Edwards and Kerry DID vote for the Bush Tax Cuts.

[in_cog_ni_to]

After I saw that Edwards DENIED voting for the Bush Tax Cuts and one of his supporters posted here on DU that neither Kerry or Edwards voted for them, I posted the question on the blog and this was the answer. Edwards lied. He DID vote for the 2002 Tax Cuts. Well, now we know he lies.


Both Edwards and Kerry voted yes to the 2002 tax bill and no to the 2003 tax bill. What Wes is saying is technically correct but the matter is confusing because of the positive 2002 vote and negative vote in 2003. Go to http://www.vote-smart.org/election_president.php to check their voting records. I am not sure if all congressional votes are included here but this is where I found this info. Kerry and Edwards will deny Wes's statement based on their 2003 vote, rather than including the whole picture.

Kerry and Edwards have voted for No Child Left Behind, the Patriot Act, and the Iraq War.

[HFishbine]

1. Surprise!

He's been lying about accepting campaign contributions from lobbyists for a while now. Why should this come as a surprise?

[Lost4words]

2. Thats why I will have a hard time supporting either of them.

Both are business as usual democrats, you know the ones who abandoned us!

[in_cog_ni_to]

6. I know

and people fall for his "all american, down home, good old boy, 2 americas, son of a millworker schtick.

I'm not really surprised, but found it curious that Wes said it and he denied it....I was hoping Clark's researchers were better than that. :) They are! Edwards lied. It's good to know the truth before people actually vote for him, don'tcha think? :7

Go Wes!

[MoonRiver]

3. This is very good for the General.

He needs to pound this home in Tenn. No way should candidates get away with blatantly lying about their voting records. It's particularly obnoxious when a candidate tries to paint himself as a little guy populist, yet has supported the biggest give-away bonanza for the ultra rich in American history.
:puke:

[maddezmom]

5. what really ticks me off is

that either the NYT or the WP(can't remember which one) prints Edwards rebuttal without checking the facts.

[Skinner]

4. The Bush Tax Cuts were in 2001.

They both opposed them. From Project Vote Smart:

Edwards:

Tax Cut Reconciliation-Passage
Bill Number: HR 1836
Issue: Budget, Spending and Taxes
Date: 05/23/2001
Sponsor: Bill sponsored by Thomas, R-CA
Senator John Reid Edwards voted NO.

Tax Cut Reconciliation-Conference Report
Bill Number: HR 1836
Issue: Budget, Spending and Taxes
Date: 05/26/2001
Sponsor: Bill sponsored by Thomas, R-CA
Senator John Reid Edwards voted NO.

Kerry:

Tax Cut Reconciliation-Passage
Bill Number: HR 1836
Issue: Budget, Spending and Taxes
Date: 05/23/2001
Sponsor: Bill sponsored by Thomas, R-CA
Senator John Forbes Kerry voted NO.

Tax Cut Reconciliation-Conference Report
Bill Number: HR 1836
Issue: Budget, Spending and Taxes
Date: 05/26/2001
Sponsor: Bill sponsored by Thomas, R-CA
Senator John Forbes Kerry did not vote and ANNOUNCED AGAINST the vote.

[Skinner]

8. Nobody is replying to my post.

:hi:

[maddezmom]

9. what did they vote for in 2002 and 2003?

[Skinner]

10. I suppose someone should go check.

But when someone says "The Bush Tax Cuts" the implication is that they are referring to THE BIG TAX CUTS, which were the tax cuts passed in 2001.

[maddezmom]

13. I guess it's parsing of words by Clark

incognito already did:
Both Edwards and Kerry voted yes to the 2002 tax bill and no to the 2003 tax bill. What Wes is saying is technically correct but the matter is confusing because of the positive 2002 vote and negative vote in 2003. Go to http://www.vote-smart.org/election_president.php

so they didn't vote for the "bush tax cuts" the first time, voted for them the second time and not the third. Both sides are being disingenuous on this issue. JMO

[blm]

22. They both voted no on Bush's taxcuts in 2001 AND in 2003.

Those are the two people think of when they hear "Bush's taxcuts" and pointing to any amendment where they were voting to reduce the final numbers or add a benefit to the working class isn't exactly a fair representation.

