The Negotiating Partner
By Brian Beutler
Quoting Dave Weigel in full:
This amendment to the economic stimulus bill passed by the House and now being considered by the Senate, submitted by conservative icon-in-the-making Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), was breathtakingly bold. The gist, from Sen. DeMint’s Website:
o Permanently repeal the alternative minimum tax once and for all;
o Permanently keep the capital gains and dividends taxes at 15 percent;
o Permanently kill the Death Tax for estates under $5 million, and cut the tax rate to 15 percent for those above;
o Permanently extend the $1,000-per-child tax credit;
o Permanently repeal the marriage tax penalty;
o Permanently simplify itemized deductions to include only home mortgage interest and charitable contributions.
o Lower top marginal income rates from 35 percent to 25 percent.
o Simplify the tax code to include only two other brackets, 15 and 10 percent.
o Lower corporate tax rate as well, from 35 percent to 25 percent.This got the support of all but five Senate Republicans.
That’s four nays (Collins, Snow, Specter, and Voinovich), and one not voting. That would be Judd Gregg, whose Commerce appointment has apparently robbed him of his ability to do his job but, curiously, not possessed him of the integrity to resign from it. Roll Call.
39 Responses to “The Negotiating Partner”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
February 5th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
Since there’s really no such thing as a “permanent” tax cut, since Congress can always decide to raise taxes later, DeMint is really referring to tax cuts without built-in sunsets. Crazy thought: why not agree to his proposals and let them ride for a year or two? Tax cuts are stimulative, and this will boost the economy. If the deficit explodes too fast and the bond market starts demanding higher interest rates, we can always call it a failed experiment and vote to raise taxes back to Clinton levels.
February 5th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
we can always call it a failed experiment and vote to raise taxes back to Clinton levels.
In the present demagogocracy that is America, raising taxes ever is a political non-starter.
February 5th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
Republicans are batshit insane when it comes to the economy. It is just amazing to see America, and the world, facing a wave of job losses not seen in my lifetime anyway, and the Republicans honestly come back with tax cuts for the top income bracket, giant estates and corporations. Period. Not a dime to create jobs directly, not a single public work or infrastructure. Just like Bush they want to spend the money, they’re just diametrically opposed to getting anything of value in return.
February 5th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
Why is anyone listening to Jim DeMint. Don’t people know that he didn’t pay his taxes back in the ’80s? I remember a time when that would disqualify you from public service!
February 5th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
DeMint is a neat name for one proposing tax cuts.
Wouldn’t it be nice if we did change our our tax code. Not what DeMint suggests because he will just draft that onto the present tax code. But why not make our tax system like the sales tax, or VAT in Europe but keep it on income.
What we have now is completely unintelligible tax code and full of breaks (gained by lobbyists who are necessary to educate Congress) for the influential wealthy. Let’s restrict the amount of money that can be taken as deduction or through other trickery (loopholes); and impose a simple income tax that everyone must pay. Start at the poorest wage earners at 5%(who will get rebates) and the richest at 19% (who won’t). Make it progressive and adjust the rates where it somewhat reflects the needs of our country.
For instance, one year those making 100 to 150 thousand are taxed at a 15% rate but if we need more money the next year they go up to 15.3%.
Wait a minute, I must be crazy. That would be transparent and fair. We can’t have that.
So let’s go on pretending the lobbyist are educators and the high earners are sacrificing. Why is it we hear that the top 1% pay 15% of all taxes; but we never hear that they receive 20% of all taxable income.
February 5th, 2009 at 1:38 pm
The GOP alleges that the stimulus package will spend too much of the taxpayer’s money, leading to a greater deficit. This GOP plan has the same problem. The difference is that the Democratic measure boosts spending, which will increase economic activity, and the GOP measure cuts taxes, and then hopes that will increase economic activity.
Would like to see an economist total up the deficit spending embodied in this bill. Even if you accept the GOP premise, I bet this would make the spending in the Obama plan look moderate by comparison.
February 5th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
Why is anyone listening to Jim DeMint. Don’t people know that he didn’t pay his taxes back in the ’80s?
Sounds like he’s qualified to join Obama’s cabinet!
February 5th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
Susan,
3 reasons:
1) that year or so is real poeple’s lives, real jobs lost etc.
2) Cutting the taxes on the wealthy hasn’t worked for the last 8 years why would it now?
3) As others ahve noted, it is near impossible in our messed up olitical system to ever raise taxes, even undo a previous cut.
February 5th, 2009 at 1:41 pm
This is just wrangling right now, but let’s see what happens when it gets close to a floor vote.
This motion, now that its on the record, is the platform the Republicans are going to run on over the next two years.
Now that they have their own plan up and its been voted down, lets see what happens when the negotiated plan comes up. If the Republicans actually filibuster, then its war and the Democrats will be forced to break them by changing the senate rules and actually letting a majority vote.
The ultimate question last fall wasn’t whether the Democrats would get a certain number of votes, it was whether the Republicans would allow the Democrats to actually run the country. The Democrats had a majority in the congress two years ago, and they were not allowed to put their own beliefs and platform in place. In this area I actually believe the right-wing Republicans are true to their talking points. They sincerely believe that no one but them should be running things, that all other factions are fakes, weaklings, and liars who are going to destroy America.
