Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Breaking: One Dem Senator endorses middle class tax cut vote

By Greg Sargent

Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley, one of a recent crop of relatively young and reform-minded Senate Dems, in a statement sent my way:

"Our nation can't afford failed trickle-down economic policies that favor the wealthiest among us and leave working families behind. I support an up or down vote on middle-class tax cuts and believe that it would be a huge mistake to repeat the Bush giveaways for millionaires and billionaires."

As best as I can determine, he's the only Democratic Senator to publicly throw his weight behind the idea of holding this vote.

By Greg Sargent  | November 16, 2010; 2:01 PM ET
Categories:  Senate Dems, taxes  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Rahm: I never believed in bipartisanship
Next: In testy exchange, Chuck Grassley told Obama: No deal!

Comments

Gawd. How may times do we have to go through this? Just say you're going to pussy out on an issue and be done with it. This is like being dumped by the same girl three times.

Posted by: klautsack | November 16, 2010 2:05 PM | Report abuse

Yay, Oregon, this is the guy who beat Gordon Smith in '08. We'll see if he can get Wyden to join him.

Posted by: shrink2 | November 16, 2010 2:06 PM | Report abuse

klautsack, so shall I put up that Offspring song again?

Posted by: shrink2 | November 16, 2010 2:08 PM | Report abuse

Well I live in Virginia, but I'm going to email him right now to thank him for standing up for our side. COME ON DEMS: show you mean it!

Posted by: LAB2 | November 16, 2010 2:11 PM | Report abuse

Shat is gonna hit the fan if they don't vote ONLY on the middle class tax cut. Dems and Obama, if you want to be re-elected, you better get your arses in gear and get this done.

Posted by: clintt5 | November 16, 2010 2:12 PM | Report abuse

shrink2 - Absolutely. This is all so predictable.

Posted by: klautsack | November 16, 2010 2:12 PM | Report abuse

Didn't get any feedback on this in a previous thread, so I'll post it again:

I still have my doubts about the ultimate success of this approach. If the House holds a vote on permanently extending just the middle class tax cuts and it passes, wouldn't Senate Republicans be able to just run out the clock and wait for the GOP-controlled House to introduce their own permanent extension of all of the Bush tax cuts in January?

Would the potential political damage sustained by Republicans for holding out for a month and a half be enough to pressure them into not filibustering during the lame duck session? I suppose that the immediate result of payroll tax increases for everybody would make Republicans look pretty bad, but I'm wondering if they're betting that Obama and Democrats will ultimately look worse if they veto/vote down/filibuster the House GOP extension of all the Bush tax cuts...

Thoughts?

Posted by: billy_burdett | November 16, 2010 2:23 PM | Report abuse

"This is like being dumped by the same girl three times."

Heh, heh, The Offspring did a song called Self Esteem, Obama fans should consider its applicability...


"I wrote her off for the tenth time today
And practice all the things I would say
But she came over
I lost my nerve
I took her back and made her dessert
Now I know I'm being used
That's okay man cause I like the abuse
I know she's playing with me
That's okay cause I got no self esteem

We make plans to go out at night
I wait till 2 then I turn out the light
All this rejection's got me so low
If she keeps it up I just might tell her so

When she's saying that she wants only me
Then I wonder why she sleeps with my friends
When she's saying that I'm like a disease
Then I wonder how much more I can spend
Well I guess I should stick up for myself
But I really think it's better this way
The more you suffer
The more it shows you really care
Right? Yeah yeah yeah

Now I'll relate this little bit
That happens more than I'd like to admit
Late at night she knocks on my door
Drunk again and looking to score
Now I know I should say no
But that's kind of hard when she's ready to go
I may be dumb
But I'm not a dweeb
I'm just a sucker with no self esteem."

Posted by: shrink2 | November 16, 2010 2:24 PM | Report abuse

Never heard of this guy, are you sure he isn't a State Senator?

