Why did Murray and Cantwell vote for corporate welfare?

[baby_bear]

They both voted for that despicable legislation yesterday that amounts to huge corporate giveaways and tax breaks for outsourcing jobs.

Box and Feinstein both voted no.

Did Murray and Cantwell vote yes just because it includes the provision for deducting sales tax from federal income tax for states with no personal income taxes? I wish someone would do the math. I bet the lost revenue from the corporate welfare will cost individuals in Washington more than a few hundred dollars for the sales tax deduction. And even at that, if you don't itemize, you don't get the benefit. That's certainly not fair. I have lots of friends who can't afford to buy a house, so they don't itemize. But they pay plenty of sales taxes! And the percentage of their income that is taken up by sales taxes is higher than for higher income people.

I am very disappointed in Murray and Cantwell, although I haven't heard them say that this is why they voted yes. But if not this, then why did they vote for it?

s_m

[Parche]

1. votes

This is a good example of bill reform that is needed
When a bill goes to the Senate or Congress, it should not have
provisions or added approprations to it.

[freebird04]

3. Line item veto is the answer

to pork spending and legislative add-ons. It also makes the president much more directly responsible for spending. IMO, spednig will never be under control under the pres has a line-item veto.

[miss_kitty]

2. While I voted for Murray and Cantwell

and I will vote for Murray again, but I gotta say: They give me gas! Honestly-these are the kind of Democrats you NEED to see the 'D' after their name to be sure-big business dems. This state is rife with 'em and I should know.

My dad was a lobbyist/apparatchik 'dem' in the 70's through the 80's and some of the shit they did-a lot of the shit they did-was republican. For example, even though he was a lobbyist, he was often described (off the record, of course) as the house leader's right hand. UGH! local politics at its grubbiest.

It would be interesting and revealing, no doubt, to see who WA state's dim bulbs hold close. I know who ever it is, they don't believe in acknowledging the receipt of Email correspondence, which makes them rude too.