In tax deal, Obama didn't secure as many "concessions" as advertised

[nashville_brook]

http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2010/12/10/in-tax-deal-with-gop-obama-didnt-win-as-many-concessions-as-advertised/


Payroll Tax Cut – There is little reason to believe Republicans would not have supported this as a stand alone bill. A payroll tax cut was an idea McConnell supported last year along with the conservative American Enterprise Institute. This accounts for half, $112 billion, of the spending the Obama apparently “got” from the Republicans.

Child Tax Credit – Rachel Maddow noted that extending the Child Tax Credit was part of the Republican “Pledge to America.” In 2008, John McCain campaigned on doubling the child tax credit. Including this in the tax dea is not a concession, that is helping Congressional Republicans fulfill their promise.

Temporary Extension of Investment Incentives – The extension of bonus depreciation and increase in small business expensing are “pro-business” ideas popular with Republicans. Bonus depreciation was a feature in several bills that George W. Bush signed into law. There is no way to consider this as $22 billion Obama “got” from Republicans.

Earned Income Tax Credit – Republican President Ronald Reagan supported and greatly expanded the earned income tax credit. During the 2000 campaign George W. Bush opposed cuts to the earned income tax credit. American Enterprise Institute President Arthur Brooks said the Earned Income Tax Credit is an example of a program that “rewards work and earned success.” There are Republicans who oppose it as “Welfare,” but it has not been anathema to the party.

It is also important to remember the EITC is a permanent policy, the deal only includes an extension of a modest expansion of the EITC. If a concession, it is a fairly minor one by Republicans.

American Opportunity Tax Credit – This College tax credit was an idea Obama campaigned on and was part of the stimulus bill. He can count this as a real concession.

One-Year Extension of Unemployment – Republican didn’t want to pass an unpaid-for extension of unemployment for a full year. This can be called a win for Obama, but it should be noted that Republicans were not prepared to take the blame for cutting people off in this economy. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) admitted as much when he said that, even without this deal, the Senate would have approved a brief unemployment extension.

[bluethruandthru]

1. EXCELLENT POST! Thank you! n/t

[nashville_brook]

2. Grassley: Unemployment extension would have been possible without tax deal

thanks! here's the whole bit on the UI extension...coming from Grassley no less!!!!!



http://iowaindependent.com/48732/grassley-unemployment-extension-would-have-been-possible-without-tax-deal


U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said earlier this week that even without a deal on tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, the Senate would have approved at least a brief extension unemployment benefits. The statement will surely add fuel to the fire of criticism being hurled at President Barack Obama by Democratic lawmakers and liberal pundits for his deal with the GOP to extend the Bush-era tax cuts for the richest one percent of Americans in exchange for an extension.

The White House deal with the GOP reauthorizes long-term unemployment programs for 13 months by attaching the benefits to a two-year reauthorization of expiring Bush-era tax cuts for the rich. Grassley said a shorter extension would likely have passed anyway.

On a conference call with reporters, Grassley said there would have been some accommodation on unemployment anyway, “even if you didn’t have this tax bill.”

(snip)

[Starry Messenger]

3. k & r

[Jakes Progress]

4. You mean we were -gasp - lied to by a president?

I'm getting the vapors.

[ProSense]

5. Republicans blocked unemployment for a couple of months and killed some stimulus benefits

Details

[nashville_brook]

11. And we made considerable political gains by making this a public fight.

[no limit]

43. Republicans were willing to extend unemployment if used money from stimulus bill

that would have been a much better deal than this bill.

[BrklynLiberal]

6. It is a scam. The repukes did not give up anything they REALLY hoped to hold on to.

and that so-called" Payroll Tax Holiday" is actually the first step to dismantling Social Security. It is a timebomb that the repukes planted with the total cooperation of this administration

[nashville_brook]

39. it actually works great for them in the long run b/c they get to dismantle govt.

it's a win-win for them.

[BrklynLiberal]

41. BINGO!!!

[silver10]

7. Thank you for breaking this down.

Regardless of what graphs Obama uses to show what they got and what we got, most of what is on the blue side would be on the red side as far as they are concerned, and they will take credit for it.

[nashville_brook]

8. The right loves tax cuts because they want to drown government in the bathtub....

And for the first time, we're really on the brink of this happening.

[John Q. Citizen]

9. Great Post

This illustrates why the President is having so much push back from the people in his party that knock on doors and fold up the chairs after the meetings.

He's been very misleading and secretive about this whole deal and people know it.

Then it's pass it now, take it or leave it.


