Real Relief for Families

Across the country families are struggling and Democrats have responded with a plan to provide relief to middle class and working families. The deal announced by Speaker Pelosi is progressive and a sharp departure from the policies of George W. Bush. Rep. Barney Frank called it the most progressive tax bill he has seen in the past decade. Here are the facts:

• The new agreement provides $28 billion in tax relief for working families who haven't seen any tax relief in the last seven years. These families got nothing from the Bush tax cuts. Now, they will finally get assistance when they need it most.
• The plan abandons the Bush policy of providing tax relief to the well off. In 2001 and 2003, the President's tax cuts gave 37 percent and 67 percent respectively of the benefit to taxpayers making more than $200,000. Under the new stimulus package announced last week, taxpayers making more than $200,000 receive nothing while families earning between $48,000 and $86,000 will receive the largest share - nearly one-third - of the benefits.
• The Bush administration backed down from their initial proposal that would have provided no relief to 35 million taxpayers with incomes largely under $30,000. Democrats ensured these Americans will receive $28 billion in tax relief.

Let's look at one example. Under the new agreement a single mother with two children making $20,000 will receive a $900 check. If that same mother was receiving food stamps, one stimulus proposal would have offered her an additional $1 per day in food stamps, or approximately $300 for the rest of the year.

Democrats could offer this single mother $300 in relief or $900 in relief. The choice was easy. When given the opportunity to provide an additional $600 in assistance to a single mother of two making $20,000 a year, Speaker Pelosi made the same decision that the single mother would have made.

In politics, no compromise is ever perfect, but the new agreement is progressive and gives tax relief to middle class families who are struggling. Americans want their government to address problems and provide solutions. And this time, it appears that their expectations will be met.

Comments

[azrix]

Why doesn't Speaker Pelosi provide some real tax relief? Why not stop funding the trillion dollar Iraq debacle? Why not stop giving hundreds of billions in useless handouts to the military industrial complex? Why not bring our troops home, not only from Iraq, but from Korea, Japan, and Germany? Why not do all that and give all that money back to the taxpayers in the form of lower taxes next year? That would be real relief.

Why not put Social Security payments in a lock box, like the one that got talked about 8 years ago, so it has a greater chance to remain solvent in the coming years without more tax increases? Why not end the hidden taxation of inflation provided by the Federal Reserve? Why not provide cost of living increases to Social Security recipients closer to the actual inflation rate of near 10% instead of the 2% they are getting now?

Answer those questions, then we can talk about some measly "economic stimulus", progressive or not.

[Canukistani]

If you continue at the present pace of fixing things one inch at a time, then you will make a difference­...in about 437 years. I may be mistaken, but I don't think people are willing to be that patient.

[DatelessNerd]

The so-called "stimulus package" is nothing but an expansion of the gigantic federal deficit.

Therefore, it is not "tax relief." It is "tax deferment," which will ultimately be paid for by our children--with interest.

When Congressional Democrats get the balls to start taxing the richest 1% of Americans, and start addressing our skewed distribution of wealth, then I'll be impressed.

[quicksilver7]

The so-called stimulus package is so lame that it's laughable. Even Nixon dared to impose price control in the 70's when OPEC tried to blackmail us. To help those who really need it? Stop giving a measely $500-600 tax rebates to most of us who don't need it, as it will just sit in the bank without circulating it back into the economy, since our spending would not be affected in any way. Instead, impose temporary price freeze on essentials that surely will help beyond the rebate amount.

[SusanaSanJuan]

Rahm, as you write this the Bush Administration is wiretapping Americans with no oversight. You are trying to perpetuate this illegal activity, even working against the true Democrats in your own party. I truly hope you and every other member of the DLC has a primary challenger in November so you are forced to listen to the voices of REAL liberals.

[nippersdad]

Rahm:

I remember begging my (former) Senator, Max Cleland, not to vote for George's last "tax relief" package. I said that we would only have to pay it back with interest and it would do nothing to stimulate the economy long term anyway.

Five years of recession followed by a soft economy and yet another recession, three trillion dollars in debt and yet another "tax relief" package in the offing, and I feel like I am reading his response again.

In order to get this economy back on its' feet, you are going to have to put people to work on the (now) two trillion dollar backlog of infrastructural repairs that we have been waiting for for over ten years now. You are going to have to suck it up and get us out of Iraq and Afghanistan. You are going to have to repeal George's tax cuts for the wealthy and you are going to have to revisit all of the horrific trade deals that the Democratic caucus has been so complicit in passing for the last fifteen years.

