Harry Reid To Force 'Buffett Rule' Vote When Senate Returns From Break, Aide Says

WASHINGTON -- Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will force a first-ever vote on the "Buffett Rule" when the Senate comes back from its two-week recess on April 16, according to a Senate leadership aide.

Reid plans to file cloture -- the procedural motion required to begin debate on a bill -- on Buffett Rule legislation on his way out the door on Thursday, which means the Senate will vote first thing when it gets back from break on whether to move forward with the bill, the aide said. Not coincidentally, the vote is timed to take place a day before the deadline for filing taxes.

President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats have long been pushing for passage of the Buffett Rule, which would require people who make more than $1 million to pay at least a 30 percent tax rate on their income. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) filed legislation in January to make the Buffett Rule the law; the Senate will be voting to begin debate on that bill, the aide said. This will be the first time the Senate is voting on the matter.

The bill is not expected to pass since there aren't any Republicans to date who have signaled any support for it. But the vote gives Democrats the ability to hammer in their election-year message that Republicans are on the side of the rich, while Democrats are fighting for the middle class.

UPDATE: 6:35 p.m. -- White House Press Secretary Jay Carney later weighed in on Reid's planned vote.

"In the next few weeks, Members of Congress will get a chance to vote on the Buffett Rule, and show the American people whether they are willing to make sure the middle class gets a fair shake," Carney said in a statement. "We urge Members to vote for this common sense approach."

Comments

[ruthtruth]

10:01 AM on 03/30/2012

I think it's a great idea to put this Buffet Rule out there and then we will know once and for all who is with us and who is with the 1%. Most intelligent people already know but for the few stragglers this should do it. The ones that still don't get it never will. I bet the TP/GOP will shoot it down in a heartbeat.

[DRouss3977]

08:38 AM on 03/30/2012

Go for it, Harry. Get the GOP/TP's recorded vote on giving millionaires a better tax deal. The American electorate can then decide in November who has the middle class as a top priority. Anyone who votes for the GOP/TP cult is either mindless or uninformed, which the GOP/TP counts on.

[sdmills27]

10:30 PM on 03/29/2012

Maybe he took one too many blows to the head in his boxing days. We have more important things to worry about than increasing taxes a few percentage points on a small minority of the country.

[ruthtruth]

10:04 AM on 03/30/2012

Well since the TP/GOP have shown to not care about jobs then I think this is important as the "job creators" haven't created anything but bigger bank accounts for themselves.

[sdmills27]

10:02 PM on 03/29/2012

Great priorities Mr. Reid. It has been almost 1100 days since your Senate passed a budget. Private estimates of actual unemployment range from 15% to 21% and inflation between 9% and 11%.

We have some real problems and this clown is worried about the Buffet rule! What a fool.

[sgeppy118]

12:26 PM on 03/30/2012

His point is square on the exact concerns you make. G.W. gave giant tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans, in order to create jobs. Fast forward, unemployment sky rockets. In other words, trickle down economics is a huge joke. Reid wants to return the tax rates to the mid 90's level (4 trillion surplus, booming economy), and provide incentives for US based business and not for shipping jobs overseas like G.W. did. Not sure how your confused about his concerns.

I think we may be the only country in history to give massive tax breaks while simultaneously fighting two wars. What a grand idea.

[sdmills27]

10:54 PM on 03/30/2012

No he isn't. If he was he wouldn't pursue the Buffet rule when there are more pressing matters to deal with. You can't blame the unemployment rate totally on Bush. Conversely I can't blame the unemployment rate totally on Obama. If Reid were serious about helping all Americans he would take a hard stand against the Federal Reserve. Bringing some sanity to our monetary policy would help everyone more than most people realize.

We never had surpluses in the 90's, no matter what Newt or Clinton says. Social Security was raided to give the illusion of a surplus. The Treasury's own website shows the national debt increased every year in the 90's.

The problem wasn't the tax breaks. 95% of all Americans received a tax break by the way, not just the rich. The problem was that spending was increasing rather quickly. I have no love for Bush. I have made that very clear in many other posts. The only President that I think that has been more tyrannical than him has been Obama. So Bush ranks right at the bottom of the pack. Too many people on this site have a giant misconception of Bush though. They seem to think that he was a massive deregulator, And that said deregulation caused our problems we suffer from today. Nothing could be further from the truth. Bush was a massive regulator. And most of our problems stem from an all too elastic monetary policy.

[hhoc612710]

09:43 PM on 03/29/2012

I'll betcha no republican will vote for the "Buffet rule" dispite the fact that 70% of americans are for it. Repub don't care about the rest of us

[sdmills27]

10:04 PM on 03/29/2012

That may be true, but then will you give in to the nearly 70% of Americans who don't want Obamacare?

[hhoc612710]

10:13 PM on 03/29/2012

You are right but many who saw the benefits change their minds. The more they understand what's in it the more they like it. The main thing is the will of the american people.

[TheBluesGuy]

03:14 AM on 03/30/2012

Haven't kept up with the surveys, have you?

[ruthtruth]

10:06 AM on 03/30/2012

They have shown over and over that they don't but still so many don't seem to get it. Maybe this will do the trick. F&F

[ALC]

08:16 PM on 03/29/2012

The republicans work for the rich and democrats work for the middle class? People that haven't figured this out by now either know nothing about history or they just haven't been paying attention to how these guys traditionally vote on the issues.

