HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Surprise -- Max Baucus tr...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 11:50 AM

Surprise -- Max Baucus trying to kill President Obama's plan to tax the wealthy with the estate tax

Trying to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, Baucus is.

President Obama just proposed raising the estate tax rate from 35 to 45 percent and lowering the exemption to $3.5 million. This would still result in the tax falling almost entirely on the backs of the very richest Americans.

But Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D) is moving to kill Obama’s progressive proposal to tax millionaires. “Rural Montana is much different than urban America,” he told Reuters, claiming that the tax would fall on the backs of family farmers.

But only 100 farming estates pay the estate tax now. Under Obama’s plan, only the 300 richest farming estates would have to pay the tax.

Is Baucus really going to try to kill Obama’s progressive plan to ask more from the wealthy in order to protect America’s 300 richest, multi-millionaire farmers?

Read more: http://boldprogressives.org/senator-trying-to-kill-tax-on-millionaires-by-saying-he-doesnt-want-to-tax-rural-montana/

44 replies, 3262 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 44 replies Author Time Post
Reply Surprise -- Max Baucus trying to kill President Obama's plan to tax the wealthy with the estate tax (Original post)
Report1212 Dec 2012 OP
Proud Public Servant Dec 2012 #1
Report1212 Dec 2012 #4
Proud Public Servant Dec 2012 #11
The Magistrate Dec 2012 #13
Report1212 Dec 2012 #28
lsewpershad Dec 2012 #20
Proud Public Servant Dec 2012 #21
FarCenter Dec 2012 #25
Proud Public Servant Dec 2012 #30
Ninga Dec 2012 #2
Enrique Dec 2012 #3
Lionessa Dec 2012 #29
The Magistrate Dec 2012 #5
Zorra Dec 2012 #7
Proud Public Servant Dec 2012 #31
The Magistrate Dec 2012 #41
Proud Public Servant Dec 2012 #42
The Magistrate Dec 2012 #43
Auntie Bush Dec 2012 #38
AnotherMcIntosh Dec 2012 #6
dmosh42 Dec 2012 #8
TrueBlueinCO Dec 2012 #9
The Magistrate Dec 2012 #10
Mr.Turnip Dec 2012 #12
SugarShack Dec 2012 #14
Proud Public Servant Dec 2012 #15
Uben Dec 2012 #16
hfojvt Dec 2012 #19
n2doc Dec 2012 #17
kooljerk666 Dec 2012 #27
2pooped2pop Dec 2012 #18
lbrtbell Dec 2012 #22
green for victory Dec 2012 #23
FreeJoe Dec 2012 #24
jeff47 Dec 2012 #33
Report1212 Dec 2012 #34
kooljerk666 Dec 2012 #26
jeff47 Dec 2012 #32
Hydra Dec 2012 #35
LiberalFighter Dec 2012 #36
LiberalFighter Dec 2012 #37
backscatter712 Dec 2012 #39
colsohlibgal Dec 2012 #40
L0oniX Dec 2012 #44

Response to Report1212 (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 11:53 AM

1. Up for re-election in a reddish state

So I'm not surprised.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Reply #1)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:03 PM

4. The estate tax will hit almost no one in Montana

It's a tax primarily on the wealthiest. If anything it's a play for campaign dollars. Not a pitch to voters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Reply #4)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:15 PM

11. It's not about who it hits

It's about who people think it hits. Montana has a fair number of ranchers and farmers who would pass on their property to future generations; few if any would be subject to the estate tax, but they probably all thing they would or could be. It's like that Steinbeck quote: "Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires." I suspect there are a fair number of ranchers and farmers who are "temporarily embarrassed millionaires" too.

And none of that is to excuse Baucus, for whom I have little use; but we do need him to keep his seat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Reply #11)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:21 PM

13. Policy Set By Illusions, Sir, Must Necessarily Be Bad Policy

Catering to the illusory beliefs of a handful of landed mopes, and allowing them to determine the police of a nation of millions, and of a fifth to a quarter of the economic activity in the world, is folly undiluted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Reply #11)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:42 PM

28. I don't think you're right

He has agreed to many other Democratic policies that would be more unpopular there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Reply #1)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:39 PM

20. Get rid of him anyway.

He's a DINO

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lsewpershad (Reply #20)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:56 PM

