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:
Just love the "we are ready to be lead" crapola speech he gave. Wonder if he was crying for effect while he gave that one, too? Funny how Norquist and the extremists of the Party can still strike fear into this gutless b!star!
Bonehead Boehner is at it again. He is such an a@#&*le. Just like all the rest of the GOP on the House of Representatives who only represent themselves and their sponsors. Perish the though they'd represent those who elected them.
I have REALLY had it with Boehner and the crazy Republicans who don't know how to govern! Are you kidding me????? They are stalling at continuing the tax breaks for those making under $250,000/year? That one is a no-brainer. They're going to use the middle class as a bargaining chip for tax negotiations for the top 1%? REALLY????
They have had SO many opportunities to show they can be reasonable and get something done with the Democrats and they have blown every single opportunity. They can't even find ONE woman to head a committee in Congress...REALLY? They didn't get the women's vote, so they continue giving all the committee Chair positions to white guys? They can't even control that stupid John McCain and his personal vendetta against Susan Rice!
Every time I think they they're going to wise up, they do something else that pisses off most of America.
You may be independent. I have my own opinion about "intelligent". Lazy dirtball liberals are very happy to ride on the coattails of those who, through hard work and intelligence, have advanced the economy and society.
Go find someone else from whom to steal.
youmustbekidding: You are so ill-informed it's hard to know where to start. What makes you think all liberals are "lazy dirtballs?" You are the personification of Abe Lincoln's adage: "Better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt." I'm a proud liberal, started and sold two highly successful advertising businesses that employed many people and have no problem paying a little more in taxes to help my country out of a bind. How about you? What have you done other than whine?
no one stops you from paying more Richard. Do you refuse to take all of your available deductions? Do you refuse to take all of your personal exemptions? Do you willingly pay more as the Govt has made provision for?
If not why do you want to penalize others for what you've proven you won't do voluntarily?
The adage isn't attributable to Lincoln alone. Twain, Jefferson, Marx (Groucho), Einstein, Eliot, and Engel are all sourced. Intelligent scholars source it back to: Proverbs 17:28
I'm glad you're a successful businessman. However, liquidating 100% of the top 2% assets, and taxing 100% of their income will do nothing to "help the country out of a bind".
Debt, and an unbalanced budget are the culprits. Contributed by the liberal tax & spend agenda, with Obama as worst-in-history for accelerating the debt.
You're ill-informed. Cease the endless entitlements, cut and balance the budget. Live with austerity for awhile.
In the end, the poor will do far less to rejuvenate the economy than the rich.
Yet another giant load of manure from master liar Boehner. It's a well-known fact that only about 3% of small business owners actually make enough to be affected by a tax increase as proposed by Obama. Tax rates for the wealthy are at all-time lows. Perhaps Boehner could explain to us how, if the tax structure is so onorous for business, Gates, Zuckerberg (and many others in the last two decades) became millionaires and billionaires.
What are the stages of grief?
Can anyone pinpoint what stage the GOP/TP are in, I'd like them to get down to business and get a deal done before the holidays
I'd like them to make sure we go over Bernake's cliff
I'd like to see everyone compromise and get a deal done, but if push comes to shove by all means let's go off the cliff...no skin off my back, I'm not a politican
The Republicans have been stuck in the denial stage for over four years now.
Once again, people are too busy parroting partisan slogan solutions to a lesser problem while ignoring the bigger problem.
Yes, the 'fiscal cliff' poses a problem of potential tax increases and spending cuts that would be uncomfortable and hurt the economy.
But how much is being written about the country hitting the debt limit again before year-end? Yes, the debt limit is the bigger problem. The government WILL run out of money if it cannot continue to borrow and the pain will be severe and long-term.
You go Tommy. "Boner" is driving and Louise (the rest of the Republican party) is riding along. Tommy's idea is great!!!! Splat. Is the sound that "Boner" will hear as he hits bottom.
Thanks to the Stalinist Obama and his orwellian obamacare the top 2% are already getting tax increases next year
Starting next year, there will be a new 3.8 percent tax on “unearned” net investment income — such as capital gains from the sale of stocks or real estate, dividends, interest income, annuities, rents and royalties. Also starting Jan. 1 is a new 0.9 percent Medicare surcharge on top of the current Medicare payroll tax. Both taxes apply to taxable compensation that exceeds $200,000 for singles, or $250,000 for couples filing jointly.
I appreciate their help.
The tax is limited in scope and will only apply to taxpayers with adjusted gross income of more than $200,000 and married couples filing a joint return of over $250,000.