[cosmicdot]

11. I'm hoping someone will reply to your post with vote record facts

:hi:

so, we can have the full tax-cut picture

[Skinner]

15. My post is "vote record facts."

If you say "The Bush Tax Cuts" the implication is that you are referring to teh BIG PACKAGE, which was passed in 2001. There have been other tax bills, but they are generally not referred to as "The Bush Tax Cuts."

Anyway, here's some more info from Project Vote Smart. It looks like Edwards and Kerry opposed the major Bush tax bills in 2002 and 2003...

Edwards

2002

Estate Tax-Permanent Repeal
Bill Number: HR8
Issue: Budget, Spending and Taxes
Date: 06/12/2002
Sponsor: Bill sponsored by Gramm, R-TX)
Senator John Reid Edwards voted NO.

2003

Tax Reductions - Passage
Bill Number: HR 2
Issue: Budget, Spending and Taxes
Date: 05/15/2003
Sponsor: Bill sponsored by Thomas, CA-R
Senator John Reid Edwards voted NO.

Tax Reductions - Conference Report
Bill Number: HR 2
Issue: Budget, Spending and Taxes
Date: 05/23/2003
Sponsor: Bill sponsored by Thomas, CA-R
Senator John Reid Edwards voted NO.

Kerry

Estate Tax-Permanent Repeal
Bill Number: HR8
Issue: Budget, Spending and Taxes
Date: 06/12/2002
Sponsor: Bill sponsored by Gramm, R-TX)
Senator John Forbes Kerry voted NO.

2003

Tax Reductions - Passage
Bill Number: HR 2
Issue: Budget, Spending and Taxes
Date: 05/15/2003
Sponsor: Bill sponsored by Thomas, CA-R
Senator John Forbes Kerry voted NO.

Tax Reductions - Conference Report
Bill Number: HR 2
Issue: Budget, Spending and Taxes
Date: 05/23/2003
Sponsor: Bill sponsored by Thomas, CA-R
Senator John Forbes Kerry voted NO.

[cosmicdot]

18. by vote record facts, I'm referring to the former posters query

I should provide the link to this Senate vote
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=108&session=1&vote=00069

re all of the tax vote records, or as you worded it "There have been other tax bills" ... I'm certainly intelligent enough and aware of the BIG PACKAGE from the year 2001, and of those who voted 'for it' ... let's not be so literal ... when we know what's being posed.

sorry if you took my back-up query personally ... perhaps it was the :hi:

not sure how this Hollings amendment vote RE "eliminate tax cuts" plays into the "vote record facts" ... but, if it doesn't apply ... don't attack me with ridicule and condescension.

U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 108th Congress - 1st Session

Question: On the Amendment (Hollings Amdt. No. 265 )
Vote Number: 69 Vote Date: March 21, 2003, 11:39 AM
Required For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Amendment Rejected
Amendment Number: S.Amdt. 265 to S.Con.Res. 23 (Budget resolution FY2004 )
Statement of Purpose: To eliminate tax cuts.
Vote Counts: YEAs 22
NAYs 77
Not Voting 1
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State


Grouped By Vote Position YEAs ---22
Akaka (D-HI)
Biden (D-DE)
Boxer (D-CA)
Byrd (D-WV)
Carper (D-DE)
Chafee (R-RI)
Corzine (D-NJ)
Dodd (D-CT)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Graham (D-FL)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hollings (D-SC)
Inouye (D-HI)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sarbanes (D-MD)

