iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Schumer: Budget Deal Should Include Tax Hikes, Medicare Changes


First Posted: 03/09/11 11:28 AM ET Updated: 05/25/11 07:35 PM ET

WASHINGTON -- Hours before the Senate is slated to hold a pair of doomed votes on extending government funding, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) argued on Wednesday that Congress should broaden the scope of its upcoming budget deal to tackle tax policy and mandatory spending as well as discretionary spending.

Speaking at the Center for American Progress, an Obama administration-allied think tank, Schumer said the plan sent to the Senate by the Republican-controlled House took the wrong tack by focusing on cuts to discretionary spending, which makes up only a small portion of the overall budget. The bill passed by the House last month would cut $61 billion from current funding levels, including cuts to regulatory agencies and trims to programs that help students and low-income families.

Schumer said Republicans were relying on "bogus logic" in demanding the cuts. Although they would cut $61 billion from the existing budget, the effect on the deficit would be much smaller, a reduction of roughly $5 billion, or less than one-half of 1 percent, according to an analysis by the Congressional Budget Office.

The budget bill is expected to fail a Senate vote on Wednesday afternoon, as is a Democrat-proposed alternative. With both sides back to the drawing board, Schumer said the final plan should end tax loopholes and certain subsidies, including to big oil companies and agriculture, reform Medicare and trim the defense budget.

"We're debating how big a meat cleaver we should take to an already small part of the budget," he said of the House bill. "When you start slicing a portion of the budget that is already lean to begin with, you risk cutting muscle."

Schumer called on the White House, which is leading talks between the House and Senate over the budget bill, to broaden their reach to an "all of the above" approach. The current short-term stopgap funding bill will expire on March 18, which means Congress must pass another funding bill before then to avoid government shutdown.

In the meantime, House Republicans, Senate Democrats and the White House are at an impasse. Although President Barack Obama has spoken against additional short-term funding bills, leaders from both houses acknowledge that they will likely not come to a compromise by next Friday. To avoid government shutdown, then, Congress will likely pass another short-term funding bill, which House Republicans say would need to include at least $2 billion in cuts per week to pass muster with their conference.

Schumer did not discuss details of a short-term funding bill, but signaled he would be open to more stopgap measures to prevent government shutdown as the two chambers negotiate a longer-term solution.

"It would be great if the reset would occur tomorrow, and obviously today's vote is intended to make the point that neither side can pass its present budget," he said. "Will it take a day? Will it take a week? I don't know. But it has to happen or we won't be able to come to a compromise on a seven-month budget."

House Republicans have been skeptical of ideas to expand the scope of budget talks to mandatory spending, arguing entitlements and the tax code are better left for later in the year. The House Budget Committee, chaired by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) will unveil its budget proposal in about a month, and will include changes to Social Security eligibility, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) said on Tuesday.

Schumer said he does not want to see Social Security changes in upcoming talks over the budget, calling the program "a separate concern."

"Obviously Social Security doesn't play much of a role in the short-term budget, and frankly it doesn't play that much of a role if you're looking at deficit reduction in the longer-term budget, either," he said.

Instead, Schumer said, the focus should be on other areas where the government can find additional revenue while paring down inefficient programs, including by allowing the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, which Obama extended last year, to expire in 2012. Congressional Research Service reports "If all earnings were subject to the payroll tax, but the base was retained for benefit calculations, the Social Security Trust Funds would remain solvent for the next 75 years."

"We have yet to seriously dig into our 14,000-page tax code to find ways to reduce the deficit without hurting American families and small businesses," Schumer said. "Believe me, there are plenty of opportunities there."

UPDATE, 12:15 p.m.: Amid criticism that the White House has been too quiet during the budget debate, the administration reaffirmed its threat on Wednesday to veto H.R. 1, the House's $61 billion-cutting bill, in the unlikely event the bill is passed by the Senate.

"If the President is presented with a bill that undermines critical priorities or national security through funding levels or restrictions, contains earmarks, or curtails the drivers of long-term economic growth and job creation while continuing to burden future generations with deficits, the President will veto the bill," according to a statement from the Office of Management and Budget.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON -- Hours before the Senate is slated to hold a pair of doomed votes on extending government funding, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) argued on Wednesday that Congress should broaden the scope o...
WASHINGTON -- Hours before the Senate is slated to hold a pair of doomed votes on extending government funding, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) argued on Wednesday that Congress should broaden the scope o...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 833
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (14 total)
10:52 AM on 03/31/2011
Make sure to describe them as Extreme.
11:54 AM on 03/14/2011
We need a third arm of government, one that looks out for the middle class. The first thing that should be done is to not pay the politicians who are working against the middle class. Take away their perks and privileges. Republicans and Democrats both need controlled.
11:13 PM on 03/12/2011
I think you're all reading into this a bit too much. Senator Schumer is a brilliant, longtime democrat who vigorously supported the health care law. He's partially responsible for this monumental achievement!