[stuart100s]

10:19 PM on 03/29/2012

The repub work for the rich and the middle class. The dems work for the poor and entitled class. People that don't believe this have only to look at how successful the dems have been at increasing the size of their supporters.

[SCJohnson]

11:18 PM on 03/29/2012

If you go by what they say, both parties work for all of the people in America, thought they disagree about what this means. If you go by what they actually do, the Republicans work exclusively for the top .01% of the American people, and the Democrats work for the .01% of the American people but throw bones to the poorest 50% to keep up their image as good guys. Neither side can be said to realistically be working for the middle class, because, after thirty years of trickle down economics (from the Right) and globalization (from the left), there is almost no middle class remaining to work for.

[ruthtruth]

10:06 AM on 03/30/2012

Yup. F&F

[SMBrown2]

08:06 PM on 03/29/2012

It is pivotal that we punish the producers in society in order to benefit everybody else. Who is John Galt?

[shankapotomus]

08:14 PM on 03/29/2012

But all this money will save us. LOL

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/20/buffett-rule_n_1367591.html

[Bushido08]

07:50 PM on 03/29/2012

One thing I found interesting when living in Japan is they used to each year post the top wage earners and the amount they paid in tax (or didn't because of loop holes). I think the senate can give lip service all day long to tax those that make over a million but those folks will always find ways to avoid paying. In fact, each year when we file taxes we all look for loop holes to avoid paying taxes. We would be stupid not to take advantage of them. The difference is that we can't pay an accountant and lawyers to figure those things out for us and the loop holes are not necessarily written for the every day joe. The only way to put this nonsense to rest once and for all is to create a flat tax on income period.

[SCJohnson]

11:23 PM on 03/29/2012

I disagree, a flat tax benefits the wealthiest (those with the most disposable income) at the expense of the poor (those with the least disposable income). Lets keep our current tiered system, but close the loopholes that allow Romney and other billionaires to avoid paying their fair share. We especially need to close the loopholes that allow corporations to end up with negative aggregate tax rates.

[greytunes]

05:23 AM on 03/30/2012

A National sales tax with food and prescription drug exceptions would fill the bill.

[ThatsTheTheWayItIs]

07:33 PM on 03/29/2012

All bills in both Houses from now to November will never pass. They will all be political, oddly with the same purpose: both Dems and Repubs will try to show how right-wing Repubs are. The Repubs to appease their base, the Dems to rally theirs and gain support from Independents. The Dems will win from this, big time.

[VikingQuest]

07:31 PM on 03/29/2012

Are we still calling it the Buffet rule since we're finding out how Buffet is dodging taxes?

[TFProleteriat]

07:20 PM on 03/29/2012

"the Buffett Rule, which would require people who make more than $1 million to pay at least a 30 percent tax rate on their income."

And suddenly accountants and lawyers begin to see dollar signs knowing how much money the rich will spend to defer and hide their money.

[ThatsTheTheWayItIs]

07:35 PM on 03/29/2012

Exactly the opposite. Just like the AMT, the Buffett rule will thwart that efforts. Romney only pays 15% because of "carry interest" and other tricks to make his income be capital gains. Under Buffett rule that wouldn't work, and his accountants less work because there is no way around it. Deductions create jobs for accountants, the Buffett rule disables them on the top-income.

[TFProleteriat]

08:23 PM on 03/29/2012

That is the way it is SUPPOSED to work, true. I agree completely. But, like always, they will find a way around the new rule, or will find a way to further muddle the tax code in order to take advantage of grey areas. As usual.

[the real minority]

07:11 PM on 03/29/2012

so every secretary will be paid between 200k to 500k?

[ThatsTheTheWayItIs]

07:38 PM on 03/29/2012

She's paid about $80K. That income is dividends from all stock she has gotten from options in her long years with Buffett. I worked at DEC in the '70s, lots of secretaries were millionaires. An average engineer I know got lucky at a startup, made $5M for five years work. That's not pay.

[OneInEveryFamily]

07:48 PM on 03/29/2012

BRK has never paid a dividend

[ninjacb]

07:05 PM on 03/29/2012

as if.

[CountLeo]

06:54 PM on 03/29/2012

The mighty democratic senate voted today to keep giving subsidies to international oil drilling/mining/marketing companies.

I have no doubt that the friends of the rich will cave on this as well. Lot's of pre-election showboating. Mildly entertaining but meaningless.

[ruthtruth]

10:11 AM on 03/30/2012

Your facts are a little off. Only 4 Democrats voted with the GOP. So it seems to me that the TP/GOP are the ones who shot this down.

[CountLeo]

11:33 PM on 03/30/2012

Which fact? The the senate is democratically led? That they voted down a bill to stop subsidies for petroleum producers. That senate dems can vote a full 'yae' an any bill they want?

You might not like the facts but there they are. Even if it 'seems' to you to be otherwise.

[OneInEveryFamily]

06:18 PM on 03/29/2012

Reagan loved America. Reagan was proud of America. Reagan made great speeches about America.

Reagan's entire life until dementia set in, America had a tax rate for the top few percent of earners that was much higher than the democrats are proposing.

Was Reagan a socialist to love such a country? How did anyone build wealth back then when the country was a big commune?