More

Democrats To Launch Payroll Tax Cut Extension Campaign

Debbie Wasserman Schultz Payroll Tax

First Posted: 08/23/11 10:47 AM ET Updated: 10/24/11 06:12 AM ET

WASHINGTON -- Setting the stage for a more aggressive posture on taxes and jobs, the Democratic National Committee is launching a campaign to pressure Republicans to extend the payroll tax cut past the end of 2011.

The campaign will involve a wide range of party assets -- from lawmakers to new media operatives -- and take place in a number of states, including New Mexico, Colorado, Arizona, Iowa, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, California, Minnesota, Wisconsin, South Carolina and Missouri.

According to a DNC official, members of Congress will be holding coordinated press conferences this week alongside allied groups and other elected officials. There will also be what the official described as a strong social media component involving Facebook campaigns and Twitter posts from members of Congress and the DNC -- all toward the general effort of "hammering the hypocrisy of individual members who signed [Grover] Norquist's pledge [not to raise taxes]."

The cut affects the 46 percent of all Americans who pay payroll taxes but do not qualify to pay federal income taxes. In the bipartisan deal last December to keep the Bush-era tax cuts in place for another two years, lawmakers signed off on a proposal to reduce the percentage of taxes that workers pay towards Social Security from 6.2 to 4.2 percent. That rate is set to go back up to previous levels on Jan. 1, unless Congress acts.

The payroll tax cut is one of President Obama's favored policies, and a rare chance for the Democratic Party to tarnish the opposition as willing to allow tax hikes.

But the DNC's campaign does risk potential pushback from the base. Progressives have been wary of the proposal, arguing that it depletes funds from a Social Security program that could clearly use them. When the payroll tax cut was first passed in December, Social Security advocates expressed concern that it would simply be routinely extended by lawmakers wary of allowing any tax cut to lapse.

While the vast majority of Democrats now seem fully behind an extension -- arguing that it is both a financial relief to workers and a backdoor stimulus -- Republicans are now the ones balking. In an Associated Press report on Monday, Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas) acknowledged it would be a "net positive" to let workers keep the specific tax break. But because the payroll tax isn't being made permanent -- and because its benefits are not being felt by employers as much as employees -- the GOP seems poised to oppose an extension.

If Republicans do so, Democrats would have a pointed argument to push at a time when the party is hoping to regain control of the economic narrative.

At the very least, disagreement between the parties on extending the tax cut would provide yet another telling contrast; Republicans recently blocked Democratic efforts to close tax loopholes for high-end products and earners during the debt ceiling debate.

"This week's push is just the tip of the iceberg of an effort to highlight exactly who the party of 'corporations are people' is really fighting for," the DNC official said. "We will continue pushing this message during our rapid response activities during the debate and during the jobs bill debate this fall."

UPDATE: John Kartch, the director of communications at Norquist's Americans for Tax Reform, sends over the following remark about the impending lapse of the payroll tax cut:

Obama in late 2010 asked for the reduced tax rate for Social Security as a temporary tax cut -- a stimulus measure like the temporarily refundable tax credits of the 2009 ‘stimulus’ package. (This is unlike the R and D tax credit or AMT patch or 2001/2003 tax cuts whose proponents argued for them as permanent policy changes even though they were made temporary for budgetary/filibuster reasons...) One could argue that therefore allowing it to lapse was not a tax hike. But safer to either continue the lower rate or cut some other tax rate by the same total amount so that any change was revenue neutral.

The Bush tax cuts, too, were passed on a temporary basis (with an expiration date 10 years after they were signed into law). And while during the debt ceiling debate, Norquist seemed to suggest that he wouldn't count the reversion of those rates to pre-Bush levels as a "tax-increase," he quickly backtracked from that position.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON -- Setting the stage for a more aggressive posture on taxes and jobs, the Democratic National Committee is launching a campaign to pressure Republicans to extend the payroll tax cut past th...
WASHINGTON -- Setting the stage for a more aggressive posture on taxes and jobs, the Democratic National Committee is launching a campaign to pressure Republicans to extend the payroll tax cut past th...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 5,988
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (101 total)
  1 of 9  
COMMUNITY PUNDITS
itschuck2c 10:15 PM on 08/23/2011
The 81% Tax Increase
To pay for government's promises on Social Security and Medicare.