NAYs ---77
Alexander (R-TN)
Allard (R-CO)
Allen (R-VA)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Bond (R-MO)
Breaux (D-LA)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burns (R-MT)
Campbell (R-CO)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Clinton (D-NY)
Cochran (R-MS)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
Daschle (D-SD)
Dayton (D-MN)
DeWine (R-OH)
Dole (R-NC)
Domenici (R-NM)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Edwards (D-NC)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Fitzgerald (R-IL)
Frist (R-TN)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lott (R-MS)
Lugar (R-IN)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Nickles (R-OK)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Roberts (R-KS)
Santorum (R-PA)
Schumer (D-NY)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Talent (R-MO)
Thomas (R-WY)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)
Wyden (D-OR)

Not Voting - 1
Miller (D-GA)

[Skinner]

19. I apologize.

I in no way intended my post as an attack, as ridicule, or as condescension.

[Monte Carlo]

12. Thank you then, O exalted one.

This saves us lazier folks from doing the research.

[HFishbine]

14. Edwards

voted to adopt the 2002 Budget Resolution (which included tax cuts of $1.18 trillion) and opposed the majority of dems in the senate to do so.
------------


Bill Number: H Con Res 83
Issue: Budget, Spending and Taxes
Date: 04/06/2001
Sponsor: Resolution sponsored by Nussel, R-IA


Roll Call Number: 0086
Resolution passed
Full Member List


Senator John Reid Edwards voted YES.

Vote to pass a concurrent resolution to set the framework for the fiscal 2002 federal budget. The 10-year budget plan calls for tax cuts of $1.18 trillion over the ten years and $85 billion in fiscal 2001.

H Con Res 83

Vote to pass a concurrent resolution to set the framework for the fiscal 2002 federal budget. The 10-year budget plan calls for tax cuts of $1.18 trillion over the ten years and $85 billion in fiscal 2001. The publicly held dept would be reduced by approximately $1.1 trillion and discretionary spending would be capped at $670 billion from fiscal 2002-2011. Among other provisions, the resolution would eliminate the marriage penalty tax by increasing the tax cut by $69 billion, increase funding for veterans health care by $1.7 billion by redirecting the same amount from the proposed tax cut, and provide for an increase of $967 million in fiscal 2002 for veterans discretionary spending. The Senate rejected amendments that would increase funding for environmental programs by $50 billion and set aside $50 billion for debt reduction, as well as an amendment that would provide an additional $70 billion over 10 years for tax credits to small business to purchase health insurance and make health insurance fully deductible.
(Resolution sponsored by Nussel, R-IA)
Resolution passed 65-35: R 50-0; D 15-35 on 04/06/2001.

[Skinner]

16. My understanding is that a budget resolution is not law.

A budget resolution sets the broad outline for the budget, so then Congress can go fill in the blanks. Yes, Edwards probably should have voted against that. But when it came time for final passage of the tax cuts -- the vote that would write them into law -- he voted NO for passage and NO for the Conference report.

(If someone here knows the federal budget process, please step in and correct me, as necessary.)

[HFishbine]

17. I'm open to expert clarification too.

You may well be correct. Anybody?

[Skinner]

21. To revise and extend my previous post.

I'd like to be clear that I think it's pretty lame that Edwards supported the Budget Resolution. The broad outlines of the Tax Cut would have been included in the Resolution, and he should have voted no then. This convoluted budget process allows legislators to have it both ways -- you can vote for it AND against it.

[BlueEyedSon]

7. Are you SURE?

I have read many times that Kerry voted FOR the IWR and PATRIOT

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SangamonTaylor]

23. Lets get this right

If this is what Wes Clark means when he says "Edwards voted for the Bush Tax Cuts" then he is being very disingenious. I have lost a great deal of respect if this is the case. The 2001 bill was the huge trillion dollar tax cut. The 2002 was a stimulus package that extended unemployment.

The 2002 bill that Edwards voted FOR:

Economic Stimulus Package – Final Passage

Bill Number: HR 3090
Issue: Budget, Spending and Taxes
Date: 03/08/2002
Sponsor: Bill sponsored by Thomas, R-CA

Roll Call Number: 0044
Bill passed
Full Member List

Senator John Reid Edwards voted YES.