The Slavocrats of 1860 held the same sincere beliefs. Fortunately, in this generation there are no issues out there that any large number of people are willing to get killed over. We can have reconciliation, or paralysis, or the Republican party will have to be broken, dismantled, and re-built from the ground up.
February 5th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
Susan R., there’s a reason that the bill went down in defeat: because such reasoning was advocated by Republicans, and the voters did not find such arguments compelling. It is interesting how they’ve decided to go “double or nothing” on their failed ideas. They should be thankful Obama offered them any tax cuts in his stimulus package in the first place: they’re not helpful– Obama just did it to make them happy. Were they thankful? No– they acted like a bunch of spoiuled, ungrateful children, rather than being thankful that Obama offered them anything at all.
I think it is time for the congressional dems to repay DeMint and the 35 Republicans betrayals by stripping all their demanded tax handouts from the stimulus package in reconciliation. Seriously, if this the sort of thanks we get for collaborating with them, out of the kindness of our hearts, it’s clear we have to retaliate with massive force. They obviously only understand the language of force.
February 5th, 2009 at 1:53 pm
…has apparently robbed him of his ability to do his job but, curiously, not possessed him of the integrity to resign from it.
Well said, sir. Well said.
February 5th, 2009 at 2:05 pm
“In the present demagogocracy that is America, raising taxes ever is a political non-starter.”
But raising taxes on “the rich” (at least, the highest-earning 40%) isn’t. So why not go a long with the Reps to cut everyone’s taxes, and then raise those on top earners later, while keeping the lower brackets for everyone else? That way, you end up with an even more progressive tax code. That’s what Obama’s already planning to do with the Bush tax cuts, after all: keep the lower rates on the low-earners, and raise the rates on the high earners higher.
February 5th, 2009 at 2:12 pm
So many permanent tax cuts from the party that insists spending must be temporary because of the horrors of deficits.
(Yeah, I know – Republicans talking out their asses shouldn’t surprise anyone. And they don’t, but I still thought it was funny.)
February 5th, 2009 at 2:13 pm
That’s what Obama’s already planning to do with the Bush tax cuts, after all
If that’s true, what do we need additional Republican input on the issue for? We’ve already cut taxes, like they’ve wanted, so their job is done. The rest of the stimulus project now involves actually doing work.
February 5th, 2009 at 2:29 pm
What’s the surprise here? Republicans have been marginalized in the moderate-Republican states save for Maine (it’s not clear that Voinovich’s and Specter’s seats will stay Republican in 2010), so what’s left are doctrinaire Republicans, which is another way to say crazy. What other No votes did you expect, Nelson Rockefeller and Lowell Weicker and Bob Packwood and Edward Brooke?
February 5th, 2009 at 2:45 pm
The rest is all negotiable. These two are really the ones they care about the most. Isn’t it funny that both goals, if achieved, would serve to lower the percentage of tax money raised that comes from the very wealthy and therefore increases the percentage of money raised that comes from everybody else but the rich?
February 5th, 2009 at 2:48 pm
PASSED BY THE HOUSE??! THIS AMENDMENT? ARE YOU SERIOUS?!?!
February 5th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
I doubt any of you read my op/ed today, but I made some good points about the stimulus package. To wit:
So: Democrats want to spend money on sectors that have been adding jobs, and do nothing for those sectors that have been losing jobs. Actually, it’s worse than that, because the new, stricter emissions standards Democrats just passed (e.g., allowing bankrupt California to set the emissions standards) will put another nail in the coffin of the moribund auto industry.
February 5th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
All that, mind you, for a measly $170 billion in stimulus this year. My old boss tried a stimulus in that range last year and look how much good it did.
February 5th, 2009 at 4:08 pm
Is there any estimate available on the cost of this tax-cut proposal? I couldn’t find one on DeMint’s site.
February 5th, 2009 at 6:11 pm
Now we’re talking! We need more of this. There’s still too much pork and unecessary social spending in the so-called stimulus bill.
February 6th, 2009 at 11:35 am
I’d like to see that also. I found an estimate that extending the Bush tax cuts and AMT would be $4.4 trillion over the next 10 years. DeMint’s proposal seems significantly larger. With numbers in that range, I don’t understand why this isn’t front page news.
February 24th, 2009 at 11:55 pm
Great post. I am trying to get you on my RSS feed, but can’t figure it out. can you help me?
March 1st, 2009 at 10:25 pm
cialis
I want to say – thank you for this!
March 2nd, 2009 at 1:44 pm
do you guys have a recommendation section, i’d like to suggest some stuff
March 14th, 2009 at 9:20 am
Great site. Good info
xanax
March 22nd, 2009 at 7:21 am
tramadol
I want to say – thank you for this!
March 22nd, 2009 at 11:19 am
buy viagra online
It is the coolest site,keep so!
April 2nd, 2009 at 9:33 am
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
buy cheap viagra
April 3rd, 2009 at 5:39 am
Great site. Good info
cheap brand pfizer viagra
April 14th, 2009 at 10:54 am
Very interesting site, Hope it will always be alive!
viagra