Jim DeMint: I'll Filibuster Tax Cut Plan

Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) signaled on Tuesday his intention to vote against a likely cloture motion in the Senate on a tax cut deal struck by the White House and Republicans this week.

Defining his stance on the issue on conservative Hugh Hewitt's radio program, the Republican senator and Tea Party favorite also said he would oppose the proposal should it garner enough support to overcome a filibuster.

Here's an excerpt of DeMint's exchange with Hewitt:

HH: I've got some quick questions for you. The first is, if the deal reached between the president and the Republican leadership yesterday makes it to the floor of the Senate in substantially the same form, will you vote for cloture to allow a final vote on it? And would you vote for it on that final vote if it cleared cloture?

JD: No.

HH: On both counts?

JD: On both counts...

Although President Barack Obama is taking heat from his own party for the extent of his compromise on the tax cuts, DeMint told Hewitt that Republicans gave up too much in the deal.

"Most of us who ran this election said we were not going to vote for anything that increased the deficit," he said. "This does. It raises taxes, it raises the death tax. I don't think we needed to negotiate that aspect of this thing away. I don't think we need to extend unemployment any further without paying for it, and without making some modifications such as turning it into a loan at some point. It then encourages people to go back to work. So there's a lot of problems with it."

DeMint added that he sees the solution to the ongoing tax cut debate as a "permanent extension" of the tax rates implemented under the administration of former President George W. Bush.

The conservative lawmaker is the second Republican in the Senate to come out against the agreement reached between the GOP leadership and the Obama administration. The Washington Post reported earlier this week that retiring Ohio Sen. George Voinovich made clear his opposition to the plan.

Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont also came out in force and stated his unwavering opposition to the proposal.

"Millionaires and billionaires do not need huge tax deductions, that's the simple truth," he explained during an appearance on MSNBC's "The Ed Show" on Monday. "If we're serious about creating jobs in this country, which should be our main priority, that's the worst way to do it. Much better to take that money, invest in our roads, bridges, railroad systems, infrastructure -- you create jobs doing that."

Sanders has criticized the materialization of the tax cut agreement as a "moral outrage" and has conveyed his intent to garner support to wage a filibuster against the plan.

Comments

[Pete Del Re]

04:06 PM on 12/10/2010

Dear Sen DeMint - Not voting for cloture isn't a filibuster... What Bernie Sanders is doing on the floor of the Senate right now IS a filibuster. It's nice to see the genuine article again and not just obstructionism. I hope you're listening to Sen Sanders, because that is how it's done.

[mphalen]

03:04 PM on 12/10/2010

LIAR!

[wargames83]

09:01 PM on 12/09/2010

Who cares what Jum DeMint says? After all he single-handedly caused the recession.

[wargames83]

09:02 PM on 12/09/2010

Jim Demint. I am a terrible typist

[funserious]

12:51 PM on 12/09/2010

Do it, you puppy.

[Drew Tornelli]

12:13 PM on 12/09/2010

Bernie Sanders for President 2012!

[Drew Tornelli]

12:07 PM on 12/09/2010

Tax cuts for billionaires--LET IT EXPIRE, dammit!

[G Dobbs]

10:38 AM on 12/09/2010

Poor Jimbo - Fox hasn't told him that the Republicans are now in charge.

[John W Hindes]

10:36 AM on 12/09/2010

We will END unemployment insurance.
We will CREATE new infastructure, lite, clean, safe transportaion, we will put all to work building it.

This is after the BIG CRASH of our current systems.

As for now, lay back and enjoy the orgy ;-)

[Justjack1]

10:27 AM on 12/09/2010

SUPERKK, your statement was so right it had to be posted twice: "The goal of today's conservati­­ves is to funnel middle-cla­­ss taxpayers' funds into the hands of the wealthy. That's it; don't look for further complexiti­­es. If they could get tax breaks for the wealthy only, that's all they would want. But most of the electorate would not support that, so they add tax breaks for the middle class to make the tax breaks for the wealthy palatable. This principle holds for conservati­­ves throughout all these major government programs. In this shell game, the 'pea' is major kickbacks for the rich, and the 'shell' is minor kickbacks for everyone else. "

[sunny4]

09:49 AM on 12/09/2010

People Jim Demint states the only reason he'll vote against this package is , take unemployment off the table!

[Mencken Today]

07:35 AM on 12/09/2010

Well you guys are on record; now do it!!!

[cornflower]

06:44 AM on 12/09/2010

If DeMint's against it, I'm for it.

[Loyd Hawkins]

09:04 AM on 12/09/2010

That's a strange way to come to your political beliefs. You should either be for it or against it based on the merits of the bill, not on who does or doesn't support it.

[cornflower]

06:42 AM on 12/09/2010

"It raises the death tax." How can a person say something like that with a straight face?

[SuperKK]

07:05 AM on 12/09/2010

The goal of today's conservati­ves is to funnel middle-cla­ss taxpayers' funds into the hands of the wealthy. That's it; don't look for further complexiti­es. If they could get tax breaks for the wealthy only, that's all they would want. But most of the electorate would not support that, so they add tax breaks for the middle class to make the tax breaks for the wealthy palatable. This principle holds for conservati­ves throughout all these major government programs. In this shell game, the 'pea' is major kickbacks for the rich, and the 'shell' is minor kickbacks for everyone else.

[funserious]

12:53 PM on 12/09/2010

.....not really a person......

[jcop]

05:54 AM on 12/09/2010

Of course dimwit DeMInt has no problem with the cost of the tax cuts for him and his rich buddies. These republicans are unbelievable in the sheer level of hypocrisy they have. What complete greedy jerks. And Obama is a fool for even negotiating with the corporate tools.

[TROOPER-X]

05:44 AM on 12/09/2010

Many seem to be confused where it pertains to unemployment insurance. It is insurance just like any other, and it provides compensation up to a certain point. Jim DeMint is not out of bounds with his suggestion.
If we lose our house in a fire, it is insured up to a certain value.
If we total our car, we do not receive 5 times blue book value.
If we lose our jobs, we get a portion of our pay for a reasonable duration. There are supplemental insurances which can be purchased, but this is not the discussion.
Unemployment funds have been exhausted above and beyond, which is why the taxpayers are unfairly picking up the tab now.
This is something everyone should read and I hope it clears up what we're "entitled" to........http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/8821/ten_costly_myths_about_unemployment.html

[cnart]

07:22 AM on 12/09/2010

Apparently you were not entitled to have a brain that allows rational thought.

[GreenKate]

11:21 AM on 12/09/2010

You are the one who is confused, Trooper -X. When unemployment insurance began during the Depression the tax (ins premium) was assessed on 100% of a workers wage. In 1940 congress caved to business and capped it to the first $3,000 (the "base"), but still that covered most wages back then. The base has hardly been increased since 1940- is now only the first $7,000. Due to lobbying from business they have been allowed to underpay and underinsure. If we insured our homes and cars for slightly more than 1940 values, we would carry maybe $10K on our homes and $1K on a new car- almost worthless. This crisis is caused by what is driving most of our economic problems- decades of government caving to business.