What really matters is not how much money is in the Social Security trust fund or when it is exhausted, but how much Social Security benefits have been promised and how much total revenue the government will need to pay them.
The answer to this question can be found on page 63 of the trustees report. It says  Read More...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wayne the pain
11:24 AM on 08/28/2011
I am sure Obama will be opposed to the extension. After all, we all must share the sacrifice! We would not want to end the Bush billionaire tax cuts, they have suffered enough!
RSK1177
Concerned
11:18 PM on 08/25/2011
JAT3...Bush was not the only one who believe that Hussein had WMD's. Several other countries also believed that Hussein had WMD's. Yes, I was for getting into Afganistan and remove those responsible for 9/11. I also believe that Hussein had WMD's and it was okay for the U.S. to go into Iraq. As it turns out, there were no WMD's but going into Iraq does the same things that you justified U.S. wars on. Freedom, fairness, humanitarian reasons and hope for democracy. If you think that Libya, Egypt, Yemem, Somalia and other middle eastern countries will have democracy as we know it, keep drinking your kool-aid. The Transitional Government of Libya has drafted their constitution and it's based on Sharia law. Doesn't leave a lot of room for democracy does it? Those countries don't like the U.S. or the western world so why waste our resources and risk American lives for the reasons you justify U.S. wars?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
handyallen1
bleeding heart
10:50 PM on 08/25/2011
have we democrats become so weak that the only way to spur jobs is to weaken social security and on top of it we're begging republican to allow us to do it! how pathetic is that.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:45 AM on 08/25/2011
Bush's ss plan will someday look like a very good deal. Americans could have had their money in their own account, to use or even leave to their heirs. The Democrats knew better and now we know why. They are shifting the ss money to the general fund and will simply put everyone on welfare when the retirement comes.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Goldshield
Retired NYPD Detective
08:33 AM on 08/25/2011
Wow, someone who actually knows what's going on congratulation. I posted the same thing back in 2005 on the AARP political board under the pseudonym "Void-Them" which means Vote, Out, Incumbent, Deadbeats.

I was referring to President Ronald Regan proposed plan to give individuals the right to either accept the present plan and stay in the SS system or have their FICA tax be placed in a managed 401k plan.

I used the analogy of the Social Security Trust fund, to show that it was nothing more than a Ponzi scheme where real money (defined as money you can spend) is placed into a "lock box" called the "Social Security Trust Fund". This scheme works this way, real money goes in and is immediately replaced by government obligations (IOU's) and the real money is transferred to the General Fund, described as the pig trough where they the pigs (politicians) spend it.

This scheme is still going on today only now the pigs are stealing every dollar we print and they still want more.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Berryives
11:47 AM on 08/25/2011
Exactly. The pigs at the trough want to spend even more of the trust fund money, so to do that they've decided that Social Security benefits should be cut so there will be more to borrow against. The most disgusting aspect is that they would like to make it into a means-tested program so that it would become a welfare program essentially.
photo
pickles n pops
No more payroll tax cuts Mr. Obama!
03:42 PM on 08/25/2011
Sadly true; but only if one has to choose between Bush's plan and what the totally corrupt gang of pols, who currently wield the levers of power in D.C., are concocting right now.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Berryives
11:40 PM on 08/24/2011
I am staunchly opposed to the payroll tax cuts. It undermines the SS system. It is also extremely contradictory to hear all the talk about how SS is in trouble (although decades away), and then have cuts to the payroll tax base for SS. It undermines SS because it contributes to the idea that SS is like a welfare program, which it is not. That is, it turns the funding of SS into an arbitrary political football, rather than a social insurance program that is funded by those contributing to it by way of payroll taxes over many decades of their working lives. I'm afraid that Obama's support for this kind of thing just demonstrates how shallow he is.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Goldshield
Retired NYPD Detective
09:01 AM on 08/25/2011
You are correct in all assumptions but when you look deeper into all entitlement programs you will find a sinister reason for them. Entitlement programs were devised by the birther of all entitlement programs FDR who used entitlements as a narcotic to addict those that received this largess into voting for the party that gave it to them. I myself am a recipient of this largess but I like most of you are entitled to it since we paid into to it and expect a return on our investment, unlike welfare which virtually enslaved those that receive its assistance into a life of poverty and dependence.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ipolitics123
What an excellent day for an exorcism.
10:31 PM on 08/24/2011
So Debbie does "Full Throated" now?
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
bovine13
09:34 PM on 08/24/2011
So the Dems finally admit that tax cuts creates jobs...
photo
pickles n pops
No more payroll tax cuts Mr. Obama!
10:19 PM on 08/24/2011
moooooo... (translation: no!)
05:12 PM on 08/24/2011
It takes a faux democrat like BO to dismantle the remaining safety-net programs inherited from FDR, JFK & LBJ. Clinton got rid of welfare and all those pesky regulations about banking, telecommunications and intellectual property that the corporations and uber-rich had been clamoring for. How long before Obama finishes the job on Social Security, Medicare and whatever else is left.
I see that Mr. Julius 'net neutrality' Janikowski published the rule for eliminating the fairness doctrine (yes the one that RReagan eliminated by decree in the 80's had never been published in the federal register and therefore was not officially law).
What's left?

