E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSAnyone thinking Republicans might be ready to accept extending the Bush tax cuts for those making less than $250,000 now, think again.
House Speaker John Boehner (R), the man at the center of negotiations with President Obama, today rejected Oklahoma Rep. Tom Cole’s suggestion to pass an extension of tax cuts for 98 percent of people, declare victory, and go home.
Yuri Gripas / Reuters
U.S. House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) speaks next to Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, November 28, 2012.
"I told Tom earlier at our conference meeting that I disagreed with him,” Boehner said at a Capitol Hill news conference Wednesday morning. “He's a wonderful friend of mine and a great supporter of mine. In my view, raising taxes on the so-called top 2 percent, half of those taxpayers are small-business owners that pay their taxes through their personal income filing every year. The goal here is to grow the economy and control spending; you're not going to grow the economy if you raise the top 2 percent rates. It'll hurt small businesses, and it'll hurt our economy, why this is not the right approach. We're willing to put revenue on the table as long as we are not raising rates."
Cole (R-OK) on Wednesday reiterated his call for Congress to pass an extension of the Bush tax rates for those making less than $250,000 first and then work on the extension for higher-earners later, a major break from the Republican's strategy in fiscal-cliff negotiations.
“In my view, we all agree that we're not going to raise taxes on people who make less than $250,000 dollars, so we should just take them out of this discussion right now,” Cole said after a meeting of the GOP Conference. “Continue to fight against any rate increases; continue to try to work, honestly, for a much bigger deal.”
NBC's Mark Murray and Domenico Montanaro discuss the ongoing fiscal cliff negotiations and how Grover Norquist's no-tax-increase pledge plays into the discussion. Plus, what happened when Susan Rice made a visit to The Hill.
Cole, the deputy whip and former National Republican Congressional Committee chairman, first made the suggestion during a closed-door "whip meeting" yesterday, which was first reported by Politico last night. His comments have drawn criticism from those in his party.
Boehner is not the only Republican to disagree with Cole. Rep. Sean Duffy said on MSNBC’s Daily Rundown Wednesday morning that he believed Cole’s views are in the “minority” of House Republicans. In fact, interviews with other GOP members confirms that.
The lack of support for Cole’s proposal highlights the gap that persists between the White House and House Republicans with the clock ticking toward the so-called “fiscal cliff,” when all Americans would see tax increases and there would be a round a severe Defense and domestic spending cuts unless a deal is struck.
“Cherry picking provisions and rates right now doesn’t solve the problem, and they're not a serious deficit solution,” Rep. Kevin Brady (R-TX) told reporters today after a meeting of the Republican Conference.
Brady, who sits on the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee, said he is advocating for comprehensive tax reform, to be completed next year after all rates would be extended.
“I think we're strongly unified behind no tax increases on New Year’s Day,” he said.
Rep. Raul Labrador (R-ID) echoed Brady’s concerns, saying he believes the majority of the Republican Conference, including himself, is opposed to the idea of decoupling the Bush tax rates.
“We have to make tough decisions about our tax rates,” Labrador said. “We have to make tough decisions about our spending; we have to make tough decisions about our deficit. Let's do that today. There's nothing courageous about saying let's raise taxes on a few people today.”
In August, House Democrats proposed a bill that would do exactly what Cole proposed, but it failed 257-170 with no Republicans voting for the bill, and 19 Democrats voting against it.
Related:
Leave a Comment:
Republicans never learn. Most small business people do not hit the $250,000 level and if keeping taxes low for them was the key to getting them to hire, why haven't they? They continue to try to inflict the discredited notion of trickle down supply side economics on the country. Businesses will start hiring when they need to provide more service or product to a population that is spending more money. Their marginal tax rate (especially when we are talking 3 or 4%) has nothing to do with it. Republicans continue to hold 98% of the population hostage in service to the 2% who are not going to be destroyed by giving up a little more money. They are the people who made the most money out of the last decade so they should be prepared to contribute a bit more to fix the damage that decade inflicted on the country and economy as a whole.
Quite honestly, I think all the Bush tax cuts should expire as they were designed to. The payroll tax cut should be continued to 1-2 more years and then it too should expire. People elect representatives to bring home the bacon - they should be prepared to pay for it.