Posted by: RedTeaRevolution | November 16, 2010 2:24 PM | Report abuse

So, after Obama raised health insurance premiums $800 Billion, this guy wants to ADD a $700 Billion Tax Increase to weigh down the economy and hiring.


GREAT platform for 2012


Sounds like a winner to me !!!!


.

Posted by: RedTeaRevolution | November 16, 2010 2:28 PM | Report abuse

@billy: "If the House holds a vote on permanently extending just the middle class tax cuts and it passes, wouldn't Senate Republicans be able to just run out the clock and wait for the GOP-controlled House to introduce their own permanent extension of all of the Bush tax cuts in January?"

Yes, or they could filibuster. Even before that there may not be enough votes in the House to pass the thing.

"Would the potential political damage sustained by Republicans for holding out for a month and a half be enough to pressure them into not filibustering during the lame duck session?"

Not even close. They have been rewarded for filibustering and have suffered no consequences for "obstruction."

"I suppose that the immediate result of payroll tax increases for everybody would make Republicans look pretty bad."

Not really, and if so, only for a month or two. My bet is that tax increases would actually make the dems and Obama look bad - they're the ones in charge and they've had four years to fix this.

"I'm wondering if they're betting that Obama and Democrats will ultimately look worse if they veto/vote down/filibuster the House GOP extension of all the Bush tax cuts..."

Yep.

The country already feels that the Dem party is too liberal. Obama gains nothing by succumbing to pressure from the far left to hold a symbolic vote.

Posted by: sbj3 | November 16, 2010 2:41 PM | Report abuse

I live in Oregon, and THAT'S why I voted for Jeff Merkely. I just voted for Ron Widen too, so come on Ron, MAN UP!

Posted by: divtune | November 16, 2010 2:43 PM | Report abuse

As promised, clear evidence that the claim that Obama never pursued bipartisanship on health reform is B.S.:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/11/in_testy_exchange_chuck_grassl.html

Posted by: sargegreg | November 16, 2010 2:45 PM | Report abuse

Only the GOP would be out in force saying a tax cut for middle class americans was wrong.

Yup, tax cuts for millionaires is the only way to go.

Posted by: dcp26851 | November 16, 2010 2:46 PM | Report abuse

Responding To: billy_burdett | November 16, 2010 2:23 PM

The original Bush tax cuts were passed by the Republican controlled Senate using reconciliation, which requires only 50 votes. Therefore, they could not object now to Democrats using the same procedure to extend them.

But the clock is ticking on the lame duck House. Come on Nancy Pelosi. Show us again that you still have a pair!

Posted by: divtune | November 16, 2010 2:50 PM | Report abuse

It's a game of chicken. If Obama thinks he wants/needs the middle class cuts more than he rejects the upper class cuts, then he'll succumb to whatever tactics the Repubs will use to delay the vote on the middle class cuts until he gives in on the upper class cuts.

If, however, he holds fast and the Dems introduce just a middle class cuts bill, he can't lose. The worst that will happen is that the cuts go away for everyone and the deficit starts to drop. He can argue, as Clinton argued, that the Repubs prevented him from signing off on just the middle class cuts. I think that's win/win for him, if he can control the message and persuade the electorate that the Repubs stood in the way.

Posted by: gchuzi | November 16, 2010 2:50 PM | Report abuse

Hurrah. A step forward for the middle class and against lavish gifts of borrowed money for the very wealthy.

When economic recovery is job 1 for the sake of the millions upon millions of unemployed and underemployed and for U.S. government fiscal health AND the annual deficit and the total debt are of such concern, we must think smart and act smart.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office assessed about 10 plans for their economic boost. The Bush tax cuts for the very wealthy were far down at the very bottom. There was precious little trickle down.

Competing for first place with a significant positive impact of economic activity was the proposal of GOP Indiana Governor Mitch Daniel and others for a tax holiday for social security.

Let's think smart and act smart -- let the Bush tax cuts (lavish gifts) for the very wealthy expire; instead, enact the tax holiday that will meaningfully boost economic recovery.