The tax is 3.8% on income from investments that are greater than $250,000 for an individual tax return and $500,000 for a joint return.
So for example, lets say you make $200k a year and you buy a house for $250k, then sell it for $300k.
You would owe 3.8% on the difference of $50k, which is $1,900.
If you and your wife buy a house you wouldn't even pay that 3.8% unless you bought a $500,000 house.
Cry me a river.
There's a good explanation of the details here:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/taxes/realestate.asp
The Medicare tax does not impose a 3.8% tax on all home sales. It imposes a 3.8% transaction tax on profits over the capital gains threshold; and only applies to individuals with an income above $200,000 and couples with a joint income of more than $250,000.
Taxes are at historical lows, and you don't get something for nothing.
no problem stealing from others sings the marxist choir
$50k in one transaction is more than the US average annual salary.
They can afford to cough up 3.8% on profits from not even working.
Stated like a true marxist
I'm a proud tax-paying American. America is worth it.
I Paid A Lot More In Taxes In The Old Days Than Now -- So Any Middle Incomers Who Are Making Ends Meet That Wants To Pay More In Taxes Does Have A Problem I'd Say -- A Real Problem!
It Won't Kill Me But I Still Rather Have It In My Jeans To Meet My Needs!
When All Those Republican Voters Making Less Than $250.000 Get To Paying Their New Tax Bills -- They Might Wake Up And Might Realize That They Are Writing A Check For 2 Or 3 Grand More -- They'll Be The First Ones On The Phone Asking Why And What Happen To That Bush Tax Cut Stuff -- I Trusted You With My Vote -- Why Did You Let This Happen -- Well Mr. & Mrs. Tax Payer You Votered For Me And I Voted For The Republican Party -- Right -- So Now You Won't Have To Worry About Spending Your Money We'll Spend It For You!
Choice A: Wake Up Now! Or B: Write The Check Now!
See That Was Easy -- I'm Sure You Can Even Figure It Out -- I Think -- Maybe -- I Hope So -- If You Get Lucky --
Maybe -- Nope -- It's A Real Long Shot At Best!
Don't Worry -- Keep Trusting Them -- They Work For All Americans Making $250,000+++++++++++!
So Vote Republican -- For The Real Takers Not The Real Makers!
We need a 40% reduction in Federal Spending in order to restore fiscal responsibility and begin returning Americans to freedom instead of being enslaved to the marxist Federal Govt
What we really need is a 40% reduction in idiotic posters like you.
What you propose, Larry, is not only a recipe for another recession or depression, it is the surest way to promote a socialist revolt. The bulwark against Marxism is a large middle class.
so Windy you are saying the at the middle class are already marxist parasites who steal from others?
No, Larry, I'm saying that the middle class are enjoying a decent standard of life within a capitalist economy and have no reason to adopt a marxist philosophy of seizing the means of production in the name of the state. The middle class serves as a buffer between the wealthy and the lower classes, some of whose members may feel that the system isn't working for them. As long as there is the hope for upward mobility, this country has not divided into a labor versus business type of party system. The plain fact is that the most recent research has shown that the chances of upward mobility in this country is now much lower than in other developed countries. In other words, if you want to realize the American Dream, you might want to move to Denmark. The Republican agenda at this point poses the greatest threat to the American Dream. When you adopt their buzzwords such as "parasite" you are perpetuating the myth that poor people are to blame for their predicament because they do not take advantage of the abundant opportunities around them. This type of denigration of the 47% is exactly why Romney lost the election, simply because American people who live in the real world know better.
Oh Larry, Larry, Larry. Your mother would be proud.
Actually Buck she's very proud of me.
We haven't had a capitalist economy for 100 years. We lost our individual liberty and became subjects of the state who determine how much of our income we are allowed to keep while also determining the winners and losers.
In my household, my income is significantly higher than my wife's. Therefore, I bare the larger burden of the bills in my household. The same rule should apply in this case. Taxes should only increase for those who can bare the burden of a tax increase. The middle class, at this juncture, cannot afford an increase in taxes. At best, we need a combination of spending cuts and tax increases on those who can afford it. Get rid of most if not all tax deductions (housing credits etc.). Cut our defense to peacetime levels and maybe sell some of our older planes to our allies for extra revenue. Close ALL military bases and reduce American presence around the world. We cannot continue to police the world. If other nations want our military assistance, then they should either handle the matter themselves or PAY US to send in negotiators, military consultants and strategists only. No troops whatsoever. I don't see anyone complaining about socialism when we're sending large amounts of money to foreign nations. Well you know what? End ALL foreign aid programs and leave Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid programs alone. If we can afford to give Myanmar millions of tax payer dollars then we can afford to take care of own elderly, sick and poor.
