House Dems To Biden: 'One Year Of Unemployment Benefits For Two Years Of Tax Breaks For The Rich?'

Democrats in the House of Representatives complained to Vice President Joe Biden for two hours Wednesday evening about the White House's deal with Republicans to preserve expiring tax cuts in exchange for extended jobless aid and a payroll tax holiday.

"One year of unemployment benefits for two years of tax breaks for the rich? What kind of deal is that?" said Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.), describing the gripes of "plenty of people" during a meeting between Biden and House Democrats.

The White House struck the deal with congressional Republicans on Monday to preserve Emergency Unemployment Compensation and Extended Benefits programs for 13 months in exchange for a two-year extension of tax cuts for people earning more than $200,000 a year.

The programs provide up to 73 weeks of federally-funded benefits for workers who exhaust 26 weeks of state benefits. The average weekly benefit is about $300, and the total cost of a yearlong reauthorization is roughly $60 billion. Republicans and conservative Democrats ostensibly concerned about the deficit impact of the benefits have blocked several attempts to renew them in the past couple weeks, but they've signaled they will relent if the benefits are attached to the even-costlier tax cuts for the rich.

Some 800,000 laid off workers have already received cutoff notices, and another 1.2 million will stop receiving benefits by the end of the month unless Congress reauthorizes the recently-lapsed programs.

Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) said after the meeting that there are "serious questions" as to whether the White House's deal could pass the House in its current form. Several Democrats leaving the meeting said Biden did not suggest the White House is open to making changes to the deal's framework.

"I think there's more support in the caucus than might appear upon first blush," said Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.), a supporter of the deal. "I think some people felt they had to vent; I think there are a lot of people who don't like it, but that isn't the same as saying at the end of the day they're going to vote no."

Several Democrats said the least popular part of the White House's deal is the estate tax proposal, which would tax estates at 35 percent and exempt the first $5 million, a far more generous proposal than Democrats have supported.

"The rich get everything they wanted," said McDermott. "They don't care about the other stuff because they know it will all go away. The unemployment benefits -- we're gonna be fighting that one this time next year, right in the middle of when they're in control. What chance do we have then? Zero."

As he left, Biden told reporters the meeting was "great."

Comments

[Kyrillos Wickenberg]

09:43 PM on 12/10/2010

The rich don't need any stinking tax cuts. The stock market is up 15% so far this year. They are making a bundle. IT's the poor 99ers that need the break.

[2circulate]

09:31 PM on 12/10/2010

2002-2010 Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% of Americans amounts to over $600 billion

2008 - $750 billion taxpayer money allocated for wealthiest banks in the country

2010 - $300+ billion more in tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% of Americans

See a pattern? Both the Republicans and Democrats work for the wealthy 2% and not for the 98%. How to stop it? NO MORE MONEY FOR THE WEALTHY FOR ANY REASON!

[conservicide]

03:31 PM on 12/10/2010

The only thing Biden can do is reiterate to Obama and his Clinton staffers that are convinced that they can smooth over any message, is that he is setting the dems up for a full collapse in what everyone thought would be a new era of sanity.

The end result is that Bush results are extended to 12 years total so far, corporate lobbyists win no matter who is in office. The only difference is dems grumble about it and repugs get paid for it.

[Tecumseh]

11:40 AM on 12/10/2010

Why were Democrats in Congress and Pres. Obama afraid to make populist arguments about tax cuts for the rich before the November election? Why didn't they vote on it repeatedly to shame the Republicans? It's the only card they had to play. While House Democrats are correct on the merits here, it's a little late to get on their high horse.

[SparkyDash]

12:37 AM on 12/11/2010

Indeed, this was the job of the Congress. In an attempt to save their seats or win elections (midterm election results tell us how effective that pathetic strategy was) they essentially dumped it in Obama's lap for post election efforts. Sad. Such a hotbutton issue may have actually helped many of the Democrats by calling out Repubs on their ugly embrace and protection of America's top 2%. Now Congress can act like heroes and Obama takes the heat. However, the stimulus resulting from the compromise may be Obama-Biden's big effin' deal...stay tuned ;-)

[Ernie Vega]

05:08 AM on 12/14/2010

Hi Sparky. I agree, stay tune is right. So glad you saw it. I was posting links and quotes earlier. This is good news. Faved. Already a fan, Thanks for the response on my other post, Did you read Krauthammer;s article on the Wash Post? He gets it. See you on the threads,

[Lost Rights]

11:31 AM on 12/10/2010

"I think some people felt they had to vent; I think there are a lot of people who don't like it, but that isn't the same as saying at the end of the day they're going to vote no."

