration from a very frustrated Member.” ? Rep.Shelley Berkley (D-NV), [characterizing] the remarks of a fellow Democratic lawmaker who said ” Fuck the president ” during a Caucus meeting concerning the tax Compromise.

    That’s a big step up from “You lie!” or a little Joker war-paint. Will the New York Times Editorial Board castigate Democrats for allowing partisan fury to overcome reason, or for creating a dark mood that increases the chance of political violence?

    Answer: No.

    http://minx.cc/?post=309204

  53. Big Bang Hunter says:

    – Finally got in, and it was just a rehash of thr fuck-the-prez comment during the caucus by an unamed Senator.

    – But some of the comments after the piece are a hoot.

    Example: I can’t wait to see the demonstrators in the streets shouting:

    “What do we want?” – “More Taxes!”
    “When do we want them?” – “Now!”

  54. Big Bang Hunter says:

    – DADT failed in the Senate.

  55. John Bradley says:

    Perhaps if someone did fuck Obama, his primal lust would be sated, and he’d stop fucking us.

    I mean, it worked wonders in the ’90s. Where’s Vera Baker when you need her?

  56. steph says:

    after bumblefuck comes the deluge, re #49, my favoritest youtube evah, comes next the

    Times cover, Feb 2011:

    “We are all FUCK YOU BUMBLEFUCK, you sick MOTHERFUCKING Bastard”

    There are no other words, other than a heartfelt and gladtiddings to all (and to all a good night) then a FUCK YOU, are there?

    ants-on-a-christ-pogo-stick don’t even come close.

  57. Big D says:

    Popcorn futures skyrocket.

  58. Big D says:

    Oh, and it looks like Senora Manning found a defense he could beat.

    And yes, I’m a Cowboys fan. So take it with a grain of salt. And by salt I mean salty Manning tears. Bwahahaha

  59. cranky-d says:

    And yes, I’m a Cowboys fan.

    What color are your eyes? Just wondering.

  60. Big D says:

    What color are your eyes? Just wondering.

    Ahh, the old “you’re so full of shit your eyes are brown” schtick. As I said, I’m a Cowboys fan. There’s not much you could say that would hurt worse than that.

  61. cranky-d says:

    You see right through me, Big D.

  62. Stephanie says:

    JD: No I haven’t heard from Bmoe since the end of November. Via email. I’m getting a worried, too.

    It’s confusing that there is a Steph and a Stephanie here. The only shortening I do to my name is Stevie – and no, I don’t sound like a goat.

  63. JD says:

    Thanks, stephanie. Sorry to ruin your night, Big D.

  64. bh says:

    Anyone have B Moe’s email address?

    We should send him a line and make sure everything’s good.

  65. Stephanie says:

    I do. I will send a note to him now.

    Donald has been around a little and he sees him and talks to him more often. I’ll zip one to him, too.

  66. sdferr says:

    Stephanie, let him know I’m concerned how he’s taking Urban’s retirement — not too hard I hope. heh.

  67. Stephanie says:

    Done and done.

  68. Slartibartfast says:

    DADT failed in the Senate.

    DADT plus, you know, a fucking huge Defense Appropriations bill.

    Wonder what was in the other 99.975% of the bill?

  69. JD says:

    Slarti – That is all on Hairy Reed and SanFranNan’s shoulders, no?

  70. Stephanie says:

    I just got the Sarah Palin piece sent to me via facebook from…Sarah herself Woohoo!!! She’s really pushing on this. I hope this pushes this right into Obama’s lap. It will be interesting to see which credentialed morons attack her for it as it just brings it further into the debate.

  71. Slartibartfast says:

    Dunno what you’re talking about, there, JD.

    Just that…well, without wading through the other four-thousand-odd articles of that bill, it’s hard to know whether it ought to have been worthy of a vote or not.

    Like as not, there’s some lefty claptrap in there about missile defense that was found objectionable.

Comments are closed.