Posted by: jimb | November 16, 2010 2:56 PM | Report abuse

Merkley is the only one to come out and say it, but I think I can guarantee that Bernie Sanders would agree with this. Then again, techically, Sanders isn't a Democrat.

Posted by: Calvin_Jones_and_the_13th_Apostle | November 16, 2010 2:57 PM | Report abuse

On thoughts - I've been worried about that outcome too. The Repubs block the middle class-only bill, then come back in January and pass tax cuts for everyone and get the credit. So I would say two things - first, if you're gonna play this game play it right. Don't just offer a middle class-only bill, DARE Republicans to vote against it. Say it loudly to every press outlet in town that Republicans are going to vote against middle class tax cuts, don't even wait for their response, put them on the defensive from the get go.

And if you still don't win, and Republicans once again skate by with blocking the bill, then take a page from their book - block their bill next year. Remember, it really takes 60 votes to get anything throught he Senate now, and if Republicans didn't get the blame for filibustering, why should you? Then take another page from their book - after blocking their legislation, piously ask if they have learned their lesson now and are "listening to the American people," and will introduce a middle class-only tax cut that we can all agree on....

Posted by: dwt301 | November 16, 2010 2:58 PM | Report abuse

Didn't get any feedback on this in a previous thread, so I'll post it again:

I still have my doubts about the ultimate success of this approach. If the House holds a vote on permanently extending just the middle class tax cuts and it passes, wouldn't Senate Republicans be able to just run out the clock and wait for the GOP-controlled House to introduce their own permanent extension of all of the Bush tax cuts in January?

Would the potential political damage sustained by Republicans for holding out for a month and a half be enough to pressure them into not filibustering during the lame duck session? I suppose that the immediate result of payroll tax increases for everybody would make Republicans look pretty bad, but I'm wondering if they're betting that Obama and Democrats will ultimately look worse if they veto/vote down/filibuster the House GOP extension of all the Bush tax cuts...

If the rethugs hold it off until January, all the tax cuts will expire. Which is what should happen.

Posted by: mtravali | November 16, 2010 3:05 PM | Report abuse

Have some guts - let the tax cuts expire! This would reduce the deficit that's being loaded on the nex... - oh, for f---'s sake! - OUR generation!

Posted by: mastersinourhouse | November 16, 2010 3:16 PM | Report abuse

The attitude of the liberals toward other people's money should scare every America tax payer.

Using words like "lavish gifts" liberals prove the oft repeated contention that they think all the money belongs to the government and that we, the wage earners, should be grateful for whatever pittance the government permits us to keep.

If nothing else the looming debate in DC will provide the Democrats with ample opportunity to offer quotes that their political opponents will use in future elections.

Liberals deride the tea party at their own peril. The level of taxation in America is a central point of contention. The effort to disparage successful people so that the liberals can confiscate their money without guilt isn't fooling many this time around.

As I noted last week, the impression liberals want us to have is that the target of their thievery are folks like Paris Hilton. Americans know better. That 200K/250K threshold will suck up a lot of members of every community: professionals, self employed and two income earners. it won't be nameless faceless robber barrons who inherited some money and live lives of wretched excess and disipation. It will be the couple that owns a few subway franchises, or a successful local restauranteur. It will be people in our community upon whom we rely for goods and services.

A prolonged debate about the tax rates in America will also offer the Democrats an opportunity to show America that they really, at their core, have no shame.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | November 16, 2010 3:21 PM | Report abuse

Hold the damned vote and get it done, one way or the other, but it better exclude extending the shrubs' tax cut for the super mega rich, they already own the planet.

Posted by: mtravali | November 16, 2010 3:27 PM | Report abuse

A Democrat with a backbone, how unusual.

Posted by: dfdougherty | November 16, 2010 3:38 PM | Report abuse

America was at its strongest economically From the end or WWII until the late 1970's. Let's go back to the tax rates and economic policies we had then.

