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:
Mr Boner, must be having fun, playing with himself!!!!!!! He should be run out of town on a rail, for making such a stupid statement. Does he have any brains at all.?
well, now we know who the GOP is standing for in the negotiations...Thank GOD Romney didnt get elected..wed be screwed
Every logical, sane person never doubted for a moment that the inept, disjointed, out-of-touch-with-reality Obstructionist Party would lick their wounds after being politically trounced by of all things, a black man, and become what they've always been -- pathetic, racist, sore losers with a vendetta.
Why should Rich or the top 2% pay more in taxes?
==== They profit more for the military
The military bases around the world are there to protect US interest( Asia, Middle East, Africa, etc..) What interest does a middle class has in that part of the world ? Nothing
==== The 2 % profit more than anybody from Infrastructures for the businesses, the customs, the police, etc...
It's simple for the republican congressmen and senators. You either support the state people that voted you in office or you support Grover Norquist a billionaire lobbyist dude.
When I hear Grover Norquist say on TV, these people have a choice. They support me or the people that voted them in. If they don't support me, they will not win their next election.Have you ever heard the word(Black Mail)of our republican politicians.
Grover Norquist is the type of person that President Lincoln warned American people many years ago.(Beware of a elite rich person seeking to own our government) Grover Norquist fix this description 100%.
Boner.. Grab a cig. a stiff drink and enjoy telling the 98% to kiss your a$$ while you have a fat a$$ Christmas and a happy new year!! Thanks DB!!!
Somebody please remind Boehner that the Republicans lost the last election. (And, at the same time, somebody remind the Democrats and Obama that they won.)
President Obama campaigned on letting the tax cuts for those making $250,000+ expire, and he was re-elected by majority of Americans.
Polls show majority of Americans think letting those tax cuts expire is the right thing to do.
GOP is NOT doing the will of the people, they are doing the will of their mega millions/billion donors.
GOP lost the election, lost seats in House and Senate...they still can't understand Americans do NOT want them to continue their obstruction.
I think all the
BushObama tax cuts should expire, so Boehner not being forced into being Cole's monkey on a string expresses this voter's wishes. Do the right thing, write some legislation that contains some spending cuts, some new revenue, and an increase to the debt ceiling.With the boner making these comments, we may just be screwed!!!!!!!!!!
Holding the middle class hostage, again.
you republicans have got to be the dumbest @!$%#s on the planet.don't you clowns know you lost the election? you won't vote for middle and lower income taxes to hold out for your rich buddies? what the hell is wrong with you people?-go the way you're going so we can have a real congress in 2014 and get all you dumbasses out of there!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The morons don't get it. There has been a transference of wealth from the middle class to the upper class for the last 35 years courtesy of the Republican Party. "Trickle down" has empirically been shown actually to be "trickle up”: between 1979 and 2007, the annual income of "t]he top 1% of income earners saw their after-tax income shoot up a whopping 275% . . . , and in the process more than doubled their share of all income, jumping from 8% to 17%, according to a new report from the Congressional Budget Office."
at the same time worker wages have remained flat or have been declining after taking into account the higher contributions by workers to worker benefits like health care and retirement. "Today the top 1 percent of Americans control 43 percent of the financial wealth . . . while the bottom 80 percent control only 7 percent of the wealth. Incredibly, the wealthiest 400 Americans have the same combined wealth as the poorest half of Americans -- over 150 million people.”
Indeed, "[t]he top 20% now take home 85% of every dollar earned.
"Republicans (still) favor tax cuts for the wealthy and the corporations, (even though) these had no stimulative effect during the George W. Bush administration and there is no reason to believe that more of them will have any today."
In fact, despite receiving tax cuts and despite the fact that they have been making trillions during the 3 ½ years of Obama's presidency, corporations and wealthy business owners decided no longer to invest in America but rather to set up factories and service centers abroad, where cheaper labor brings higher profits. "With no control over where the wealthy and corporations deploy their capital, the money we borrowed to support tax cuts largely favoring the wealthy has supported job creation and business growth abroad while our job creation has lagged at home."
In fact, those "job creators" so lionized by Republicans are actual economic traitors to the people of this country, and their products and services should be boycotted by American patriots whenever possible.
In summary, trickle down has always been a Republican con job, a prescription for transferring wealth from the middle class to the party's wealthy donors, as has been repeatedly demonstrated by statistics showing increasing income inequality in this country and the creation of jobs in Third World countries by our “job creators." That transfer of wealth must be abated, and taxing those who have been its beneficiaries is the only way to stem growing income inequality.
the top 20% begins at $75,000 in income. You don't think they are the middle class?
$250,000 is middle class America.