Vote to pass a bill that would provide temporary business tax breaks and extend for thirteen weeks unemployment benefits that would cost $51.2 billion in fiscal 2002.

HR 3090 Job Creation and Worker Assistance Act of 2002

Vote to pass a bill that would provide temporary business tax breaks and extend for thirteen weeks unemployment benefits that would cost $51.2 billion in fiscal 2002. The bill would provide incentives for rebuilding the area around the World Trade Center in New York City and include a 30 percent equipment depreciation deduction for three years. The bill would also reauthorize the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families grant program, prolong several of the expiring tax provisions, and extend for three years the net operating loss carryback period.
Note: Bill signed by president on 03/09/2002.
(Bill sponsored by Thomas, R-CA)
Bill passed 85-9: R 47-1; D 37-8; I 1-0 on 03/08/2002.

Bill Number: HR 3090-107th Congress (2001-2002)
House Passage Vote: 10/24/2001-Outcome: Passed
Senate Passage Vote:02/14/2002-Outcome: Passed
Presidential Action: Signed on 03/09/2002


Now, the TRILLION dollar tax cut he voted against in 2001 (the big one)

Tax Cut Reconciliation-Conference Report

Bill Number: HR 1836
Issue: Budget, Spending and Taxes
Date: 05/26/2001
Sponsor: Bill sponsored by Thomas, R-CA

Roll Call Number: 0170
Conference report adopted
Full Member List

Senator John Reid Edwards voted NO.

Vote to pass a bill that would reduce taxes by $1.35 trillion through 2010 through income tax cuts, relief of the marriage penalty, a phase-out of the federal estate tax, doubling the child tax credit, and providing incentives for retirement savings.

HR 1836 Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001

Vote to pass a bill that would reduce taxes by $1.35 trillion through 2010 through income tax cuts, relief of the marriage penalty, a phase-out of the federal estate tax, doubling the child tax credit, and providing incentives for retirement savings. The bill would create a new 10 percent tax rate retroactive to January 1 for the first $6,000 for single taxpayers, $10,000 for single heads of households and $12,000 for married couples filing jointly. Beginning July 1, current tax rates of 15 percent, 28 percent, 31 percent, and 39.6 percent would drop to 15, 27, 30, 35 and 38.6 percent. People subject to the new 10 percent tax rate would receive rebate checks by October 1 of $300 for single filers, $500 for heads of households and $600 for couples filing jointly. The bill would double the $500-per-child tax credit by 2010 and make it refundable. The plan would also raise the estate tax exemption to $1 million in 2002 and phase out the tax over 10 years, as well as phase out restrictions from 2006 through 2009 on personal exemptions and itemized deductions claimed by upper-income taxpayers. It would set the standard deduction for married couples and the income eligible for the 15 percent rate bracket at double that of singles beginning in 2005. Among other provisions, the bill would also increase annual limits on contributions to Individual Retirement Accounts to $5,000 and ease rollover rules to make it easier for employees to move pension savings to another plan when they change jobs.
A conference report is generated by a committee made up of members from both the House and Senate to reconcile differences between the two houses on provisions of a bill passed by both chambers. Once the conference report goes to the floor, it cannot be amended.
(Bill sponsored by Thomas, R-CA)
Conference report adopted (thus cleared for the president) 58-33: R 46-2; D 12-31 on 05/26/01.

Bill Number: HR 1836-107th Congress (2001-2002)
House Passage Vote: 05/16/2001-Outcome:Passed
Senate Passage Vote: 05/23/2001-Outcome:Passed
House Conference Report Vote:05/26/2001-Outcome:Passed
Senate Conference Report Vote: 05/26/2001-Outcome:Passed
Presidential Action: Signed on 06/07/2001

[in_cog_ni_to]

24. Edwards did vote for a 2001 tax cut

I couldn't find where Kerry did vote for any. I apologize to Kerry. I didn't check this persons post...that will teach me. :spank: I'll change my thread title.