I still think the government debt is insurmountable relative to our GDP but whatever. I doubt these guys have considered the fact that the FED will have to raise interest rates on this debt in the next. Do their figures and proposed cuts account for an interest rate greater than 0%? As soon as the FED raises the interest rate on our debt, all hell will break lose...if not before that period. I just think this is a bunch of political posturing, can kicking and two sides afraid to admit that the solution to this problem will involve a great deal of suffering not unlike what we saw in 2008. Probably even worse. If these guys don't do the common sense thing and drastically cut the military, reduce the size of government by cutting useless programs and end all foreign aid..then we are looking at a serious crisis in the near future. I won't even get into a potential currency crisis. Judging by Obama having lunch with Romney today, the TEAthuglicans up to the same antics of saying NO to everything and the CEO of Goldman-Sachs coming out saying that Social Security needs to but STOLEN..sorry, I mean CUT...I just have a strong feeling that the middle class is about to get screwed over big time one way or another.
elliot-3020456 "Read the tax pledge. It is a pledge to the American People not Norquist.
It pledges to not raise any Americans taxes, Not Grover's."
Who has threatened to Primary anyone who violates the pledge? The American people or Norquist?
I'm an American and a voter and I didn't ask any politician to sign a tax pledge...
I'm an American who demands that our members of Congress refuse to raise taxes. We are already a totalitarian marxist govt that steals from those who produce to engage in marxist redistribution of wealth while bankrupting the country
I know Larry Robinson...the sky is falling, O-H... N-O...t-h-e s-k-y i-s f-a-l-l-i-n-g
Larry, I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, considering that the financial sector playing high-risk games with the market was the primary cause for the Great Recession. The past 30 years, if you care to check your fact, has seen wealth migrate into the hands of the few at the top and the shrinking of the middle class. It wasn't Marxists that were engineering this redistribution of wealth.
Larry look around you - everything that has absolutely anything to do with town, city, parish, county, regional, state or federal governments and services is paid for through redistribution.
That's what governments do..
Nonsense REO-
police, fire, and most local services are paid for through user fees including and primarily property taxes or sales taxes.
Most of what our Federal govt is involved in is marxist redistribution of wealth - transfer payments.
Taking from one group and redistributing it to another.
That includes the Marxist Child Tax Credit, EITC, Federal Unemployment benefits, Food Stamps, Medicare and Medicaid, Fed aid to education, and even SS which relies upon current recipients receiving payments from current workers.
So tired of these guys voting based on their fear of a Republican primary from the Right, or of a bloviating lobbyist.
When did current Repubs turn into the entrenched with special interests Dems of the 70's and 80's? Same thing, just different interest groups.
Republicans: what happened to "Country First"???
John Boner needs to get booted out of office.
It's a shame this d!c#head was re-elected.
Must be a bunch of Rush Limpbaghl fans staggering around the 8th district with blinders on.
If lowering taxes on the wealthy created jobs we should be up to our armpits in jobs right now. How does Boehner explain that. Also, most American's agree that taxes should go up on the wealthy. Is he ignoring the voting that just happened. I think so.
Eric... SO TRUE! The Republicans never mention that little fact!
I am against extending the Bush tax cuts for anyone. I think this country is valuable enough that I am willing to pay a little more to get the ship righted. Tax increases and drastic spending cuts are the medicine that we will all have to endure to make this nation better.
And last but not least, I BLAME EVERY SINGLE ON OF YOU OUT THERE regardless of party affilitation, since you were dumb enough to vote these people into office not once but twice or more sometimes. You elected the people who voted for the tax cuts in 2001, you voted for the people who continued the tax cuts in 2010, you voted for the people who then ran the deficit up every year, you voted for the people who then ran the national debit up to over 16 trillion now, you voted for the people who then gave President Bush the authority to go to war twice, you voted for the people who jammed a health care bill down our throats that has done nothing but add to overall cost & debit.
Bitch all you want about each other, but you voted for the idiots in each party we have now & have had to deal with in the past. What happens is not their fault. It's YOURS! You got what you voted for!
Who did you vote for, Dave? In case you had'nt noticed your own vote, are you blameless?
The Tan Man is still looking for his heart, I see. Hey John, maybe you left it in the back of the Koch brothers' limo?
Looking for some facts here instead of what you all have offered so far. Does anyone know EXACTLY what percent of people who make over $250k are ACTUALLY small business owners? There is much data suggesting that lower taxes have zero to microscopic influence on investment decisions. In spite of that, rhetoric seems to think lower taxes do have an influence. So why not extend the bush tax cuts for people who are REALLY small business owners and for the rest...well the country needs the money in a big, big way.