Who are the top 2%
In California that would be a teacher and a policeman or fireman; a longshoreman and a teacher; a nurse and a garbage collector;
Let's look at typical incomes in states like California
he AVERAGE teacher salary is $67,871 per year
In the state public school system, teacher salary in California is determined by individual school districts. According to the Sacramento Bee, the average teacher salary in 2011 was $67,871. Districts with the highest average teacher salaries in California are located near Santa Barbara, San Francisco and Los Angeles. Montecito Union Elementary District, covering a wealthy community near Santa Barbara, is the top-paying district with an average salary of $101,066. The second and third highest paying districts are both located in Santa Clara County, which is also home to Silicon Valley. The average salary in the Mountain View-Los Altos Union district is $100,530, while Los Gatos-Saratoga Joint Union has an average salary of $92,636. Laguna Beach Unified, located outside Los Angeles in Orange County, is fourth on the list with an average salary of $91,828.
http://www.sacbee.com/2011/03/03/3446569/see-average-police-firefighter.html
Or how about Police and Firefighters
While their ranks have thinned due to layoffs and the recession, California police offices and firefighters still typically earn far more than most Californians.
California police officers made, on average, $92,976, including overtime, incentive pay and payouts upon retirement during 2010, according to a Bee analysis of data from the state controller's office. Firefighters and engineers earned, on average, $113,882. Average pay for police captains across the state was $147,940; for fire captains, it was $141,525.
http://www.sacbee.com/2011/03/03/3446569/see-average-police-firefighter.html
Nursing
the Average salary for a RN in CA is $83,000.
The following is from 2002
Full-time West Coast dockworkers who load and unload ships make on average nearly $100,000 a year, while clerks who keep track of cargo movements average $120,000. Not only does the medical coverage for active longshoremen require no out-of-pocket expenses, but the same holds true for retirees.
its been proven, its been shown, and its time the GOP realizes this boat isnt floating anymore..raising taxes on the rich does NOT hurt the economy..and lowering them doesnt help..the country started to flourish under the Clinton rates, and we should go back to those. NO MORE BREAKS for the top 1%!
The basic differences in economic policies between Romney and Obama were taxes and how to use government spending to stimulate economic growth. There really was no essential difference on the debt issue, with neither candidate promising a "balanced budget" over the next four years and Romney's first balanced budget coming either late or after a second term in office.
On the annual deficit, Romney's promise wasn't to eliminate it, but not to exceed the current deficit of approximately $1.0 trillion per fiscal year.
So, both Romney and Obama foretold of a worse case addition of some $8.0 trillion in ADDED national debt by 2022.
Romney "hoped" to do better than his promises through supply side economics tax cuts and defense spending government stimulus. Obama's is/was a slower, but broader based infrastructure update to compete more effectively in the global economy.
The upshot of both was Romney was falling back on a Cold War economy, which may have had a quicker return to higher GDP growth, but less sustainable, while running the risk of returning global "plowshares into swords" - i.e. the defense industry infrastructure is largely present and probably the most advanced on the planet. Obama's plan was stimulus through tax increases, with longer term improvements toward more balanced trade in goods and services, via education and health care reform. [BOTH promised energy independence, via different paths.]
Exit polls showing that some 60%+ of the electorate still blame the country's economic ills on Bush Junior and favor additional tax hikes for the upper 2% are connected and basically say: "We like capitalism when it helps most of us, not just a few. You got greedy And came close to killing the goose that lays the golden eggs. Call it redistribution or call it punishment, you had your chance and blew it. Restoration of the middle class is more important than additional disposable income for the wealthy to spend on derivative bets and/or building a new consumer market in China. You want to invest there, rather than here? Go live there."
I hope these bozo's Republican supporters are taking note. Their GOP "leaders" are willing to throw them and the rest of the 98% of the country under the bus so the capital gains tax doesn't go up; that is the main reason. The small businesses they claim will be hurt are include many hedge fund operators who make millions.
No, it is not just about capital gains. And it is not just about the wealthy.
Hedge funds are just a business, like any other- so why single them out. Many hedge funds manage billions of dollars and are hardly classified as small businesses. Whether you drill for oil, manage a hedge fund, or run a consultant business...who cares? Each should pay tax that is required of them...nothing more.
If there is no difference in "work," then tax them all at ordinary earned income rates.
Why is the party of religious morality protecting the wealthy? When a rich man asked Jesus what he needed to do to inherit eternal life, Jesus loved him and said "sell everything you have to the poor and come follow me." I think republicans have missed the main moral justice issue of Christ's ministry. To love your neighbor as yourself, not the rich person because you hope he will create jobs for you!
We have spent over $3 trillion in Bush tax cuts over 10 years and what has that gotten us? More jobs! I don't think so. We could have had a high speed rail system that match our interstate system and look how many jobs that would have created. No all the money went into the Cayman Islands for future generations of wealthy families and their children. Not exactly what Jesus had in mind when he said sell everything you own and give it to the poor!
