Support NeoGAF

[AirBrian]

Congress Sends Bush Tax Cut Bill, Victory

WASHINGTON - Legislation extending three popular middle-class tax cuts for the rest of the decade sailed through Congress by lopsided votes in both the House and Senate, giving President Bush (news - web sites) a major legislative victory on his signature economic issue, tax relief.

Many Democrats complained during debate Thursday that the majority Republicans who control Congress should have offset the lost revenue to keep the nation's soaring deficits from getting worse.

But in the end large numbers of Democrats supported the package, something that Republican tax-cut proponents had counted on occurring with a congressional election only 40 days away.

The $145.9 billion tax cut package was approved in the House by a 339-65 vote, with 125 Democrats joining 213 Republicans and one independent in voting for the proposal. In the Senate, the measure passed by a 92-3 vote.

While no House Republicans voted against the tax cuts, the three senators objecting included two Republicans, Sens. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island and Olympia Snowe of Maine, who joined Sen. Ernest Hollings (news, bio, voting record), D-S.C., in voting "no." All three have been critical of the government's inability to get soaring deficits under control.

"I for one am very reluctant to saddle future generations with the bill for this fiscally ruinous policy," Chafee said in a statement.

Bush, whose campaign was hoping for a high-profile victory on taxes in the closing weeks of the presidential race, praised the congressional votes and said his tax relief was "putting more money into the hands of the American people and helping to grow our economy."

Sen. John Kerry (news - web sites), his Democratic opponent, said he also supported the middle-class tax cuts. "Millions of American families are being squeezed by the weak Bush economy, falling incomes and rising health costs," Kerry said, adding that as president he would roll back Bush's tax cuts for the wealthiest families and use the savings to invest in health care and education.

The tax package Congress passed will affect an estimated 94 million Americans, mainly through its provision to extend a broader 10 percent tax bracket, which helps reduce taxes for virtually all taxpayers. The package also keeps the per child tax credit at $1,000 and retains the provisions providing married couples relief from the so-called marriage penalty.

The package extends the child credit for five years, the marriage penalty relief for four years and the expanded 10 percent tax bracket for six years.

When added to the tax relief Bush persuaded Congress to pass in 2001, all of the provisions will have the effect of keeping the popular provisions on the books through the rest of the decade. After 2010 all of the tax cuts are due to expire.

Bush, in the statement released by the White House, said Thursday's congressional action "brings us one step closer to making the tax relief permanent."

The price tag for the individual tax relief in the newly passed package was $131.4 billion over 10 years. In addition, Republicans added provisions to extend a group of 23 expiring tax provisions at a cost of $12.97 billion. The biggest item in this group was $7.56 billion to extend until the end of 2005 a tax credit to businesses for research and development.

Full article here

Bad news for Kerry?

 

[Doth Togo]

The only people benefiting from this tax cut are those that make over $200,000...

 

[AirBrian]

The only people benefiting from this tax cut are those that make over $200,000...

Not according to the article:

The tax package Congress passed will affect an estimated 94 million Americans, mainly through its provision to extend a broader 10 percent tax bracket, which helps reduce taxes for virtually all taxpayers. The package also keeps the per child tax credit at $1,000 and retains the provisions providing married couples relief from the so-called marriage penalty.

And I benefited from it last year and I know I don't make $200K. If it truely were for only the rich, why would most Democrats vote for it so close to the election. They could easily vote "no" and turn it around on Bush.

 

[AeroGod]

Take that subspace!

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

While no House Republicans voted against the tax cuts, the three senators objecting included two Republicans, Sens. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island and Olympia Snowe of Maine, who joined Sen. Ernest Hollings (news, bio, voting record), D-S.C., in voting "no." All three have been critical of the government's inability to get soaring deficits under control.

Wait, they didn't vote against it, but voted "no"? Wha?

I saw Chafee on some CNN show a few days back. He says he's considering not voting on George W. Bush, though he'd still vote Republican. He's considering writing in George H .W. Bush.

If it truely were for only the rich, why would most Democrats vote for it so close to the election. They could easily vote "no" and turn it around on Bush.

Because even then the Republican candidate would speak to a large crowd and say "[Democrat] wants to raise your taxes!" *audience boos* Bush does this to Kerry all the time.