I don't think he means Medicare any ill will, but even if the republicans decide to gut it or kill it altogether, no worries. The health care law mandate will protect seniors from losing coverage. Some of them may even be eligible for subsidies. Anyone predicting a health care crisis is just channeling Chicken Little.
03:49 PM on 03/10/2011
Sen Schumer, let me understand you. The repugs are in a corner no plan for a budget .
An you A Democratic Sen Schumer want to give them gram an papap medicare to gut ? You dems will pay the price .

Sen Schumer Nafta is still raging . Could you fix that ? American Worker Tax being used to ship American jobs overseas ?

Prescription Drug Plan " please negotiate the price of PDP. This drug program is unfunded ? The American Worker Tax is being wasted ? Please fix it .

Things not to do borrow 1000 billion =1trillion for a two yr .tax cut . Then cry chicken little chicken little the sky is following .. I Sen Schumer has to gut Grams an Papaps medicare ?

Sen Schumer why did you raise tax on the middle class an working poor ? When you removed the make work pay tax cut ? Sen Schumer 40 million family will be hit with a much higher tax in 2011 ?

Sen Schumer you do no you will do nothing about raiseing tax on these corp. ? Just gut Gramas an Papaps medicare an.S.S. Sen Schumer you opened up S.S. in these tax cut .
09:23 AM on 03/10/2011
The backbone of State,County,and City revenues are property taxes.Every foreclosure and short sale reduces all property values,snow balling less and less revenues,which triggers more and more cuts in jobs and services.Its become a race to the bottom.Remove Bank write off losses incurred for foreclosure and short sale.Allow write offs for principal reductions only.Same outcome for Banks,returns 27% of mortgages back to zero equity which is better than negative.Stops down ward spiral of home values, stabilizes property tax revenues.Slows or stops Job losses.Jobs Today,deficits Tomorrow>
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
zogimperator
is this microbiology?
09:59 AM on 03/10/2011
Makes altogether too much sense.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
freethinkergirl
Help, there's an elephant in our bedrooms...
01:46 PM on 03/10/2011
Very interesting....I like your solution, F&F
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
plaidsportcoat
01:36 AM on 03/10/2011
"Although they would cut $61 billion from the existing budget, the effect on the deficit would be much smaller, a reduction of roughly $5 billion, or less than one-half of 1 percent, according to an analysis by the Congressional Budget Office."

Yeah, but--the constant refrain from the GOP that the Budget Office is partisan, therefore they never accept their numbers has won credibility for this idea in the general public. Anytime you refer to the CBO anymore, they simply stop listening. Just one more little way they win the messaging.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LouiseM
One of the most cynical optimists you'll ever meet
11:20 AM on 03/11/2011
"win" the messaging? I think it's becoming clear to everyone who isn't a confirmed deep-Right Republican that the party is divorced from any facts they don't like. They ignore everything, from science to accounting to law to the opinions of the people.

The more that they reject any non-partisan numbers just because they don't like them, the more that they become the party of schizophrenic delusion.
12:57 AM on 03/10/2011
What a surprise. Senator Schumer and Obama want to raise taxes and keep on spending! And we all know for every $1 they take in taxes from people working hard for a living or running a business that they will spend that $1 and $10 more plunging us even deeper into debt. And the taxes will kill hiring! When Sen Schumer will you and Obama stop the massive corrupt spending and driving the U.S. to the debt clifff? When will you stop trying to kill our economy?
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
freethinkergirl
Help, there's an elephant in our bedrooms...
01:52 PM on 03/10/2011
Drink!!!!!......"corrupt spending"....that was Bush and his D!ck.....Halliburton....Iraq....giving tax cuts during war time which was has never been done before in history....MMA of 2003 adding billions to the deficit and giving Bush's pharma boys $$$$$$$$$....Bush's massive bailout of the banks in 2008....
 
Bush increased the deficit 83%......and never put the money he borrowed from China in the deficit which Obama has done....so there you go Sparky.....it was Bush's corrupt spending and money he hid with smoke and mirrors....not to mention we now have to pay the interest on the out of control spending by Bush and his cronies....
08:59 PM on 03/09/2011
As long Schumer is there the rich do not have to worry about paying their fair share.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
johuyik
Pro-2cnd and anti-NRA.
08:23 PM on 03/09/2011
Actually there's nothing to worry about . See the top 1% of Americans are doing disproportionately well. Their earnings are up when the rest of Americans are making less, and they're tax breaks are in full force.