Lets go then, off the cliff. We can all do well to pay higher taxes, have to pay the national debt somehow. Go ask a Republican how they intend on paying down the national debt when they take away everything Americans get for paying taxes, but then still expect Americans to pay taxes. Their talking points never address payments to the national debt. Their votes never allow us to raise enough revenue to pay for current spending. Their positions are not fiscally responsible. They sign a pledge to never increase taxes, but are never prevented from approving spending. The Republicans and Grover Norquist are the largest drivers of the national debt. The Republicans and Grover are like a couple sitting down to talk about them having too much debt and spending, so they decide one of them needs to cut back their work hours, and revenue, to force them to reduce spending, but they still spend, just with less revenue. That doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
Ugh...
It's really very simple... Let all the tax cuts expire for everyone. Everyone pays higher taxes and we balance the budget from there.
Then we start looking at what we can cut, what tax breaks can be given, and where the money should be spent.
If you try to do it all at once, you'll just end of arguing and getting confused.
It won't be fun, nice, or easy... but at least you'll have a balanced budget and can proceed from there.
Eliminate all of the Bush tax cuts, including the tax cuts for low- and middle-income Americans, and you would reduce the debt by perhaps 10% — assuming you didn’t cripple the economy in the process. Tax the rich? That won’t get you there either. In fact, according to the Congressional Budget Office, in order to pay for all currently scheduled federal spending would require raising both the corporate tax rate and top income tax rate from their current 35% to 88%, the current 25% tax rate for middle-income workers to 63%, and the 10% tax bracket for low-income workers to 25%.
http://tinyurl.com/2flzfl6
Boenher is the lap dog of the elite and Grover Linguist. Time to forget about the Republican Party and let the tax breaks expire. All Republicans have become are attention whores and campaign money tramps.
Yes, let ALL tax cuts expire.
That would be far more fair, than letting tax breaks expire only for high earners.
This one was soooo obvious only Stevie Wonder wouldn't have seen that coming...
If the Republican leadership agreed to start with the <$250k earners they'd lose a huge bargaining chip to protect their wealthy buddies. Only their wealthy buddies wouldn't mind paying more.
They're not going to change their spots. They're a nasty, bitter, angry, spoiled, underhanded bunch of corporate prostitutes, period. It's the only thing they're consistent about.
It was so silly of us to have an election. Clearly, the will of the people doesn't matter.
The people did NOT vote on tax increases for the wealthy, and for everyone else to keep their tax cuts. The will of the people does matter. But we have no direct vote on our own taxes, regardless that Obama incorrectly says he has a mandate.
The people did re-elect Obama, who ran on a platform of raising taxes for the wealthy. In addition, exit polls found that 60% of voters agreed with him. So, yes, the people did vote on taxes if only indirectly.
So much for Mr. Boehner being for the middle class. His reason being that those making over $250,000 are small business people makes no sense. Anyone with an AGI over $250k has got to be smart enough to have a financial planner and CPA that can help them avoid having that much in AGI. Taxing such incomes will also result in more investment in job creation as that will lower their AGI to result in less taxes. Mr. Boehner is making no sense at all.
There is also the matter of the middle class, those earning less than $250k, are the engines of our economy. Their spending results in a greater economy and always has. That is why this country led the World after WWII as there was a greater middle class evolved post-war.
On what planet does government overspending, coupled with tax cuts for all....equal raising taxes on just the 2% to pay for this?
No spending cuts, no increase in taxes on anyone else?
It is very easy to be selfish, and shortsighted...and merely just try to screw the other guy with a tax increase. When Obama is not mocking or scolding Wall St, or business, it is high earners...above all else. If all men are created equal...I find it tough to stomach the constant prejudice against capitalism and wealth that is on constant display in the White House.I am not a 2%er and firmly believe everyone should pay some higher amount to help pay down our debt- even if it is a token one time $20.
Yes high earners have more ability to pay...but that does not mean they should be singled out.
As the sequestration was the bipartisan resolution to having NO DEAL; why are the Democrats pushing for a partial deal?
Why didn't the Democrats suggest tying spending cuts to the <$250K cuts, with the upper rates to be addressed later?
Or is this just President Obama reneging?
Boehner wants to hold off on cutting taxes for those below $250,000 so he can use it as a bargaining chip to cut benefit programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, and any other programs from which he can extract monies from the middle class. After he has the opportunity to shred our safety nets, he will then support cutting taxes for those below $250,000.
Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are huge entitlement programs that are hugely underfunded. No smokescreen of Obamacare, or fiscal cliff is going to rectify this. These programs are NOT just for the middle class.
You should be glad that someone wants to address this entitlement fiasco, rather than turning a blind eye to it.