iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors

This week, the president and the GOP announced a $900 billion deficit-financed package that includes, among other measures, an extension of tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires.

After the past decade, we knew that Republicans were never serious about deficit spending. They added trillions to the deficit with two wars and the original Bush tax cuts. Republicans made the tax cuts expire at the end of 2010 because they tried to hide the real long-term costs -- which is the reason we're in this mess today.

In 2008, with a Democratic President and Congress, the Republicans suddenly found religion on the deficit. They used the boogeyman of the deficit to justify their plans to privatize Social Security, turn Medicare into a voucher program, and cut programs that help working families. We still hear the arguments from Republicans every day:

"Extend aid for unemployed workers? We can't, because of the deficit!"

"Ensure seniors have access to their doctors in Medicare? We can't, because of the deficit!"

"More money to stimulate the economy? We can't, because of the deficit!"

Now these same people who have been screaming about the deficit for the past two years are scrambling to add hundreds of billions of dollars to the deficit to give tax cuts to those making over $250,000 a year -- the very last people who need help in this economy.

If Republicans want tax cuts for the wealthy, we should demand that they explain how to pay for them right now. We know how they will be paid for in the long run -- once Republicans are in the majority and flip-flop back to caring about the deficit, they will insist on "deficit reduction" legislation that slashes important programs that help working families -- all to pay down the deficit that this proposal creates.

There are concrete measures we can take to improve the economy and help working families. But the Republican Party held these measures hostage. They stood in lockstep to block middle class tax cuts, extensions of unemployment insurance, or any other issue, until Congress extended deficit-funded tax cuts for the wealthy.

Some of the proposals in this compromise are positive. Unemployment benefits are protected for the next 13 months -- helping an estimated 400,000 Californians this month alone. The earned income tax credit and the child tax credits will be extended, helping millions of working families with children. These are important provisions that I want to see make it into law, but I cannot support them when they are coupled with outrageous deficit spending to benefit the rich.

Republicans made it clear that they would rather have ALL the Bush tax cuts expire than give up tax cuts for the wealthy. Democrats need to stand up and show that we have the same level of conviction that protecting the middle class is the right thing to do.

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 40
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
06:56 PM on 12/08/2010
Why wasn't Obama making this case? 67% of American voters support your position on this issue! I thought America elected a leader who would fight for us but instead he was in India selling arms when he could have been at home pressuring vulnerable Senators and Congressmen to come around to OUR position. President Obama has abdicated his bully pulpit and has become a clearing house of information about power in Washington. Where is the President we thought we elected?
01:25 PM on 12/08/2010
Congress ought to be looking at each change the Bush tax cuts made. For example, capital gains and qualifying dividends are taxed at a lower rate than wages. This is far more complicated that the old capital gain deduction since the rate depends on the taxpayer's other income and the source of the capital gain (gain from collectibles is taxed at a higher rate than gain from stock, for example). This provision also creates a fraud environment: when people believe they are being treated unfairly, they are more likely to cheat. Consider the taxpayer with $30,000 taxable income. If this taxpayer's income is from wages, the income tax is about $4,000, If, on the other hand, this taxpayer's gross income includes more than $30,000 in capital gains and qualifying dividends, his tax liability is $-0-. This is fair? Even Calvin Coolidge thought a case could be made for taxing wages at a lower rate than investments.
jhNY
Mercy.
01:07 PM on 12/08/2010
The Republicans have only one grand idea when it comes to taxes-- lower them. At any time possible, for whatever reason you wish to tag on, but lower them. Right now, they tout the Bush rates extension as an engine of job creation, but really, they'll say whatever they think you want to hear while they work and fight and jawbone and deal and get taxes lowered.

Democrats would like to be seen as fiscally responsible, and say they would raise taxes on those who profited mightily from the last bubble and profit mightily today, but they are not serious as a bunch, or they would have faced this issue before the mid-terms, and would have run on raising taxes on the rich, with breaks extended for the rest. The party in its legislative and executive manifestations chose not to do so, and chose not to craft their own tax plan as a counter to what would happen automatically should there be no extensions--- a tax hike of 50% on the lowest bracket.

So now, in a crisis they have confected, with but a few short weeks to work, they must act quickly and pass along breaks for everybody, so as to get some unemployment extension and a bit of stimulus out of the Republicans.