Raise the rates on the top 2%, fine, but it will only account for about 7% of the budget shortfall. Will Obama please tell us his plans to come up with the other 93% ?
raising the rate on the top 2% produces about 50 billion annually which is about 3 1/2 days interest on the debt or about 2% of the deficit.
Where's President Clinton to explain the arithmetic?
I'll settle for President Reagan who patiently explained to people how cutting social security benefits would have no effect on the deficit.
Letting the Bush rates expire for the top 2% saves $42B in the first year that would otherwise be added to the deficit.
The savings will continue to grow every year, totaling $950 Billion in deficit reduction and interest payment savings over the next ten years.
http://www.offthechartsblog.org/cbo-ending-high-income-tax-cuts-would-save-almost-1-trillion/
Reagan never cut SS benefits
REO- try dividing 42 billion by 1.1 trillion and see how much it actually reduces the deficit. And that would be with 3 assumptions
1. That the top 2% don't delay or reduce income and that they don't shift investments back in to non taxable vehicle as in the past when rates are raised.
2. That Obama doesn't reduce spending. Dems have already said that entitlements which are the biggest cause of our debt and deficit are off the table
3. That top earners don't leave the country. In England 2/3's of millionaires moved out of Great Britain after tax rates were raised to 50%
Two-thirds of millionaires left Britain to avoid 50p tax rate
Almost two-thirds of the country’s million-pound earners disappeared from Britain after the introduction of the 50p top rate of tax, figures have disclosed.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9707029/Two-thirds-of-millionaires-left-Britain-to-avoid-50p-tax-rate.html
It's not $42B every year. The savings grow each year to total $950B over ten years.
Those assumptions are made by the CBO taking into account low end projections.
UK had 16,000 millionaires at the time, the U.S. has 5.1 million. The 50% rate was an increase of 10%, not an expiration of 4.6%.
Read more: http://business.time.com/2012/06/05/number-of-millionaires-in-u-s-decreases-but-spikes-worldwide/#ixzz2DYnmEjpz
Read more: http://business.time.com/2012/06/05/number-of-millionaires-in-u-s-decreases-but-spikes-worldwide/#ixzz2DYnmEjpz
Boehner lied and he knew he was lying. According to FactCheck, "In 2011, the Treasury Department's Office of Tax Analysis took a more in-depth look at the issue using a more realistic definition of "small business" and it shows that more than 90 percent of small-business owners wouldn't be affected by Obama's proposal to raise taxes on individuals making over $200,000 and couples making over $250,000. Moreover, about 90 percent of those who would be affected by the tax increase are not small-business owners."
He knows he's lying because he already was corrected on this after he said it on November 9, although that apparently was not the first time. "Boehner's spokesman, Michael Steel, said Boehner misspoke, that he meant to say half of small-business income, not half of small-business owners. If it's an honest mistake, it's one Boehner has made before."
Why does he keep saying this to us? Because these lies work if you accept them on their face, and he's betting that most of us will. Be informed and check these statements.
Who did you vote for Dave? If you didn't vote, then you really have no reason to complain.
Its good to see the Repubs true colors coming out now that they don't have to make false promises to try to get elected (although that didn't work all that well, did it?) Boener knows that those of us making less than $250,000 a year are the suckers that don't matter (I guess we are whats left of the non-47% Romney fell in love with during the election). If the richest 1% are going to have to pony up more, by God, so are the rest of us!
I still don't understand why when the rich have more money (AKA taxed less), that is good for the economy, but when the middle class has more money, it doesn't really help the economy? Please, someone, one of you supply side tea baggers, enlighten me.
Ask yourself, how does the middle class get more money? Through more jobs, which generate more taxes; or, less taxes, which creates a larger deficit.
Both. When consumers (middle and working class) have more money, they spend all of it on consumer goods and services. This increases demand, which creates more jobs. When the rich have a little more money, they don't spend it all. It gets saved. It is not invested in expanding business and new hiring, without evidence of demand for their products and services.
There is a sweet spot between the right amount of demand and supply, that results in the most job growth. Historically, as Warren Buffett wrote, higher taxes will never make someone NOT want to make more money. If consumers demand more of their product, they will provide it.
mj ct that makes no sense whatsoever, but thanks anyway for trying.
Rep. Cole will now be labeled a RINO and sent to re-indoctrination camp.
Terrorism is alive and well in the United States and it's coming from the Republican Party. This is pure economic terrorism by Republicans.