21. We stand a REALLY good chance

Of losing the Senate in 2014. If we keep it, it will be because we didn't trade in red-state DINOs like Baucus (and Landrieu) for real Republicans. I don't like it, but I'd rather have the Senate than have an ideologically more pure party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Reply #21)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:10 PM

25. There are 7 Democrat senators up in 2014 in states that Romney carried.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FarCenter (Reply #25)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 03:01 PM

30. Exactly my point

We lose 6 of those, we lose the Senate -- especially since we're unlikely to pick up any seats at all unless Collins gets unseated in a primary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 11:54 AM

2. Thanks for the heads up on this...I say a phone call to Sen. Baucus is in order. America is too

large of a country to take to the streets like citizens in England and France do when the government tries to pull the wool over their eyes.

so the next best thing, is to call the bastards. Join me?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 11:54 AM

3. after Obama sided with him on health reform

there were competing versions in the House and Senate, Obama put his weight behind Baucus's senate version and the House liberals were out of luck. Maybe Obama should remind him of this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enrique (Reply #3)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:59 PM

29. I think there are many older white men in both parties

 

that treat Obama as a "boy" with all that relates. The BlueDog asshats have been the worst as far as I can tell, they are true back stabbers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:05 PM

5. This Is One Seat, Sir, I Would Happily Sarifice

Baucus' seniority and committee position enables him to do far more harm to the country, and to our Democratic Party, than a junior Republican could manage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Magistrate (Reply #5)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:07 PM

7. +1 Well said. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Magistrate (Reply #5)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 03:08 PM

31. Would you still say that

if the junior Republican was the one who handed control of the Senate to the GOP and made Mitch McConnell majority leader? Because that's a very, very plausible scenario.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Reply #31)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 06:33 PM

41. Life Has Risks, Sir

And we are not going to lose the Senate, even if Baucus is retired to the lobbyist shops.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Magistrate (Reply #41)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 08:47 PM

42. Brave words

but our chances of losing the Senate are excellent, sadly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Reply #42)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 09:00 PM

43. We Were Supposed To Lose It this Year, Sir....

"A coward dies a thousand deaths, a brave man only once."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Magistrate (Reply #5)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 05:12 PM

38. Good point!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Original post)


Response to Report1212 (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:09 PM

8. The same guy who sucked up to the health care corps! Should have been a Repuke.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Original post)


Response to TrueBlueinCO (Reply #9)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:14 PM

10. Death Tax, Sweet-Heart? Death Tax? Seriously? Death Tax?

"The mind wobbles...."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:16 PM

12. Can we push Schweitzer into primarying him in two years?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mr.Turnip (Reply #12)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:29 PM

14. We better! Max also voted against our last real jobs bill...one of four DINO's to do so !

 

Back when we had the house. Four dem senators KILLED IT! Forget the prez...go after the LAWMAKERS

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mr.Turnip (Reply #12)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:29 PM

15. No, we need him for POTUS [nt]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:30 PM

16. HE would really be lowering the tax to 35%

The estate tax will increase to 55% (what it was before bush tax cuts) when the cuts expire. And, the exemption will fall back to $1 million. So, he's really proposing lowering the tax rate and raising the exemption. How can they argue with that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Uben (Reply #16)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:38 PM

19. because he is only lowering it to 45%

instead of the 35% it is now.

I say to heck with it. We don't need Baucus's help to raise it to 55%, and I prefer $1 million and 55% to $3.5 million and 45% anyway.

The latter represents $300 billion in tax cuts to dead rich people. I think they should be asked to sacrifice for the good of their country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:35 PM

17. Well then he can just stuff it

and let rates go back up. I'm sure his opponent next time will bring it up.

The estate tax really needs to be 50% on estates larger than 10-20 million, to keep the oligarchy in check.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to n2doc (Reply #17)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:36 PM

27. if rich people hate income taxes how many need to pay estate taxes to balance budget??

 

Someone should do a spreadsheet & publish it. Rich bastards will be defecating & may want live, to pay income taxes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:37 PM

18. lower it to 1 million

which I think is what it was before the great republican greed fest under bushco kicked off but not sure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:11 PM

22. Fuck Mad Max.

That is all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:25 PM

23. The guy that had Single Payer advocates arrested at a hearing?

 

That Max Baucus?

Baucus gaveled for order, guffawing, “We need more police.” The single-payer movement has taken his words as a rallying cry. At a hearing Tuesday, five more were arrested. They call themselves the “Baucus 13.”