Welcome to the new serfdom and line up for the table-scraps that the plutocrats may be willing to throw your way!

Complete corruption!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nonyabusinessinpa
04:59 PM on 08/24/2011
Blab, Blab, Blab.......Its the same old same old!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PresReagan
...... thinking
01:28 PM on 08/24/2011
All either party seems to be talking about is band-aids, they will not get serious on fixing real issues. I wish we could just fire all of them and start over with non-politicians and then see things get done. There are to many lobbyists, special interests groups and to many politicians worried about getting re-elected instead of doing what is right for us, the people.

I am sick and tired of the "perceived" divide between left and right. In all actuality we are all closer together than the media and politicians want us to believe. That is why we need to clean house each election and let the ones that we recently elected know that we are watching and they will be gone if they play the games instead of do their job.
03:14 PM on 08/24/2011
When you have a corrupt system, the majority (if not all) the politician­s will be corrupt.
Changing the players without changing the system is useless.

Until EVERYONE starts talking and blogging and marching for Campaign Reform we are just spinning our wheels discussing anything that might challenge the special interests.

Campaign Finance Reform or Fascism—th­at is everyone’s choice whether they know it or not.
photo
pickles n pops
No more payroll tax cuts Mr. Obama!
03:37 PM on 08/24/2011
We need our own polling organization which will ask the right questions, in a timely manner, and disseminate the results to the public and to Congress, and media outlets to get our message out. Here, we're just preaching to the choir; useful, but not enough. Any capitalists around to enable this, before it's too late?
photo
pickles n pops
No more payroll tax cuts Mr. Obama!
09:00 PM on 08/24/2011
Don't know why the mods keep blocking your replies. Maybe try answering my later reply to Col. Sanders.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Alfredo Villanueva
01:27 PM on 08/24/2011
Anything will do, as long as the Government's real owner--the corporations and super rich-don't get touched. God, I want to throw up!
12:58 PM on 08/24/2011
HOW TO PROFIT LIKE THE ULTRA-RICH DURING TIMES OF ECONOMIC CHAOS!

*** globaleconomics13.blogspot.com ***

This is a must see video... you have you prepare yourself and your loved ones before it's too late.

I'm posting my blog video here because I need to reach out to the real people who are effected by the Global Economic Crisis.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Bude
My Brain Hurts!
11:41 AM on 08/24/2011
Norquist has been conspicuously quiet about this republican backed tax increase.
03:40 PM on 08/24/2011
He has a Dickens of a dilemma.
DUSAA-1775
never moon a werewolf
10:14 AM on 08/24/2011
...' The payroll tax cut is ... a rare chance for the Democratic Party to tarnish the opposition ...'

The democrat's plan is to weaken SS even more? The democrats wish to 'tarnish' their opposition by harming our country.
Did Wasserman come up with this strategy?? Face it, she is not the brightest bulb on the tree.
10:10 AM on 08/24/2011
There has been much funneling of medicaid by States through revenue bonds secured by medicaid and medicare monies not directed to healthcare but construction and other projects. By reducing the payroll tax this becomes a concern of Wall Street that only wants increases in revenue supporting their bonds. That is why the Republicans are not on board.

As to Social Security here is a good analysis i read: "The issue here, however, is what would happen if the Social Security crisis were resolved by simply cashing out its federal bond holdings with newly-issued U.S. Notes? Would dangerous inflation result? The likely answer is that it would not, because the Social Security fund would have no more money than it had before. The government would just be returning to the fund what the taxpayers thought was in it all along. The bonds would be turned into cash, which would stay in the fund where it belonged, to be used for future baby-boomer pay-outs as intended." page 377 of WEB OF DEBT by Ellen Hodgeson Brown