Key Vote

2002 Budget Resolution-Adoption



Bill Number: H Con Res 83
Issue: Budget, Spending and Taxes
Date: 04/06/2001
Sponsor: Resolution sponsored by Nussel, R-IA


Roll Call Number: 0086
Resolution passed
Full Member List


Senator John Reid Edwards voted YES.

Vote to pass a concurrent resolution to set the framework for the fiscal 2002 federal budget. The 10-year budget plan calls for tax cuts of $1.18 trillion over the ten years and $85 billion in fiscal 2001.

H Con Res 83

Vote to pass a concurrent resolution to set the framework for the fiscal 2002 federal budget. The 10-year budget plan calls for tax cuts of $1.18 trillion over the ten years and $85 billion in fiscal 2001. The publicly held dept would be reduced by approximately $1.1 trillion and discretionary spending would be capped at $670 billion from fiscal 2002-2011. Among other provisions, the resolution would eliminate the marriage penalty tax by increasing the tax cut by $69 billion, increase funding for veterans health care by $1.7 billion by redirecting the same amount from the proposed tax cut, and provide for an increase of $967 million in fiscal 2002 for veterans discretionary spending. The Senate rejected amendments that would increase funding for environmental programs by $50 billion and set aside $50 billion for debt reduction, as well as an amendment that would provide an additional $70 billion over 10 years for tax credits to small business to purchase health insurance and make health insurance fully deductible.
(Resolution sponsored by Nussel, R-IA)
Resolution passed 65-35: R 50-0; D 15-35 on 04/06/2001.

Bill Number: H Con Res 83-107th Congress (2001-2002)
House Passage Vote:03/28/2001-Outcome:Passed
Senate Passage Vote:04/06/2001-Outcome:Passed
House Conference Report Vote: 05/09/2001-Outcome:Passed
Senate Conference Report Vote: 05/10/2001-Outcome:Passed

For further status information, call the Voter's Research Hotline at 1-888-VOTE-SMART (1-888-868-3762)


on edit...this was posted on another thread.

In Congress, there was an earlier vote in which Edwards, Lieberman and Kerry voted against completely eliminating President Bush's proposed $726 billion tax cut. Graham supported that measure, but it didn't pass the Senate.

When that measure failed, all four of the Senate Democrats running for president voted for a measure to limit the tax cut to $350 billion."

http://www.tallahassee.com/mld/democrat/news/local/5739629.htm

[cindyw]

26. So he voted for them because he voted for a budget resolution?

If there is a reason why Senator's don't get to the White House it is because the majority of the people don't understand how the Senate works and they can be convinced by the persons opponent that "technically" they voted for something. Neither supported the tax cut that is the fact here. Plain and simple.

[cindyw]

25. why isn't this being locked? It is false.

The link goes to a search engine. Not evidence. They both voted no the cuts. That is a fact. You cannot deny that. To claim that there was a tax vote in some other random amendment for some other time is to misunderstand the senate. Every democratic senator could be technically accused of voting for everything under the sun with how things work. But the votes for the 2001 & 2003 tax cuts were no. That is a fact. Saying otherwise is false.

[PurityOfEssence]

27. This is an absolute LIE on the part of Clark, and he should be ashamed

Dean used this exact same distortion. Read Skinner's posts.

What Dean was talking about was how, when it was obvious that there weren't enough votes to stop the 2003 cuts, Edwards and Kerry were part of a group that tried to float a compromise bill that would at least lessen the damage. Not only did they vigorously oppose both of the tax cuts, but they tirelessly fought a rearguard action to boot.

This was done with some serious spine on the part of Mr. Edwards; it was not that popular back home to take this stance.

Clark knows better; it's absolutely obvious how both stood, spoke and fought, and he and his supporters owe an apology for this. I understand if people were misled, but in light of these FACTS, people should make efforts to undo the incredible damage they've done. This is unspeakable.

Is this any way for a public figure to act?