Van Hollen would consider another year's tax cuts for the rich

[Enrique]

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-09-11/van-hollen-would-consider-another-year-s-tax-cuts-for-wealthy.html

Sept. 11 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. House Democrat Chris Van Hollen said he would consider extending Bush-era tax cuts for wealthier Americans for a year if Republicans would agree to make the reductions permanent for “middle class” taxpayers.

Republicans, including House Minority Leader John Boehner, have insisted that the tax cuts should be extended for all Americans for two years. Taxes are expected to dominate the agenda when Congress returns next week.

“If they were to come back and say, ‘hey, let’s just do one year for the top 2 percent, and permanent for the middle class,’ that would be something that obviously people would have to think about,” Van Hollen said in an interview on “Political Capital with Al Hunt” airing this weekend on Bloomberg Television.

He said he was speaking “individually” and not on behalf of Democratic leaders.

(...)


my question is WHY? The tax cuts on the rich are NOT POPULAR!!!! Plus, there's the fact that WE ARE DEMOCRATS AND WE CONTROL THE WHOLE GOVERNMENT! Up to $250,000 is plenty!!!

[global1]

1. Caving.........nt

[Jackpine Radical]

2. Pretending to cave.

Going where they wanted to go in the first place in order to please the big donors. Can't piss off the rich, you know. The big money would stop coming.

[Enrique]

3. that's right

a MAJORITY doesn't "cave" to the UNPOPULAR position of the MINORITY.

[IndianaGreen]

9. more of the multi-dimensional chess nonsense!

Frak the people that will have to subsidize the tax cuts for the rich.

[awoke_in_2003]

24. +1000...

it is funny how so many people don't see it. One party that goes by two names.

[flpoljunkie]

4. If the bill for 1 year extension for top 2% would not be extended and was part of the bill.

Perhaps, yes. But only after there has been a vote on extending the middle class tax cuts and not renewing the Bush tax cuts for the top 2%.

[Enrique]

5. you seem to be ruling out extending cuts on top 2%

Van Hollen is not.

[elleng]

6. WE CONTROL THE WHOLE GOVERNMENT!

SURE we do!

What you been smoking?

[IndianaGreen]

8. If by 'we' you mean the American people, the answer is no. We don't control the government.

The American people haven't had a say so in their government for decades.

[elleng]

10. OP wrote that, perhaps meaning Dems;

my comment intended to suggest such control doesn't exist.

[awoke_in_2003]

25. yep...

the people in congress may be the levers of power, but someone else (Wall Street) is manipulating the levers

[IndianaGreen]

7. This from the same man that wouldn't commit to voting to protect Social Security

Has Reaganism infected the entire Democratic Party in the Beltway?

[tritsofme]

11. Lots of short sighted people here.

This is my ideal solution for the tax extension debate.

If we make the middle class tax cuts permanent, the issue is finally divorced from the tax cuts for the rich. As the tax cuts for the rich expire next year, the Republicans will not be able to credibly get through a standalone package cutting taxes only for the rich, and they will no longer be able to hold middle class tax cuts hostage to get what they want.

That is why a two year extension of all tax rates is the worst idea, they still get to hold middle class tax cuts hostage next time around too.

This is seriously a good idea.

[IndianaGreen]

12. Let the Bush's tax cut expire. All of them!

It was a bad idea then, and it is a bad idea now. One trillion dollars into the hole, and that's not counting the war.

[tritsofme]

13. Raise taxes on the middle/working classes in this economic environment?

Only if you are trying to make the economy fail.

[IndianaGreen]

15. Raising taxes is the GOP meme. Tax cuts have to lapse, else you have to pay for them!

Instead, the GOP and their Democratic allies in the Wall Street wing, would have the poor and seniors pay for the Bush tax cuts.

[tritsofme]

16. If no action is taken, everyone who pays federal income tax will pay a higher rate after December 31

Everyone, not just the rich. According to the statutory PAYGO rules, an extension of the middle class tax cuts does not need to be offset.

Raising taxes on everybody is an electoral kamikaze mission, not to mention bad policy.

[IndianaGreen]

17. The Bush tax cuts were kamikaze economics

time to return to the Clinton budgets.

[tritsofme]

18. Whatever you say Ms Hoover.

If you really think taking more money out of the checks of working people in an economy like this is smart stimulative policy, then well, I am wasting my time.

[karynnj]

21. Worse, some people currently paying nothing, will have to pay

- and everyone paying anything, given constant income, will pay more.