No matter how dire the crisis, the pols play politics. They can't help themselves, or rather, they can't help anybody who isn't like themselves-- wealthy and connected-- before they help anybody else.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
stonemann
To argue with an idiot, can mistake you for one.
12:36 PM on 12/08/2010
Whether Obama had totally capitulated to the Republicans making the tax cuts permanent or stood his ground on principle resulting in more obstruction....the middle class would lose...he did neither. I hope the bill goes through since it now has America's undivided attention and here is why.
For months, the GOP has been hammering permanent tax cuts for the rich because it creates jobs and boosts the economy. Well, they will have two years to either put up or shut up. Starting 1 Jan, slash the unemployment rate by over half or face a bill, that will not only end all chances of a permanent Bush tax rate or even a Clinton rate, but a bill that will go back to the Reagan rate of 50% and be gracious we don't go back to the Nixon or Eisenhower rate, and it would be totally justifiable. I think most Americans would agree with that.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Pamela Ezell
writer & producer
02:24 AM on 12/08/2010
Good points, but based on article about Jim DeMint's promise to filibuster the compromise, I'm afraid there actually won't be extension of unemployment benefits or any of the gains Obama bargained for. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/07/jim-demint-tax-cut-filibuster_n_793585.html
RealistBC
Micro-bios must pass muster.
10:23 PM on 12/07/2010
I wish Democrats would stand up. As of the time I've written this rant, only DINO Mary Landrieu has openly expressed displeasure with the blatant giveaway. Huffpo reports that one Republican senator will vote against this "deal". Bernie Sanders is threatening a filibuster. I'm hoping other Democrats and patriotic Republicans will follow suit.

If there was any reason to doubt that Obama doesn't have a clue what he's doing to us, his surrender should dispel them. It is also clear that he really doesn't care, or else he would show some of that vitriol to those he sucks up to for yet another opportunity to defeat himself.
08:55 PM on 12/07/2010
Tax cuts are are good if they are matched by spending cuts The economy could use a boost of spending during a recession The spending should be on schools ,roads and factories . A good place to cut is non productive things like tanks ,war planes and war ships . you build a war ship and it cost money to man and supply . You build a road and many goods and people go faster on their way
All countries that were big powers in their day fell from millitary expenses
08:55 PM on 12/07/2010
It's too bad we didn't set SS and Medicare up to automatically sunset after 10 years, or the politicians would have to justify the outsized unfunded deficits in the tens of trillions of dollars they create.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
c-tom
Badges we don't need no stinking badges
01:36 AM on 12/08/2010
Do your part don't accept medicaid, medicare and social security payments. And prove you are serious and don't associate with any family member that does take this money.
08:52 PM on 12/07/2010
Rep. Stark's analysis of the effects of the tax-cut compromise are accurate in my opinion. Indeed, the consequences are worse than were Congress to permit the Bush legislation to expire. So, if Republicans truly believe that it is acceptable to sacrifice 97% of the population for the benefit of 3%, shouldn't we put their convictions to the test?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:03 PM on 12/07/2010
What makes you think that 97% percent of us need to sacrifice? The Bush Tax Cuts incentivized the the top bracket to produce. As a result, the income tax burden was shifted upward, we all kept a larger share of the money that we earned and federal tax receipts increased.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
c-tom
Badges we don't need no stinking badges
01:37 AM on 12/08/2010
In Bizarro world that might be true.
08:42 PM on 12/07/2010
I just blasted another Congressman on this blog for attacking the Palins, who are not elected officials. I see in this piece real issues are being addressed, especially the power-struggle and opinion divergence in DC. Thank you, Congressman, for the appropriate article.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
booker52
avid reader
08:15 PM on 12/07/2010
I hope this loaded give away fails.
photo
Logicfella
Attack my name, it's easier
08:13 PM on 12/07/2010
“It's not fair that someone makes more than me!! If someone makes more than me, they are selfish. Someone should tax ALL their money and give it to me”
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
c-tom
Badges we don't need no stinking badges
01:40 AM on 12/08/2010
It's not fair that you pay a higher % of your income to taxes than those richer than you.
It's not fair that those who get most of the benefits of government don't pay most of the costs.
07:47 PM on 12/07/2010
Rep.Pete Stark (D-CA) has a wonderful opportunity that he can share with the two riches people in Washington, #1. Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) $230.98 million, and #2. Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) $225.96 million. The three of them can each pay the higher personal tax rate they fought for so valiantly. There's no law that says they can't. And when the refund comes they can funnel that back in as well. Maybe this will set an example to the other wealthy Democrats to do the same. In the words of Pete, "Democrats need to stand up and show that we have the same level of conviction that protecting the middle class is the right thing to do."

Let's see some leadership Pete!
09:32 PM on 12/07/2010
Why not make it mandatory for individuals to not have more than 2 million in actual assets. They don't need all that stuff. Chop it off at 2 million total assets, the govt seizes the excess. Problem solved the Democratic way. Damn the rich!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Awake-and-Sing
named after a great play written by Clifford Odets
07:37 PM on 12/07/2010
So stand up, Congressman.

Even if the President is weak and capitulates without a fight, doesn't mean you have to be weak.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
darma2u
06:54 PM on 12/07/2010
This says it all "This week, the president and the GOP announced a $900 billion deficit-financed package that includes, among other measures, an extension of tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires." Being of the middle class I'd rather go back to Clinton era taxes for everyone! than give the million and billion 'aires' any more tax cuts! In fact would like to see them raise taxes on them. These so called millionaires, etc. and above have 'colluded' to destroy this country, moving asset off shore so they do not have to pay taxes, yet taking all the benefits they can from the government. They have and are sending jobs off shore and investing in gold and emerging markets……...I'm over it.