And, no where near close to finally, you are going to have to revisit all of the deregulation decisions that you have been so rabid to pass since the Reagan Administration. You got a pass on the Savings and Loan fiasco, try and bail out the banks on the public dime and you just may find yourself at the Canadian border covered in tar and feathers (if you are lucky).

You people broke it, you need to fix it. $900.00 may be a welcome sum for many, maybe even most, but it will do nothing positive whatsoever to affect the fundamentals of the economy you and your friends have been looting. I hate to be harsh but in a year or two, when the entire flock of chickens comes home to roost, the Democratic Party is going to be the one taking the heat, and if it does not want to go the way of the whigs (or Max Cleland) you need to get your act together now.

[coastalcarla]

What exactly is a one time check of 600-900 dollars going to do for me when I'm having 1/3 of my paycheck stolen every month by taxes? And paying $3.50 a gallon for gas - and still trying to keep my family with a roof over their heads and food on the table? Also, is this "rebate" going to be considered income that I have to claim on next year's return? If so, then why bother? Cut my tax rate and actually help me!

[Camel54]

Okay, no compromise is perfect, but nothing but compromise is not even good.

[Lorky]

Please don't use Republican talking points - you're falling victim to their framing of the issue. It's not "tax relief" - that indicates that taxes are a horrible burden that we need eased, which goes right along with "small government" right-wing ideology. Instead, tell me you're spending the money wisely, that my taxes are an investment in America's infrastructure, that you're doing everything possible to keep decent jobs in the US, and I'm happy to pay taxes.

Don't use the bully's language - redirect the debate!

[drkazmd65]

I certainly hope that the people of his district in Illinois are paying attention to the claptrap that the Congressman is spewing. If he has an opponent running against him this time out in the Primary - vote for that opponent.

If he wins the Primary, vote for the Republican opponent. He can't be worse.

[dencolo]

The speed with which the White House and congressional leaders agreed on an economic stimulus package this week makes us wonder what else they could accomplish if they cared as much.

Health care, Iraq, illegal immigration, energy prices - none apparently has the urgency that would cause our elected representatives to move so quickly toward a joint solution.

With the U.S. economy veering toward recession, "President Bush and congressional Democrats are so worried they're making nice for the first time since Sept. 11, 2001," wrote Wall Street Journal columnist David Wessel on Thursday morning.

Putting $103 billion into the pockets of American consumers is a quick, simple solution that should moderate the effects of a recession. Fact is, the health of the U.S. economy is almost purely a pocketbook issue. Why? A recession is so-called when the gross national product declines for at least two consecutive quarters. And consumer spending now accounts for 70 percent of the gross national product. When the almost-continuous consumer spending spree slows, it is incumbent on policymakers to jump-start the process, or, as The New York Times wrote Friday, provide "a quick adrenaline shot to the ailing economy."

The National Foundation for Credit Counseling issued a long news release Friday that urged people to be prudent with their rebate money, to pay down debt, build up a rainy day fund and plan for their future. Normally, that is sound advice, but I'm sorry, this is not that. This is mad money, to be spent in the spirit in which it was received. An economy whose foundation is predicated on consumer spending needs just that right now.

For once, Congress, at least the House of Representatives, seems to get it. The beauty of the agreement between House Democrats and Republicans - and the White House - is that they put aside their philosophical differences for this much-needed quick fix. The Bush administration insisted on a simple rebates-only package, setting aside their usual insistence on permanent tax cuts because they knew it was a deal-breaker for Democrats.

[Querent]

Thanks for that update from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party, Rahm.

[mcostello]

Rahm,
everyone gave you so much credit for the "big win" in 2006. You seemed so very smart then. Now that it has been a year and "nothing has happened", you seem a shadow you that 2006 perspective.
Wouldn't a democrat rather be known at the "leader" who was despised for telling the ugly truth, and vindicated by history as pulling us out of this tailspin?
We are waiting, and it is my hope that that person is a democrat, but so far I don't hear or see it.

[mcostello]

The fact that this is a bi-partisan plan is very discouraging.
The help this economy needs is a strengthened dollar. More deficit spending is counter to that. But so is the Repub response of "make the Bush tax cuts permanent".
It doesn't matter who you give the money to, (with the exception of limitted infrastructure) if you spend more fantasy money, it make the recession worse for everyone.

[LiberalLo]

And what about the poorest of the poor, Rep. Emmanuel? What do they get? The usual nothing. How about the long-term unemployed. What do they get? The usual nothing. How about Seniors living solely on Social Security? What do they get? The usual nothing. Yeh, great stimulus package. The only thing you forgot to consider was, that the poor will spend the money and boost the economy. The middle-class will do what they did last time. Pay bills and credit cards. None so blind as those who will not see. None so deaf as those who will not hear.