Even if this made economic sense, which it doesn't, doing this prior to the election would be deadly.

[Exilednight]

26. "doing this prior to the election would be deadly."

Right there is the problem. Every politician is thinking about elections, not about actually governing.

It reminds of the argument, from both sides of the aisle, of "we can't make changes now because we have to be elected in order to make changes in the future."

The problem is that change never comes from this circular form of logic.

[karynnj]

27. Not fair - I do think there are good economic reasons to

keep the tax cuts for those under $250,000. The economy is still fragile and stimulation is still needed. Raising taxes is the opposite action and it could hurt. I am not questioning the moral/ethical ability for those currently in office to make changes - they WERE elected to the terms they have now.

[Exilednight]

30. Raising taxes on someone making over $250,000 a year is not oging to have ...........

an impact on the economy.

The fact is, wages have been flat, or reduced, for those making $50,000 a year or less. Yet, those in the middle and lower classes make the bulk of purchases on the retail level. On the flip side, we've seen CEOs and executives of large corporations still earning record bonuses - much of which was paid for with tax payer dollars.

[karynnj]

31. I'm not speaking of the top 2%, but of raising the taxes on everyone

which is what I was responding to.

[karynnj]

20. I agree with you - for exactly the reasons given

But, I do think we should at least TRY to get just the MC tax cuts passed alone first. We need either all the Democrats and one Republican (or n+1 Republicans where n is the number of Democrats that vote against it) to vote for a bill that does just this. It might be good politics - even if it fails - to bring a bill that does just that to the floors of both houses. If the Republicans vote against it - holding it hostage (to use Obama's excellent words), they will likely anger the majority of voters, from that poll. We then could - as you suggest - take making the mc tax cuts permanent and extending the wealthy taxes for one year. I predict that the Republicans will reject that too, for just the reason you have given. This makes them not only against what the majority wants, but looking like they are unwilling to compromise.

[golfguru]

14. OK by me...won't cost me a dime n/t

[karynnj]

19. I can't believe that any Democrat in his position is saying this

As the op says, the Obama position is the most popular. That should be the Democratic position PERIOD. However, as an UNSAID fall back position, this is a really smart idea - IF it is as he said - the middle class tax cuts are permanent and the above $250,000 are for just one year. This WILL make the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy dead in 2011 - as there NEVER was a time where just that portion could pass alone. The cost is the one year cost of continuing them.

The reason not to suggest we will settle there is that settling might not be needed - and if given this they will want more. Additionally, we need to be able to point to that cost as a cost the Republicans made us incur.

[ProSense]

22. Exactly. Also,

the taxes will expire unless at least one Republican votes with Democrats. The taxes automatically expire during the current Congress so the election outcome is irrelevant to the expiration.

I doubt more than one or two Republicans will go along with permanently expanding the middle class tax cuts. If they don't act before the end of the year, the tax cuts will expire.

[karynnj]

23. Exactly, the default is that they go away

However, it might be tricky getting the Republicans to be blamed for not helping continue them for those under $250,000. It will take people like Obama, and the most articulate Democrats - like Durbin and Kerry - out there explaining the difference it the parties' positions. They need to point out how much money goes to that top percent - that they were not negatively impacted (and kept from working or expanding) when Clinton or Reagan had those rates. They also need to counter this - "they're really small business men - when only 3% of small businesses fall in that category.

[Vinca]

28. Drip, drip, drip . . . and so it begins. Time for a spine check.

[TheKentuckian]

29. It all needs to expire except we should retain the bottom rate

The remainder should be redirected so we can stimulate the economy as a whole more effectively than a few bucks extra a paycheck.

The fucking nation is crumbling, gas lines blowing, sewers rotting away draining into the water, bridges falling down, highspeed internet not available to large areas, electrical distribution a mess, levies and dams way on the downside, renewable energy revolution desperately needed, 100 year old water mains popping, streets in disrepair, mass transit a joke.

Millions of poor with no income whatsoever. Food banks stretched past the limits and it goes on and on.

Talking about these tax cuts in light of our national situation is near insane and damn greedy.
I understand protecting the folks at the bottom of the shitpile from having food off the table but we have things we must do to remain competitive and not fall out of first world status that might require a sacrifice that was not bone jarring in the past that will allow us to be productive, competitive, and safer into the future while putting lots of people to work now.

Refusal to sensibly repurpose these resources is pretty much suicidal level stupid.