Posted by: mcstowy | November 16, 2010 3:39 PM | Report abuse

Merkley makes sense and I e-mailed
my Congressman and two Senators just such a proposal yesterday. Have not heard a peep back as expected. I would also suggest that after the vote for middle class tax cuts is completed they vote on whether to give the rich a tax cut as well.

I would like to see where everybody stands.

Posted by: thomgr | November 16, 2010 3:44 PM | Report abuse

I personally think the American public is too stupid to remember anything for more than about a minute. They evidently didn't remember how broken health care was, that it had to be fixed. They didn't remember who brought us the recession and the Iraq war, who deregulated Wall Street and the oil industry so that they could ruin both the economy and the environment. Why should a little thing like this leave an impression on them? They'll just continue giving their pay checks to the rich, hope that their lottery ticket hits it some day, and keep complaining about those who envision a more equitable deal for them.

Posted by: garoth | November 16, 2010 3:44 PM | Report abuse

Let all the tax cuts expire! Why reward the middle class for voting Republican.

Posted by: Dwntner | November 16, 2010 3:53 PM | Report abuse

By the way, we've already learned that Obama doesn't have the cajones to stand up for his beliefs. Either that, or he doesn't have any. He'll give away the bank before anyone asks for a withdrawl. He's so concerned about getting along with people that only want him out of office, that he won't take a stand. It's hard for the Democrats to stand up and be counted, when they don't have a leader who will stand with them, let alone fight for them. I wish they'd take a vote on a "middle class only" package, using whatever means necessary to push it through, then force the Republicans to try to push through a "tax cuts for the rich" package when they get in power, if they dare.

Posted by: garoth | November 16, 2010 4:00 PM | Report abuse

@billy - One problem with the approach of running out the clock is that there are several related issues. The estate tax jumps to punitive levels and the AMT "fix" goes away. Mind you, I don't know who faces more damage if an extend them all vote fails. Dems would filibuster to get such an amendment voted on and Republicans will try to block it. So, ALL the tax cuts will probably fade.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | November 16, 2010 4:11 PM | Report abuse

"it would be a huge mistake to repeat the Bush giveaways for millionaires and billionaires.""
-----------------------------------------
True, people like Kerry and Pelosi should not be getting one more dime from the tax payers!

Posted by: leapin | November 16, 2010 4:14 PM | Report abuse

skipsailing28, other peoples money my arse. The tax rate on the rich has dropped so much that income inequality is at record highs. Most of these super-rich folks got their money by being greedy and not rewarding their workers(you know, the middle class and poor) for busting their butts for them for decades. Half of them cheating their way to wealth on wall street or are bankers who have been raking the middle class over the coals forever. I do not feel sorry for them if they have to pay an additional 3% in taxes. They barely pay at all with tax loopholes and offshore tax shelters as it is. And if you are one of the cheating, greedy, cheap ones I speak of, I hope you get taxed until you cry like a baby!

Posted by: McSameChalin | November 16, 2010 4:25 PM | Report abuse

in response to this:
===============
America was at its strongest economically From the end or WWII until the late 1970's. Let's go back to the tax rates and economic policies we had then.

========

this assumes that it was tax rates and economic policy ALONE that created the prosperity.

Isn't it also possible that the situation facing the rest of the world had an impact as well? At the end of ww2 much of the world's productive capacity was smashed to bits. Europe and Japan, two industrial powerhouses were completely destroyed in the war.

So, of course we were prosperous, our productive capacity didn't suffer the depredations of the war. We had a huge competitive advantage.

As those war torn areas recovered, their ability to produce also recovered. By the mid 70's the Japanese had landed in Detroit and the rest is history.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | November 16, 2010 4:29 PM | Report abuse

If the Democrats actually THINK the OBSTRUCTIONISTS will be more ressonable about ANYTHING if they dawdle around about eliminating the millionaires' tax breaks, I have some nice swampland in Florida at a really great price! The majority of Republicans ARE millionaires, and very SELFISH ones at that. They aren't going to budge one iota on anything that will benefit the middle class! It's ALL for US, and US for US, with these selfish bunch, who voted "NO" on any project before this election that would've benefitted the Middle Class! Selfish people do not "compromise"! They don't understand the give and take of the word!

The Democrats better get busy and push through the elimination of that highway robbery enrichment program for the wealthy (MOST of whom inherited their money anyway~~a RARE few WORKED and made their own millions, but not many! They are the "Golden Spoon since birth" people, who don't have a clue about the REAL world. And the FOX idiots vote right WITH them, AGAINST themselves!

Posted by: Maerzie | November 16, 2010 4:33 PM | Report abuse

I see where the House GOP will now go along with extending jobless benefits if the Dems agree to extend tax cuts to the top 2%. I think the Right can now stop with all the "class warfare" BS.
This is Obama's chance, during the holiday season, to ask for some Oval Office prime time. Go on national TV and use the damn bully pulpit to say you want to permanently extend the middle class tax cuts and have the extension for the top 2% lapse. All polls have shown this to be a winning issue.

Posted by: filmnoia | November 16, 2010 4:40 PM | Report abuse

OK, other people's money your arse. That's fine by me. Can you find it using both hands? Need a mirror too?

thank you for spouting all the incorrect marxist talking points about the "rich". gosh if you could just provide some, you know, proof, of what you say about those folks I'd be more than happy to agree with you.

All you need to do is prove a few things:
(1) all the rich got that way by not paying employees sufficiently.
(2) 50% of the rich are wall street bankers
(3) Banks and wall street have been cheating people for years
(4) The rich are cheap, greedy cheaters.

It should be easy for you to provide proof of what you contend. So I'll wait here patiently for your response. Please be specific. Hard data works best. The opinions of other Marxists doesn't amount to proof.

I'll be here all the week.

try the veal.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | November 16, 2010 5:00 PM | Report abuse

If the Democrats actually THINK the OBSTRUCTIONISTS will be more ressonable about ANYTHING if they dawdle around about eliminating the millionaires' tax breaks, I have some nice swampland in Florida at a really great price! The majority of Republicans ARE millionaires, and very SELFISH ones at that. They aren't going to budge one iota on anything that will benefit the middle class! It's ALL for US, and US for US, with these selfish bunch, who voted "NO" on any project before this election that would've benefitted the Middle Class! Selfish people do not "compromise"! They don't understand the give and take of the word!

The Democrats better get busy and push through the elimination of that highway robbery enrichment program for the wealthy (MOST of whom inherited their money anyway~~a RARE few WORKED and made their own millions, but not many! They are the "Golden Spoon since birth" people, who don't have a clue about the REAL world. And the FOX idiots vote right WITH them, AGAINST themselves!

Posted by: Maerzie | November 16, 2010 5:09 PM | Report abuse

Thanks to everyone for the feedback. Many valid points out there, but I don't think that anyone has it completely right. First, I should make it clear that I don't think that there's anything "far left" or even particularly liberal about extending tax cuts for only the middle class, but I do question the wisdom of embracing a procedural strategy that doesn't have a very good chance of working.

While I think that using reconciliation would certainly be justified, my understanding is that it cannot be used again until the next Congress is sworn in. Can anyone confirm that?

I also think that Obama and Dems would suffer far more (politically speaking) than Republicans if none of the cuts were extended because 1) Dems still have the presidency and half of Congress (and therefore the bulk of the perceived responsibility for getting things done), and 2) most middle class voters would probably quickly forget the 1 and a half months of obstruction from Republicans if Obama and/or Dems decided to veto/vote down/filibuster GOP-sponsored legislation that extends their tax cuts. Come January, Republicans will be able to offer their "solution"; Obama and Dems won't be able to offer any alternatives through the House, other than the dead bill that Republicans already filibustered because it excluded "small businesses".

Wouldn't it be smarter to have a vote on temporarily extending all of the tax cuts for a year, immediately followed by a vote to permanently extend only middle class tax cuts? Yes, it would suck to extend a cut for the rich for another year, but this strategy would rob the GOP of their biggest trump card, and the ultimate outcome (lower taxes for just the middle class) would be a good one.

Posted by: billy_burdett | November 16, 2010 5:15 PM | Report abuse

I say let them all expire and see if the GOP will increase the deficit to pay for them.

Posted by: Sincear2021 | November 16, 2010 5:22 PM | Report abuse

The better way to discuss the extension of the tax cuts is to describe the tax rate on the first $250,000 of income and separately discuss the tax rate on income in excess of that amount. Take the us vs. them right out of it. I realize that this will frustrate the hell out of Republicans since their whole existence is based on class distinctions but it is much more intellectually honest than the discussion going on now.

Posted by: mikemfr | November 16, 2010 5:23 PM | Report abuse

The better way to discuss the extension of the tax cuts is to describe the tax rate on the first $250,000 of income and separately discuss the tax rate on income in excess of that amount. Take the us vs. them right out of it. I realize that this will frustrate the hell out of Republicans since their whole existence is based on class distinctions but it is much more intellectually honest than the discussion going on now. Every one actually keeps a tax cut.

Posted by: mikemfr | November 16, 2010 5:24 PM | Report abuse

Sadly it appears many Democrats priority is to preserve their cushy elected office and all of it's perks than to do something courageous for the American People.

Posted by: logcabin1836 | November 16, 2010 5:29 PM | Report abuse

Dems can't even define "rich". So you imbeciles believe $200K is rich in America, do you?

Ram what you can through while you got the chance. And we'll hang this millstone around your neck too, especially when the so called "rich" small businessman lays a few more of you off for good measure.

We've withstood two years of the most pathetic management in American history. We can withstand two more years of Obama. And then we'll retire most of you to pasture for a generation.

Posted by: TexTaylor | November 16, 2010 5:41 PM | Report abuse

We the people of the United States of America form this Liberal Democratic Party of the United States of America for the promotion of a progressive agenda for America.

We generally support the progressive and liberal candidates that run in the regular Democratic party. We do not run candidates. We do not handle money. Our power comes from the unionization of our party members who tell GOP contributors and other regressive contributors that UNTIL you get the House and Senate and the President to enact our party platform at the present point into law YOU will lose our business as consumers. By doing this we avoid petitioning a corporate corrupted congress and go to the source of corruption and pressure them for the legislation under threat of massive boycotts.

Party members will send the party agenda by email to these GOP and regressive contributors and get new people to join us.

Imagine it and it will happen.

The Republican party appears weak and vulnerable at the cash registers of those companies that give money to them.

To join us go here www.democratz.org and send some emails and get others to go there. If you like this message then Join us.

Posted by: WWWoDEMOCRATZoORG | November 16, 2010 5:50 PM | Report abuse

I don't think some people realize that the middle class tax cut is already a compromise so many people won't like it if the democrats compromise further.

I really wish people would stop acting like the money that people pay in taxes is still that individuals money. If you pay your electric bill you don't act as if it is still yours after the check has been written. If you do you have a lot more problems, namely with reality.

If you make 20k a year then 250k is rich. The amount over 250k would be taxed at an aditional 3.6%, and that is after you apply your tax deductions. As for the small business argument, why is it that a small business of that size is not filing their taxes as a business?

I would prefer the democrats pass the middle class tax cuts and send it to the senate. If the senate is not able to get it through because of obstruction; so be it. Just make sure you sound the trumpets so that everyone knows why their withholding just changed.

Posted by: whiteha1 | November 16, 2010 6:49 PM | Report abuse

Well, there is one real Democrat. Are there any more?

Posted by: rusty3 | November 16, 2010 6:58 PM | Report abuse

The first point is that those who are just millionaires are not all that wealthy anymore. Many people elgible for the Democrat's version of the tax bill are surely people who will become millionaires sometime during their life. The second point is that the tax cuts the Democrats want to give will cost much more than those where they differ from the Repubicans. The people they want to give those tax cuts to are people who are relatively well off Americans because they still have good jobs and make enough money to have to pay significant amounts of taxes. The debt those tax cuts will inflict on America will make it much more difficult to provide support to the many who have lost their jobs or are getting by with very marginal work. So it is very hard to see much virtue in the Democrat's position.

