Articles
Features
Resources
About Us
 
Search
Newsletter Signup
Enter your email address to receive the In Perrspective newsletter:
Resource Center
  • Polls
  • U.S. News
  • Int'l News
  • Document Library
  • Online & Print Mags
  • Columns/Blogs
  • Elections & Voting
  • Key Data Sources
  • Think Tanks
  • Reading List
  • Oregon Resources
  • Support the Troops
  • Columns and Blogs
  • Eric Alterman
  • Marc Ambinder
  • AmericaBlog
  • Atrios
  • Attytood
  • Bad Reporter
  • BlueOregon
  • Calculated Risk
  • Crooked Timber
  • Crooks and Liars
  • Daily Beast
  • Daily Kos
  • Brad Delong
  • E.J. Dionne
  • Kevin Drum
  • FiveThirtyEight
  • FireDogLake
  • Glenn Greenwald
  • Huffington Post
  • Hullabaloo
  • Mark Kleiman
  • Ezra Klein
  • Paul Krugman
  • LeftyBlogs
  • Rachel Maddow
  • Mad Kane
  • Media Matters
  • Memeorandum
  • Moderate Voice
  • MyDD
  • Pam's House Blend
  • The Plank (TNR)
  • Political Animal
  • Political Humor
  • The Politico
  • Pollster.com
  • Satirical Political
  • Sideshow
  • Andrew Sullivan
  • Talk2Action
  • Talking Points Memo
  • TPM Cafe
  • TPM Muckraker
  • TAPPED
  • Think Progress
  • Wonkette
  • Matthew Yglesias
  • -- more --
  • November 9, 2011
    GOP Debt Panelists Propose New Tax Cut Windfall for the Wealthy

    Without any action by Congress, on January 1, 2013 the Bush tax cuts will expire. That would not only return the top income rate from 35 percent to its Clinton boom-era level of39.6 percent. It would also produce almost $4 trillion in new revenue over the next decade, easily dwarfing the $1.2 trillion target now before the Congressional debt "super committee."

    That's why the supposedly "significant" proposal by GOP debt panelists to raise $300 billion in new tax revenue is so cynical. Far from being a major concession and a violation of their oath to Grover Norquist, the Republicans' new gambit would be just their latest Treasury-draining tax cut windfall for the wealthy.

    Of course, you'd never know that reading Lori Montgomery's Washington Post article, which Tuesday night reported, "Republicans offer tax deal to break debt impasse; Democrats dismiss it."

    Congressional Republicans have for the first time retreated from their hard-line stance against new taxes, offering to raise federal tax collections by nearly $300 billion over the next decade as part of a plan to tame the national debt.

    But as Steve Benen, Kevin Drum, Brian Beutler and Greg Sargent (among others) quickly pointed out, the Republicans' proposal to raise "overall tax collections by $250 billion, mainly by limiting the value of itemized deductions such as write-offs for home mortgage interest, state and local taxes and other expenses" comes with a very big catch. As the Washington Monthly's Benen explained:

    Way down in the same article, in the 16th paragraph, the piece gets around to mentioning that Republican want to trade nearly $300 billion in new revenue for "permanently extending the George W. Bush-era tax cuts past their 2012 expiration date, a move that would increase deficits by about $4 trillion over the next decade."

    That's the kind of detail that more or less debunks the article's headline and lede. Think about it: as part of a debt-reduction deal, Republicans want to increase tax revenue by less than $300 billion and cut tax revenue by roughly $4 trillion.

    And what would wealthier taxpayers get in exchange for "capping write-offs on charities, state and local taxes, and mortgage interest payments as a percentage of each tax filer's gross income?" As Sargent explained:

    The highest tax rate would be reduced from 35 percent to 28 percent under the emerging GOP tax code overhaul proposal...And the reduction would actually be even bigger than this. After all, if the Bush tax cuts were allowed to expire, as they're set to do, the high end rate would go up to at least 39 percent. In other words, the aide says, under the proposal Republicans are pushing, the drop down to 28 percent would be at least 10 percentage points from what it would be if the cuts are allowed to expire.

    Even if the limited deductions would cost (as right-wing talking point regurgitator Stephen Moore claimed in the Wall Street Journal) the gilded-class $560 billion over the next decade, the lower income tax rates would still yield an estimated $670 billion in savings for the upper crust.

    As you'll recall, Republicans already rejected a $3 trillion Democratic debt reduction package comprised of roughly even doses of tax increases and spending hikes. Now to secure another payday for plutocrats courtesy of lower and middle income Americans, GOP debt panelists are offering a $300 fig leaf as major "concession." Shaking his head at the Washington Post's representation of the latest GOP giveaway to the rich, Steve Benen could only ask:

    In what universe does it make sense to tell news consumers that Republicans have offered a "tax deal to break the debt impasse"? How does this GOP offer represent a "retreat from their hard-line stance" on taxes?

    To answer Benen's question, it makes sense in a Republican universe where tax cuts magically produce more revenue for Uncle Sam.

    As Lori Montgomery's Washington Post colleagues Paul Kane and Rosalind S. Helderman explained the Republican first response to the Democratic proposal last week, the GOP insisted slashing taxes would raise revenue:

    Republicans, instead, have offered more than $2 trillion in savings over 10 years, highlighted by nearly $700 billion in spending reductions to Medicare and Medicaid. According to lawmakers and aides familiar with the GOP proposal, it includes an offer of more than $600 billion in savings from new tax revenue. But the two sides are in deep dispute because Republicans want to count these increased receipts based on the expectation of surging economic growth -- a standard that neutral budget observers have declined to use in the past.

    And so it goes.

    Reacting to the Republicans' new gold-plated giveaway to the leisure class, one incredulous Democrat responded:

    "They either think we're morons or desperate."

    Of course, in their perpetual quest to shift the tax burden from the richest people in America, Republicans are counting on one or both. With their tax cuts posing as tax hikes, the GOP is once again relying on its sadly all-too-successful strategy.

    You can fool some of the people all the time, and that's our target market.

    Perrspective 9:22 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | Share

    No Comments

    Post a comment


    Find Entries
    Find by Keyword(s):
    Syndicate:
    Recent Entries

    Romney Needs Big Shovel to Bury Bin Laden, Iraq Flip-Flops
    April 27, 2012
    Comments (0)

    The Coming Right-Wing Clash over the "Half That Pay No Taxes"
    April 26, 2012
    Comments (0)

    Romney's "Vision" Blind to Economic History
    April 25, 2012
    Comments (0)

    Introducing America's Second MBA President
    April 24, 2012
    Comments (0)

    Republicans Call Kettle Black
    April 23, 2012
    Comments (0)

    Even After Bush Scandals, GOP Still Politicizing Civil Service
    April 22, 2012
    Comments (0)

    Romney Steals Thatcher's "Labour Isn't Working" Campaign Strategy
    April 20, 2012
    Comments (0)

    Romney's Noblesse Non Oblige
    April 19, 2012
    Comments (0)

    Romney's GOP Allies Boast the Rich Will Always Dodge Higher Taxes
    April 18, 2012
    Comments (0)

    10 Things Republicans Don't Want You to Know About Taxes
    April 17, 2012
    Comments (0)

    Monthly Archives
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • Category Archives
  • 9/11
  • Barking Mad
  • Budget/Deficit
  • Bush Admin.
  • Business
  • China
  • Congress
  • Contests
  • Culture War
  • Democrats
  • Economy
  • Education
  • Election '04
  • Election '06
  • Election '08
  • Election '10
  • Election '12
  • Energy
  • Environment
  • Foreign Policy
  • GOP Quotes
  • Health Care
  • Image Gallery
  • Immigration
  • Iran
  • Iraq
  • John Kerry
  • Media
  • Nat'l Security
  • North Korea
  • Obama Admin.
  • Republicans
  • Soc. Security
  • Sports
  • Supreme Court
  • Taxes
  • Technology
  • Terrorism
  • The States
  • Top 10 Lists
  • Torture
  •  

    Copyright © 2004 - 2012 PERRspectives.com. All Rights Reserved.
    Visit the Contact page to report problems with the site.