 

[sc0la]

Full article here

Bad news for Kerry?

Well Kerry voted for it so.. The thing with tax cuts is they are immediately popular. Everyone enjoys it when it happens, though in a while, when the budget is strained from lack of revenue, and they have to cut services like education etc. then people are upset.

Really the Democrats hands were forced, they couldn't vote against something with a sort of populist appeal narrowing in (within what is it 40 days now?) on the election. Though I am sure a lot of people who voted for it in the D column had misgivings about it for budget issues.

Not sure how I feel about the cuts personally as I have not investigated if I will personally benefit from it, but realistically we have to get the budget back under control, and we have to get our schools back on top by providing them with the funding they need, not with increasing layers of testing... and that requires money, lots of it.

I wonder if a re-elected Bush will defend his fiscal policies next term by again arguing that he simply inherited the deficit from previous presidential term

 

[Chesapeake Silt]

Cutting taxes is anti-patriotic. We need money to fight the evil terrorists who hate our freedom. Democracy in Iraq isn't going to pay for itself, after all. There should be a terror tax. Every day you go without being violently killed by Muslim extremists, you pay the government $5. Who's going to argue with that? Somebody who hates America, that's who.

 

[AeroGod]

Cutting taxes is anti-patriotic. We need money to fight the evil terrorists who hate our freedom. Democracy in Iraq isn't going to pay for itself, after all. There should be a terror tax. Every day you go without being violently killed by Muslim extremists, you pay the government $5. Who's going to argue with that? Somebody who hates America, that's who.

Run for President. Like, now! Ill vote for you.

 

[Lathentar]

Wait, they didn't vote against it, but voted "no"? Wha?

Senators... not Representatives.

 

[Nerevar]

hooray for fiscal irresponsibility! Let's lower taxes and raise spending again!

 

[AirBrian]

Because even then the Republican candidate would speak to a large crowd and say "[Democrat] wants to raise your taxes!" *audience boos* Bush does this to Kerry all the time.

Sure, but then at least Kerry & Co. could just add this to the list of Bush's fiscal irresponsibility. That at least would keep this in line with the current complaints. Now Bush can bust out his "reached across the aisle to get legislation passed" line and even use this to make another example of Kerry's flip-flop-ness. Kerry has stated many times he would slowly repeal Bush's tax cuts, but just voted for an extension on 3 key breaks. The informed person will know the difference, but the general masses will not.

 

[Hitokage]

Sure, but then at least Kerry & Co. could just add this to the list of Bush's fiscal irresponsibility. That at least would keep this in line with the current complaints. Now Bush can bust out his "reached across the aisle to get legislation passed" line and even use this to make another example of Kerry's flip-flop-ness. Kerry has stated many times he would slowly repeal Bush's tax cuts, but just voted for an extension on 3 key breaks. The informed person will know the difference, but the general masses will not.

The informed person would know that Kerry has not protested the tax cuts for the middle bracket, only the tax cuts given to the upper brackets and corporations.

But don't let facts get in your way, let us continue rejecting the old tax and spend politics and embrace the NEW politics of borrow and spend!

 

[AirBrian]

The informed person would know that Kerry has not protested the tax cuts for the middle bracket, only the tax cuts given to the upper brackets and corporations.

A Democrat's definition of the middle class is very different from a Republican's.

Kerry's been pretty ambiguous concerning corporate taxes. In the context of Bush, Kerry says he's against them getting tax breaks (because it should go to the working, lower class), but his detailed tax plan has him reducing corporate taxes by 5% as incentive to create/bring jobs back to the US.

http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/tax_reform.pdf

The problem with his plan is it's not really tax cuts for corporations, but more of tax restructuring. And to do so would require some legislation that would be pretty anti-corporation. I'm not sure such legislation would get passed right now unless it wasn't significantly watered down. Both Democrats and Republicans have too many vested interests in Corporate America to be efficient, let alone effective. Trust me, I would love it if this kind of legislation were to be passed. Corporations pay less than half, many times only a fourth or a third of what they should pay, and Joe and Jane Taxpayers have to pick up the bill. It's really sickening to think how much our taxes could be reduced if corporations simply paid what they should.

Man, we need a legitimate third party.