Posted by: dnjake | November 16, 2010 7:27 PM | Report abuse

As an Oregonian who is represented by Jeff Merkley, I can tell you, this guy is the best Senator in America. Period. He's knock-your-socks-off good. It's just a shame most of America hasn't heard of him yet.

I didn't even vote for the guy, and frankly I didn't expect much from him. He's turned out to be a gem -- independent-minded, thoughtful, reasonable, thoroughly decent. Much like the state he represents.

Hats off to Jeff for once again speaking truth to power. Great guy, great senator.

Posted by: SkyBeaver | November 16, 2010 7:54 PM | Report abuse

BB:
Thanks for your response, you make some intriguing points. You wrote, "The estate tax jumps to punitive levels and the AMT 'fix' goes away." Would the GOP-controlled House not be able to include reinstatement of the AMT fix and current estate tax rates? I'm not very familiar with how this stuff works.
Thanks!

Posted by: billy_burdett | November 16, 2010 8:42 PM | Report abuse

"The better way to discuss the extension of the tax cuts is to describe the tax rate on the first $250,000 of income and separately discuss the tax rate on income in excess of that amount."
You are absolutely right about this. I noticed that Obama occasionally speaks in these terms, but Dems across the board should be doing the same. Soon enough, the media will pick up on it as well. It's that magical trick of repetition.

Posted by: billy_burdett | November 16, 2010 8:48 PM | Report abuse

Being one of those millionaires I'll tell
ya .. I don't mind paying the higher taxes.
It is a plus if it helps the country become
more economically secure.

If the rest of y'all want to grant me a
tax cuts - and thereby be less secure
your selves - go for it!
More money for jet fuel.l

W

Posted by: George-W | November 16, 2010 9:00 PM | Report abuse

"I still have my doubts about the ultimate success of this approach. If the House holds a vote on permanently extending just the middle class tax cuts and it passes, wouldn't Senate Republicans be able to just run out the clock and wait for the GOP-controlled House to introduce their own permanent extension of all of the Bush tax cuts in January?"

Would you want to be a Senator on the Republican side who blocked a law that prevented taxes from going up? If the Democrats quickly put forward a tax break bill for the middle class and the Republicans oppose it, the Democrats can go hog wild in calling the Republicans the high tax party. That presupposes, of course, that Democrats were not such legislative wusses, and that they cared about America.

Posted by: dyinglikeflies | November 16, 2010 9:35 PM | Report abuse

Look at what the Fed is doing with QE2. To those who would be affected by a tax increase on the wealthy, or to their lackeys who aren't rich but defend them: you will pay the tax one way or another. Either you will pay it to the IRS or your will lose it through devaluation. Either way you will pay the tax. Question is how much more you are willing to damage the full faith and credit of the US gov't in the meantime.

Posted by: jamal2609 | November 16, 2010 10:01 PM | Report abuse

"So, after Obama raised health insurance premiums $800 Billion, this guy wants to ADD a $700 Billion Tax Increase to weigh down the economy and hiring."

Here we go again with the canard about how letting tax cuts expire for the top 2% will cost jobs. Simple question: if the wealthy aren't creating jobs now when they have the tax cuts, why wlll extending them produce a different result?

And what Republican apologists always seem to forget IS that the Bush tax cuts were SPECIFICALLY INTENDED to expire on December 31 of this year. It was written into the very law that created them. Why? Precisely of their impact on the budget deficit. So why is adding $700 billion to that deficit a good idea now?

Posted by: dale20 | November 17, 2010 12:19 AM | Report abuse

Merkely is going to get a donation from me today for pushing this.

Posted by: AndyR3 | November 17, 2010 8:00 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company