One of the Baucus 13, Kevin Zeese, recently summarized Baucus’ career campaign contributions:

“From the insurance industry: $1,170,313;
health professionals: $1,016,276;
pharmaceuticals/health-products industry: $734,605;
hospitals/nursing homes: $541,891;
health services/HMOs: $439,700.”

That’s almost $4 million from the very industries that have the most to gain or lose from health-care reform.

Another of the Baucus 13, Russell Mokhiber, co-founder of SinglePayerAction.org, has been charged with “disruption of Congress.”



He was quick to respond: “I charge Baucus with disrupting Congress. It once was a democratic institution; now it’s corrupt, because of people like him. He takes money from the industry and does their bidding. He won’t even diffuse the situation by seating a single-payer advocate at the table.”

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20090513_baucus_raucous_caucus/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:38 PM

24. $5,000,000

I'd prefer to see it raised to $5,000,000 or, even better, slightly variable based on circumstances. When I had young children and a stay at home spouse, I had to have a lot of life insurance. If I died and then she died the next year, we could have gotten hit fairly hard. As it is, it cost me extra time and money to put together an estate plan to deal with the possibility.

I would prefer to have it something like $2.5 million and, if your spouse inherits your money, they also inherit the $2.5 million exemption. Anyone that plans can effectively do that already by setting up a bypass trust (or whatever it's called) so that their spouse doesn't actually inherit the money but gets to use it. Making the exemption inheritable would save on legal fees, trust fees, and make it work for people that didn't think far enough ahead to plan for that scenario.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreeJoe (Reply #24)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 03:54 PM

33. No, the life insurance is not paid to your estate.

Thus it's not subject to estate tax. It's paid directly to your beneficiaries.

ETA: At least that's how it's normally done. It is possible to have the money paid to your estate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreeJoe (Reply #24)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:25 PM

34. It based on assets nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:34 PM

26. We need a lunatic Teabagger to replace in 2020............

 

rather than a conniving blue dog that needs a nap, someone put him to sleep.


Seriously, I would help a nut job GOPher b4 I helped him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 03:53 PM

32. So exempt farms from the tax.

Problem solved! those family farmers wouldn't have to pay estate taxes on the value of the farm when it passes to the next generation.

Of course, that simple solution only works if it's actually family farms you're concerned about......

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #32)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:54 PM

35. Right, like those "small businesses" Repubs are always talking about

Those 3% that don't even fit in the category of "small" or "business."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #32)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 05:02 PM

36. The excuse needs to be eliminated so it can't be used.

It doesn't effect family farms as many think. And too many don't understand how the estate tax is implemented.

First, the tax is only on the amount that is received that didn't already belong to you.
Second, the tax exemption is per person receiving part of the estate.
Third, not everyone receiving part of the estate would necessarily be a farmer.

If a farmer is married with kids dies. Estate left to the widow is estate tax free.

If a farmer is married with kids dies and leaves part of the estate to the kids then each kid would be taxed on the portion they receive that is above the exempt level. If any of the children has a share of the farm that share is not counted towards the inheritance.

A farm is valued at $10 million (fantasy) with 2 sons each having 1/4 share and the father has 1/2 share. Only $10 million will be divvied up with whoever receives it. If just the 2 sons then they would split up $5 million (1/2 share value of father's share) 2 however the father had stated in the will. Regardless, it is all exempt because of the $5 million plus exemption.

Even back in 2001 when the exemptions were lower very few family farms had an estate tax. A Common Dreams article includes the bit that an Iowa State University economist searched far and wide and never found a farm lost because of estate taxes. I can attest to that because I asked my father who was a CED for the ASCS years ago and he never knew of a family farm being lost because of the estate tax.

To say that the inheritors are being double taxed is a fallacy. It wasn't their money or farm to begin. And any with a share received increased value on their interest in the property. Plus many of those that have a share usually work side by side with the family and received wages for their services.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 05:05 PM

37. The estate tax on family farms or any estate for that matter needs to be disarmed as an issue.

The truth about the family farm estate tax needs to be fully disclosed so Baucus can't use it to kill the tax on the wealthy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 05:26 PM

39. Time to revive one of my old pics...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 05:50 PM

40. Baucus Is A Serious Blue Dog

And a heartless one at that. I'll never forget the leer on his face as he had single payer advocates herded out of his conference committee on Health Care. What a fake democrat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 09:03 PM

44. Baucus is a GOP corporate plant and should be kicked out of the Democratic party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread