blackfox
Jul 20, 2004, 06:17 PM
From Wash. Post:
Bush Pushes Congress To Extend Tax Cuts
By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, July 20, 2004; Page A04
Eager to sign his fourth tax cut in as many years, President Bush is pushing congressional leaders to extend a series of middle-class tax cuts before Congress's planned adjournment at the end of the week.
Democrats charge that the president is trying to ram the tax cuts through in time to hold a signing ceremony during their convention next week.
To move the tax package quickly, Republican leaders in Congress want to revive moribund negotiations on an expanded child credit for the working poor and amend it to extend tax cuts for married couples, middle-income families with children, and lower-income workers. Because the package would emerge from House and Senate negotiations on the child credit issue, lawmakers would be presented a take-it-or-leave-it tax package before they adjourn until September.
But Senate Finance Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) may balk at what even some Republicans see as a strong-arm tactic, according to senior Finance Committee aides. And a bipartisan group of senators is pushing a far more modest, one-year tax cut extension that would close loopholes and raise fees to ensure the package does not expand the record budget deficit.
"Grassley doesn't want to cram down a bill without real consideration," said a senior Senate Republican tax aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity to be more frank about political tactics. "Some want this as a political exercise, to force the Democrats to take more than they want or to force them to block it before the conventions. Grassley wants a bill that can pass."
The tax cuts themselves have broad, bipartisan support. They include an expansion of the lowest, 10 percent income tax bracket, a $1,000-per-child tax credit and tax relief for middle-income married couples. If Congress fails to pass them this year, those tax cuts would expire at the end of 2004, effectively raising taxes next year for most families that pay income taxes. The package would also include a provision to prevent the alternative minimum tax (AMT) from rapidly expanding next year.
"Our intent is to have middle-class tax relief passed," said House Ways and Means Committee spokeswoman Christin Tinsworth.
But the scope of the package is in dispute. House GOP leaders and the White House want a five-year extension of the three middle-class tax cuts, with a one-year AMT fix, a package that would cost the Treasury up to $130 billion. Some House Republicans are pushing for an expanded child credit that would extend eligibility for the credit to families with incomes as high as $309,000. Currently, the full credit is available to families with incomes up to $110,000.
Grassley aides called that "an overreach" that could sink the whole package, though administration officials expressed confidence that expanding the child credit to higher-income families "would not be an issue" in the end. ...SNIP
I am surprised no-one has posted about this, I think it has the potential to be a big issue coming into the Election...
If the Tax Plan is pushed through before November, both Bush and the Republicans will have something to crow about, and a bulwark against the Democrats who feel that Bush has not accomplished much on Domestic issues.
Although this does not erase the reality of Bush's accomplishments during the past years (or non-accomplishments), I feel that with the short attention span of the voters, it will not matter, nor will it matter if the Federal Deficit will increase as a result of the tax cuts...
This puts the Democrats in a real bind, as the nature of the tax-cuts are geared towards the middle-class, and are liked by both parties. Democrats (and some Republicans) are concerned about the ability for the US to afford the tax-cuts, and if they were to hold up the passage of the bill, this could be powerful rhetorical ammunition against the Democrats come Election time...
On the other hand, if a more modest tax proposal gains passage (more likely), the Adminstration will still be able to take credit for it's passage coming up to the Election...
It is hard to argue that these are not good tax-cuts, so I do not oppose them, but the timing seems so very Politically motivated that it really bugs me, as does the Administrations larger proposal which once again completely ignores any concept of Fiscal responsibility...and the Republicans were supposed to be for that...
anyway...comments?
Bush Pushes Congress To Extend Tax Cuts
By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, July 20, 2004; Page A04
Eager to sign his fourth tax cut in as many years, President Bush is pushing congressional leaders to extend a series of middle-class tax cuts before Congress's planned adjournment at the end of the week.
Democrats charge that the president is trying to ram the tax cuts through in time to hold a signing ceremony during their convention next week.
To move the tax package quickly, Republican leaders in Congress want to revive moribund negotiations on an expanded child credit for the working poor and amend it to extend tax cuts for married couples, middle-income families with children, and lower-income workers. Because the package would emerge from House and Senate negotiations on the child credit issue, lawmakers would be presented a take-it-or-leave-it tax package before they adjourn until September.
But Senate Finance Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) may balk at what even some Republicans see as a strong-arm tactic, according to senior Finance Committee aides. And a bipartisan group of senators is pushing a far more modest, one-year tax cut extension that would close loopholes and raise fees to ensure the package does not expand the record budget deficit.
"Grassley doesn't want to cram down a bill without real consideration," said a senior Senate Republican tax aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity to be more frank about political tactics. "Some want this as a political exercise, to force the Democrats to take more than they want or to force them to block it before the conventions. Grassley wants a bill that can pass."
The tax cuts themselves have broad, bipartisan support. They include an expansion of the lowest, 10 percent income tax bracket, a $1,000-per-child tax credit and tax relief for middle-income married couples. If Congress fails to pass them this year, those tax cuts would expire at the end of 2004, effectively raising taxes next year for most families that pay income taxes. The package would also include a provision to prevent the alternative minimum tax (AMT) from rapidly expanding next year.
"Our intent is to have middle-class tax relief passed," said House Ways and Means Committee spokeswoman Christin Tinsworth.
But the scope of the package is in dispute. House GOP leaders and the White House want a five-year extension of the three middle-class tax cuts, with a one-year AMT fix, a package that would cost the Treasury up to $130 billion. Some House Republicans are pushing for an expanded child credit that would extend eligibility for the credit to families with incomes as high as $309,000. Currently, the full credit is available to families with incomes up to $110,000.
Grassley aides called that "an overreach" that could sink the whole package, though administration officials expressed confidence that expanding the child credit to higher-income families "would not be an issue" in the end. ...SNIP
I am surprised no-one has posted about this, I think it has the potential to be a big issue coming into the Election...
If the Tax Plan is pushed through before November, both Bush and the Republicans will have something to crow about, and a bulwark against the Democrats who feel that Bush has not accomplished much on Domestic issues.
Although this does not erase the reality of Bush's accomplishments during the past years (or non-accomplishments), I feel that with the short attention span of the voters, it will not matter, nor will it matter if the Federal Deficit will increase as a result of the tax cuts...
This puts the Democrats in a real bind, as the nature of the tax-cuts are geared towards the middle-class, and are liked by both parties. Democrats (and some Republicans) are concerned about the ability for the US to afford the tax-cuts, and if they were to hold up the passage of the bill, this could be powerful rhetorical ammunition against the Democrats come Election time...
On the other hand, if a more modest tax proposal gains passage (more likely), the Adminstration will still be able to take credit for it's passage coming up to the Election...
It is hard to argue that these are not good tax-cuts, so I do not oppose them, but the timing seems so very Politically motivated that it really bugs me, as does the Administrations larger proposal which once again completely ignores any concept of Fiscal responsibility...and the Republicans were supposed to be for that...
anyway...comments?