You obviously don't know any more about economics than Obama. Most small businesses gross over $250K; that revenue would be taxed at a higher rate.
Hate to break it to you but "trickle down" works. Don't believe me? Look at all the places overseas that are hosting outsourced productions. Things are trickling down...just to other countries thanks to a global economy and our trade agreements that encourage it.
The Real Merridian seems like he doesn't under the difference between gross and taxable income.... seems like he flunked high school economics also....
Anything over $250K will be taxed at a higher rate realmerridian.
real merridian - taxable after deductions and expenses related to operations of the business. Most gross income is consumed by expenses that are deducted before taxable income is computed - that's why so many small businesses file individual tax returns as S corps. Increasing marginal rates for income over $250,000 means just that - taxable income under $250,000 will not change if the applicable tax rates are kept at current levels. Only $251,000 and above would be subject to a slightly higher rate and that certainly will not impact the vast majority of small businesses.
Screw it. Let the tax breaks expire for everyone. Lower, Middle, Upper Class, it doesn't matter. Everyone benefits from what the tax money provides, everyone should pay. I'm ready to start spending less on January 2nd.
It's time we as a nation learn to live within our means. If we spend more, we must tax more. And vice versa....
Not true. Almost half the people in the country do not pay federal income tax, but they do share in the benefits of other people's tax money...some to extreme.
Real, I pay more in Payroll Taxes, percentage wise on earned income than the Romneys of the world on their unearned income. We file our taxes and get a refund because.....?
To allow the Bush's "Temporary Tax Cuts" expire hits the middle class up side the head big time. The Middle class is the engine that drives the economy with more disposable income. Less middle class $$ less widgets bought, less GDP. The rich certainly would see no life style changes with a 3%-5% increase on their tax rate, but the over-burdened middle class certainly will.
skyparrot, you are a liar.
Are you telling us you paid over 3 million in SS & Medicare taxes per year?
The increase on the top 2% which includes mostly middle class taxpayers like police, fire fighters, teachers, nurses, longshoremen, and small business owners will definitely hurt the economy.
Furthermore the increase if the maximum projected revenue increase was realized would only pay 3-4 days interest on the debt.
The US govt has NEVER once reduced spending and Obama and the Dems have not once proposed a reduction in spending; they have only proposed reducing the rate of growth from 7% annually to 5%. Ryan proposed a rate of growth at 4%.
Can the 99% American People have John Bonehead IMPEACHED for wasting our tax payer's dollars! HE HASN'T DONE EVEN ONE THING TO EARN HIS KEEP! He's USELESS TO US! NOTHING but a corrupt Republican corporate MONARCHY political puppet!
Hey Pres, let's get rid of this jerk! He's a major hindrance to our country!!
Your just not that bright.
Actually, Obama has been the major hindrance to our country. The "fiscal cliff" we're heading for was an agreement he made with Congress. Where exactly does the "buck stop" these days???
Families making the kind of money Obama is talking about already pay too much in taxes. The top 5% pay more than 70% of the country's tax revenue already and he says they don't pay their fair share. They pay well over 50% when considering fed, state, local, property, etc.
Wake up people, with the bottom 50% paying no fed taxes and the top 5% paying over 70% of all tax rev, there is something else afoot here.
Plus, it does nothing to fix the debt problem. I don't trust Obama and his agenda goes way beyond stealing more money from higher earners. The government has no money unless they take it from someone else.
Myvoice,
Oh yes....I know....I remember those days under Clinton when the rich had to walk to their corporate jets barefooted. Even though the country somehow created over 20 million jobs and enjoyed a surplus with those unbearable tax rates those who happened to be unfortunately wealthy suffered so.
How could we ever return to those dark days of American greatness.
Vipp,
You want the Clinton rates? Me too but with Clinton spending.
This bantering about republicans and the tax rate is BS and all of the O supporters lap it up like the sheep that they are. The problem is the Oministration will not address the deficit.
These tax increases wouldn't amount to spit in a bucket against the budget deficit and will have an impact on the economy.
the Clinton tax increases did NOTHING to improve the economy, add jobs, or balance the budget
Clinton’s 1993 increase of personal income taxes on the top bracket to 39.6% had a very negative effect on the economy. It was only after Clinton’s 1997 agreed to sign the House bill cutting the capital gains tax – the opposite of what Obama proposes – that job growth really piled up.
When Clinton took office he did all the wrong things. He raised taxes sharply, hiking the top bracket from 35% to 39.6% and raised taxes on gasoline. The result was that the economy, which had been recovering, staggered. GDP growth dropped to 0.7% in Clinton’s first quarter (down from 4.3% in Bush’s last quarter) and stayed around 2% for the rest of 1993. Personal income rose 6.3% in 1992 under Bush but slowed to 4.1% under Clinton in 1993.
The tax increases Clinton passed failed to generate the revenue he had expected. The tax paradox set in. Martin Feldstein, former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors, summed it up in his Wall Street Journal article, “What the ’93 Tax Increase Really Did,” published on October 26, 1995. He said taxpayers reduced their incomes when they saw the tax hikes coming. Feldstein writes that “the Treasury lost two-thirds of the extra revenue that would have been collected if taxpayers had not changed their behavior.” Because of Clinton’s tax hikes, real personal income fell by $25 billion. High income taxpayers, facing the prospect of a tax increase reported 8.5% less taxable income in 1993 than they would have if their tax rates had not changed. The tax paradox!
Then Clinton got wiped out in the Congressional elections of 1994, losing control of the Senate and the House – the first time the Republicans had run the House in forty years.
Clinton to his credit agreed to hold down spending and the Republican push for a tax cut. In 1997, he and the Republican Congress combined to cut capital gains taxes from 28% (the rate to which Bush had increased it) to 20%. The result was electrifying for both Americans and the Federal tax revenues. Real wage growth was 6.5% in the four years after the tax cut compared to minuscule wage growth of 0.8% over the four years after Clinton’s tax increase!
And the tax paradox was again evident: lower rates produced higher revenues! In 1996, the year before the capital gains cut, the tax collected revenues of only $66 billion. In the four years after the cut, they averaged $100 billion a year. But, what was more important was the surge in economic activity that the capital gains tax cut generated. In 1996, before the tax cut, there were $261 billion in capital gains in America. In the three years after the cut, capital gains rose to an average of $440 billion. The increased tax collections and the greater economic activity were such that they pushed the budget into a surplus on paper for the first time since the 1950s (although we were still in a deficit as the debt continued to climb)
this is true myvoice
Kudos Mr. Boehner. Let the votes be cast on an inclusive deal. Passing cuts for those under $250K and dealing with the wealthy and spending cuts later not only kicks the can down the road, but also undoes the motivation of the sequestration.
MJ,
Passing legislation insuring that taxes don't go up for the middle class would bring a ton of confidence to our very uncertain markets. Considering they would still have to come up with a deal so that automatic spending cuts don't occur this option wouldn't be kicking the can down the road but would be getting something out of the way that's already guaranteed to pass anyway.
Vipp
Uncertainty won't be eliminated until all the issues have been dealt with. If it's not kicking the can down the road, then should we just give our leaders an Incomplete for the past year and consider the Simpson-Bowles commission an official inquiry?
American Acceptionalism
MJ,
I never said that uncertainty would be completely eliminated....but if you don't think that the markets would rally on the news that 98% of US citizens would be free on tax increases in 2013 you're crazy.
The sticking points between the two sides is what we do with the wealthy and their tax rates and whether or not "entitlement" programs will be cut. Not the middle and lower class tax rates. That they seem to agree on...sort of.
The deal should end up looking a lot like the Simpson Bowles commission recommendation. Republicans are going to have to wrap their heads around the idea that taxes will be raised on the wealthy one way or the other. Either Obama will let the Bush tax cuts expire on everyone and congress will have to quickly come up with a plan to reduce taxes on the middle class or Republicans will agree to let the Bush tax cuts expire for the upper income brackets and keep them in place for the middle class. Either way the Republicans will have to give in or end up looking like they work solely for the wealthy.
Vipp
Looks like a good compromise by the Democrats. What is the Democrats contribution to the deal; given that tax increases are already on the books for the wealthy through Obamacare?
So boner and the other fascist party memebers REALLy are interested in ensuring rich americans pay less and middle income workers pay more....herr hitler would be proud of what his party has become
It's President Obama that is suggesting that the middle class will see an increase if he doesn't get his increase on the wealthy. Mr. Boehner would probably agree to extending all Obama tax cuts until the spending cuts have been discussed.
No Rick, your limited leftist brain misfired.
The Repubs are saying all rates should stay the same. So that won't mean the middle class's go up and the rich's go down.
It's tricky, I know. Find a local tutor to help you with these tough political topics.
Democrats will propose a middle class tax cut after the expiration of the Bush tax cut expiration, at the end of the year. Then, Republicans can vote for it or go down swinging for the top 2%. They don't seem to grasp that this is an issue that was basically settled by the election and that it is what is left of the Republican Party that is now on trial, not Obama or the Democrats.
The election also put the GOP in charge of the House, the place where spending is approved. The Constitution calls for checks and balances. Obama only won one branch, that does not give him absolute power, and nearly half of the country rejected a sitting president; Obama has been the problem, not the solution.
Last time Obam and Reid "agreed" to a deal they reneged as soon as the House gave them what they wanted. Make it a full deal or obama will only spend more.
Obama has lied too many times to be trusted
Navy,
Which specific deal are you referring to?
The rich had the opportunity to create jobs while they got their perks. They didn't. many Rich Reputlicans, not all, are selfishly want to make our country go down because they will still be okay. Aside from that, Boehner thinks he has equal power as the president of the U.S. and he relishes his position.
If the Republicans want to hang their hat on saying higher taxes hurt the ecomony and job growth, please offer some proof. They cannot, because there is none, and they know that. Indeed, there is a study just produced by the Congressional Research Service at the behest of the Republicans that shows that the only impact of lower tax rates is an increasing share of the wealth going to the top. No wonder they tried to stop its dissemination.
What disturbs me is that the Republicans act like there was not an election. Elections do have consequences, and the consequence of the most recent election is that the voters suported the path outlined by President Obama. At the very least the Republicans are obligated to give defference to the will of the voters. That is the essence of elections. By pursuing their stale course, the Republicans are essentially telling the majority of the American people that their votes don't count. This is hogwash.
I also would like someone to tell me what other president has ever faced the type of organized opposition that President Obama has faced. In my lifetime I cannot remember anything like this. It is time for this to end. We need to get people back to work, which will take care of a significant portion of our deficit. Once the economy is back on track we can turn to solving the long term debt problem.
Other than President Obama extending all cuts because of the healing economy?
Boehner better watch out. The mouse standing behind him in the picture wants his job.
Again the party of blame finds a way to weasel out of its responsibility to govern for all ---ALL --- not just the wealthy. It is simply amazing to me...a white aged male who paid his own way through life --- that these clowns don't get the reality. Their world is toast. Time to move on and return to a more equitable distribution of wealth in this country. They will only be able to block progress for a while longer before they become totally irrelevant to the discussion at hand. Surely there must be some leadership of merit left on the Right? Someone willing to stand up and acknowledge that global warming and evolution are both real, that tax breaks for off shore corporations are inherently wrong, and that stripping the soul from American companies to make a few bucks off the back of labor is not our way forward. Will someone please surprise me and make an argument that is more than talking points or simply wishful thinking? Give me some reason to believe that Republicans actually care about the middle class......
I think John Huntsman, the guy who just wasn't radical enough, was that one guy on the right.
Anyone remember the phrase "Penny wise and pound foolish"? This fuxing traitor thinks he is going to balance the budget by taxing the poor and middle class into extinction. Now he or the poor sap that comes after him will be faced with HUGE growth in welfare simply because the present generations can not afford to pay for the fat cat's next yacht. That fact alone will blow out the budget long term - this is called kicking the can down the road while kicking the people that put him/them in office in the face.
I can now understand fully why the beltway asswipes and bandits do not want to cut the DOD budget - they will need all of those weapons to kill us when we turn Syrian on them-don't give me any crap about posse comotatus there is no law in this land anymore for those who can not afford it and who are or will be driven to violence to save their lives. Remember survival is the most overriding instinct of any we have - some people would do well to understand that.
Lol, going back to the Clinton tax rates is "taxing the middle class and poor into extinction" hahahahah.
Who knew Bill Clinton and the 1993-1994 Democrats hated those groups so much, lol.
Democrats are so stupid, emotional and hysterical sometimes you just have to laugh.
My god Boehner is an a-hole.
The big issue with the fiscal cliff is raising the debit ceiling. As long as that is raised,there will not be an issue with regard to Americas credit rating etc. They need to do that seperately. Then let the rates expire, . if you want to pay down the debt then you drop military funding bring our troops down and start paying down the debtt with the increased tax rates. but if the Pubs will let us go into a recession strictly for not raising the debt ceiling, they need to be voted out .
Guess that settles it. Taxes go up for everyone on Jan 2nd, the Senate reintroduces its bill to lower taxes on the 98% and the GOP are either blamed for not passing it or criticized by their base if they do pass it. Win-win for the WH and Dems in 2014. Obama got most of his first term legislation passed in the first two years. Should get most of his second term legislation passed in the last two years after voters sweep this GOP crap out in 2014.
wood,
That's exactly what's going to happen if the GOP doesn't wise up...and quickly.
woodbutcher
The sequestration WAS the compromise if a deal could not be reached. Why should that change now if the Democrats don't want to address the WHOLE deal?
Or are the Democrats just stringing the issue out?
Let the
BushObama Tax Cuts expire as is.Put some real legislation on the table with some spending cuts, some additional revenue and addressing the debit ceiling. Then lets get a roll call of votes on where all reps and senators stand on the legislation.
I am sure a deal will be reached and the 53% will have to pay more taxes and the 47% will continue to get their free ride of no federal taxes and plenty of means tested "programs" to make their lives easier.
And somehow those poor rich will survive....
I guess Boner wants that parting gift Congress buys for them in 2014. A GPS unit for their car programmed back to their home state to a permanent retirement.
The GOP never cease to amaze me. They rather the 98% of us suffer and go off the cliff rather than have their buddies in the 2% pay more. Can't wait till 2014 Republicans!
Who Stole the American Dream by Hendrik Smith
The millionaires-club is going to screw over the middle-class again.
Wow, Hendrik Smith is a genius, and your hero obviously, "the hidden factor in the tax argument was that the Tea Party is half millionaires"
Wait...the original Bush tax cuts, which all the hubbub is about, and which had these cuts for millionaires and everyone else were passed 5 years before the Tea Party was even created, so we can assume this would have been the party line in 2011-12 whether the Tea Party existed or not.
Darn another two-bit leftwing theory down the drain.
No because the old school Republicans or the RINOs to the Tea Party types would never have extended the cuts knowing how much we are in debt.
Here we go again.
My prediction:
"An heroic last minute solution in which both sides claim victory and the debt and deficit continue to rise"
Yes, and with the Democrats squealing like stuck pigs because the rate of government growth was slowed by 1% like 10 years down the road, and acting like they made a huge sacrifice to get the deal done, hahahhahah.
Neither party seems to have learned anything from the election or what citizens think of them. Keep up the BS and you'll be the next ones on unemployement. And we the people will be voting to take away all those perks you give yourselves and restrict you from working for lobbyists for 5 years or so. Do everything we can to make you aware of what's going on in the real world so you have to deal with it just like we do.
Personally I'l love to see that.
Cole wants to give away the Republicans only negotiating card to cut Democrats' Fat Swine Government.
It's all or nothing on the tax cuts. Either everyone keeps them or no one does.
It's great that lying Democratic scum have finally gotten around to admitting how much average people benefited from the Bush tax cuts, and that taking them away would have an effect on Joe Public, but we need the filthy rich pukes to get their cut too, they deserve it more than anyone since they pay the most in the first place.
Any tax hikes we do have to be bought by the Democrats with 3 to 1 cuts in government. And immediate cuts, as in the next budget.
Wish we could have another election real quick so we could SLAP the F_-_U_-_C_-_K out of Boner and rest of the Ballbaggers AGAIN!
Agreed !!