Too bad they are not saying NO loud enough for any one to be convinced they mean it; and they are giving signs that don't really mean to oppose it.

[Genders]

09:21 PM on 12/09/2010

Continued tax cuts will require massive spending cuts which will cause a massive depression. Let the tax cuts expire, then do not allow any business in congress before the unemployment is extended, The tax rate for the rich go to 70-90% as they always have in wars and recessions. and massive stimulus of infrastructure and green energy is created.

[bornefree]

02:55 AM on 12/10/2010

Now this makes sense.

[Lost Rights]

11:33 AM on 12/10/2010

Hey, I said that. Thanks for keeping this out there. If Obama and his ilk had any courage, they would go for that rate!
The thing is, the Rupiglets couldn't squeal any louder than they are now, and that would leave some real room for negotiations.

[Bystander]

07:12 PM on 12/09/2010

You know BO is in trouble when he sends Biden to "persuade."

[Kalemanao]

06:49 PM on 12/09/2010

WTF? POLITICIANS THREATEN TO SHUT THE GOVERNMENT DOWN... BASICALLY ON ARGUMENT OVER HOW MUCH "THEY" ARE GOING TO TAX US! WHAT IF WHEN "THEY" HOLD THE NEXT ELECTION TO KEEP OR GET THE CUSHY JOB... "WE, THE PEOPLE..." (of any political affiliation) CHOOSES NOT TO CAST A SINGLE VOTE FOR ANY OF THEM... WHO WOULD BE KING......

[Genders]

09:58 PM on 12/09/2010

Not voting enables multinational kings to rule.

[PrincipiaChamp]

12:17 AM on 12/10/2010

Indeed, we must continue to make our voices heard, no matter how dismayed we begin to feel. Republicans actually count on this happening with Democrats. Don't let it happen.

[MED1025]

05:15 PM on 12/09/2010

Poor Joe. Don't shoot the messenger.

[codycap]

04:14 PM on 12/09/2010

If the right doesn't want to pay for unemployment, let bush tax cuts expire and use the money to provide infrastructure jobs.

[Disappointed Democrat]

03:35 PM on 12/09/2010

Lolz!

[TaiJi2]

02:49 PM on 12/09/2010

Whatever the merits of the issue, the comments on this thread clearly indicate that we, as a whole, are getting dumber by the second.

[olivia]

03:11 PM on 12/09/2010

You didn't have to come here to learn that.

[eyelashviper]

02:29 PM on 12/09/2010

Giving Biden an earful just might get the message thru to the WH.

[DeeFromTheD]

02:40 PM on 12/09/2010

Yeah, until the rabid right decides they may want to take their ball home until Jan. and everything goes down because the dems didn't handle their business before the election.

[olivia]

03:10 PM on 12/09/2010

Let the country see what the GOP is going to do come January 20. Whatever is done now, the GOP will take credit for the good and blame the Dems for the bad.

Just do nothing Dems, if this bill is the best you can do.

[dano14]

06:18 PM on 12/09/2010

not gonna matter a bit. The socialist-in-chief has his own agenda. Poor Joe, getting used.

[twain307]

08:59 PM on 12/09/2010

As virtually all of America's wealth is in private hands and the government owns or runs no businesses (GM being a temporary bailout, and the Post Office being Constitutionally mandated), I fail to get how some of you people keep trotting out the word socialist. Do you not own a dictionary? Have you ever looked up the definition? We have a plutocracy, and corporatist leadership. Two more words for you to look up.

[CherokeeGirl]

02:11 PM on 12/09/2010

Some of the motivation obviously is a desire to become even more obscenely rich in the manner of the gangster Johnny Rocco in “Key Largo”, played by Edward G. Robinson, who has this exchange with the hero Frank McCloud, played by Bogie:

Johnny Rocco: There’s only one Johnny Rocco.

James Temple: How do you account for it?

Frank McCloud: He knows what he wants. Don’t you, Rocco?

Johnny Rocco: Sure.

James Temple: What’s that?

Frank McCloud: Tell him, Rocco.

Johnny Rocco: Well, I want uh …

Frank McCloud: He wants more, don’t you, Rocco?

Johnny Rocco: Yeah. That’s it. More. That’s right! I want more!

[Greg285]

02:08 PM on 12/09/2010

Dems in the House and Senate, time to 'Man Up' and put your words in action! Vote no, please don't let this deal pass the house or Senate! If you don't. the Dems will pay a serious in 2012! If you thought the mid-term elections were bad because folks did not vote, what until you see what happens in 2012 if this deal goes through! The Republicans know this will piss of the democratic base, therefore, people will not vote and they win by default. People, when are the Democrats going to realize that this is Chess and not checkers?