So according the GOP model of top down economics, we're actually doing great right now!

See, nothing to worry about! Bet you feel better already don't you?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
Quitcherbichin
If you are posting here, thank a veteran.
11:57 PM on 03/09/2011
Dam straight...as long as there are rich people there will be jobs...I never asked a poor man for job...it just didn't seem to be a smart thing to do.
09:48 AM on 03/10/2011
We need to get a button added to comments that says IDIOTIC!

How many jobs have they created in the past 10 years. Hardly any and that is with them getting tax breaks.

The only jobs here are those jobs that can't be done if they were sent overseas.
07:40 PM on 03/09/2011
Yes! Please do revisit tax policies. STOP the regressive nature of the American tax system. Make everyone pay their fair share, including corporations. Plug those loopholes that rob the US Treasury of trillions every year.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
Quitcherbichin
If you are posting here, thank a veteran.
11:58 PM on 03/09/2011
Can you say....FLAT TAX...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LouiseM
One of the most cynical optimists you'll ever meet
11:28 AM on 03/11/2011
Can you say ... unfair to the lowest, overly generous to the highest, and a failure in the Eastern European nations were it's been tried (who all also have VATs.)

Unjust and a sideshow issue.
This comment has been removed due to violations of our [Guidelines]
05:59 PM on 03/09/2011
For Fleebagging Democrats every cut offered is too low to count, but anything with any substance --well that's off limits. And to say the GOP used fancy figures -- they learned it from Obama's Chicago style accouting.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LouiseM
One of the most cynical optimists you'll ever meet
11:30 AM on 03/11/2011
I've got a government budget cut that most of America loves - cutting the bloated corrupt contractor-laden Department of Defense! Get that sucker down to 2001 levels - half odf what it is today.

That's a budget cut Americans all agree on! they also want you guys to leave social programs alone.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
OneInEveryFamily
I wish conservatives would read more liberally.
05:55 PM on 03/09/2011
The Key Statistics

•Between 1960 to 2004, the top 0.1 percent of U.S. taxpayers — the wealthiest one in one thousand — have seen the share of their income paid in total federal taxes drop from 60 to 33.6 percent.
•America’s highest income-earners — the top 400 — have seen the share of their income they pay in federal income tax alone plummet from 51.2 percent in 1955 to 16.6 percent in 2007, the most recent year with top 400 statistics available.
•If the top 400 of 2007 paid as much of their incomes in personal income tax as the top 400 of 1955, the federal treasury would have collected $47.7 billion more in revenue from just these 400 taxpayers.
•In 2007, if the top 0.1 percent of taxpayers — Americans with incomes that averaged $7,126,395 — had paid total federal taxes at the same rate as the top 0.1 percent paid these taxes in 1960, the federal treasury would have collected an additional $281.2 billion in revenue.
•Tax cuts for the wealthy between 2001-2008 cost the U.S. Treasury $700 billion, with all the billions added directly to the national debt. Retaining these tax cuts will cost $826 billion over the next decade.
•In 1960, the middle 20 percent of U.S. taxpayers paid 15.9 percent of their incomes in total federal taxes(but payroll, and other federal taxes). These same Americans,are now paying 16.1 percent of their incomes in total federal taxes
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
sunshine14
05:33 PM on 03/09/2011
Wealthy tax cuts is -spending- more spending, then the cost of 2 wars, put together. Like  handing a pay check to each, wealthy person. Wealthy tax cuts, one is  giving -spending- the Nations-incoming TAX Dollar Revenues away. Tax Revenues, belong to the Nation as a whole, your money, everyone money going into a huge pot, taking that money out of the pot, and giving it to only the wealthy.  Tax Dollars, that rightfully belong to the Nation as a whole.  Congress knows what it is, in the Trillions of lost tax revenues. Congress know right away how much is lost every year, since 2001 2003. Add up every State High Deficits together, that is the total figure of Loss wealthy tax cuts.  Wisconsin reported it has lost -HALF-in their TAX Revenues coming in, because of wealthy tax cuts, reporting also some companies pay no taxes period. Why each year for last 11 years, why  every year, each, State Deficit,  has slowly been going up into High Deficits.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
OneInEveryFamily
I wish conservatives would read more liberally.
05:16 PM on 03/09/2011
One person, please tell me what category of spending is out of whack to historical norms, other than defense.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
05:21 PM on 03/09/2011
Income tax.
photo
Big Richard
Stuck in the middle with you
05:56 PM on 03/09/2011
Income tax is an income, not an expense. But, taxes on the rich have fallen below historical lows. so, I agree. Raise taxes on the wealthy to bring them in line with historical norms.