They know how crummy this is, which is why they have such urgency to do this right now.

[nashville_brook]

10. It's the nature of back room deals, and Obama himself spoke eloquently about the tragedy

Of this approach and how he intended to change it. Back room dealing tells us, the people, that we don't matter. That the only "important" voices are ones with palace access.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

12. There is little reason to believe Republicans would not have supported this as a stand alone bill...

Had he spoken to the Democratic leadership, he would have know that there was little reason to believe the Dems did not support his compromise.

Not only has he undermined himself, but he's cast the Dems in a very bad light -- now we are the obstructionists playing out this kabuki theater.

For those who say the man is uber-smart, how can you not hang this on him?

Smart, yes. Governs like a nincompoop, yes.

[nashville_brook]

14. And it would have been great politics, making Obama appear to stand up for the unemployed

There is no reason this GOP-friendly compromise couldn't have been floated after making a public spectacle of Republicans putting families out to starve during Christmas.

He didn't try. He left money on the table. He left political capital allover the place like confetti.

[dgibby]

35. Looks to me like he's governing just like he wants to.n/t

[Kweli4Real]

13. Are you kidding me? Or, ...

Have you just not been paying attention?

You (well actually the article) claim that the things on the democrat side of the ledger don't count because at some time (recent or past) the republicans supported or were not to them.

I reference you to the past 2 years of republican obstructionism, particularly during the "healthcare debate", even when presented with EXACT proposals offered by republicans, PRESIDENT Obama was met with a resounding NO!

So I ask again: Are you kidding me? Or, have you just not been paying attention?

[nashville_brook]

15. You are certainly welcome to that opinion. It ignores the reality that Repubs love tax cuts

Because they ensure there will be no money for government services...and therefore support their end game of drowning government in the bathtub.

I, for one, think there were many more ways this could play out. There's nothing to lose making Republicans publicly abandon the unemployed. Nothing.

[Kweli4Real]

18. Two things ...

First, while I agree that republicans support tax cuts because it drains the tub, but when proposed by PRESIDENT Obama (and the Dems) they killed tax cuts to small business ... something that they had previously supported.

So no ... These terms ARE republican concessions.

Second, there is nothing for YOU to lose by making the republicans abandon the unemployed; but there is PLENTY for OTHER to lose. And it is for them that PRESIDENT Obama cut deal.

[JamesA1102]

16. Ezra Klein of the Washington post would disagree with you.

[nashville_brook]

17. actually, Ezra doesn't address the issue of what the GOP would have done

with or without The Deal.

[Kweli4Real]

20. True ...

we do not KNOW what the republicans would have done ... but we can pretty much guess based on what they were saying and how they have acted for the past two years ... starting on the day PRESIDENT Obama took office.

[hfojvt]

23. and Ezra doesn't address the other point

that a lot of the crap favored by Democrats ALSO benefits the wealthy more than it benefits those below the median income.

To me, it is just deja vu of the argument for the Bush tax cuts - "oh, this REALLY benefits the poor, we have to be concerned about the poor and support this bill." Oh, and the economy too "we neeeeed this plan to stimulate the economy."

"My tax relief plan is a fair one, lowering the rate for all taxpayers. The typical family of four with two children will get $1,600 in tax relief. And the greatest benefits, the largest percentage reductions, will go to those who need them most. My plan is pro-growth. It gives our economy a jump-start by leaving more money in the hands of those who have earned it." Feb 17, 2001

"The President's tax plan provides relief for every income taxpayer; however, it gives the lowest income families the greatest percentage reduction. Indeed, higher income individuals will pay a higher share of income taxes after this plan takes effect. (See Chart 2–2.)" Feb. 28, 2001

"It recognizes that our tax code is unfair. It is unfair to people who struggle to get ahead. It is unfair for the single mom, who lives on the outskirts of poverty, who's working hard to provide for her family. For every additional dollar she makes above $25,000, she pays a higher marginal rate on that dollar than someone who's wealthy. And that's not right and it's not fair. It's not what America is all about, as far as I'm concerned. Our tax code makes the code more fair." Feb 7, 2001

"We need tax relief that creates the greatest number of jobs. (Applause.) The goal is to create a million new jobs by the end of next year. I've submitted a good, strong plan that will help meet that goal. The United States Congress must not only listen to your voice, but must listen to the voice of somebody looking for work. We need aggressive action out of the United States Congress now." May 6, 2003

"Oh, you'll hear the talk about how this plan only helps the rich people. That's just typical Washington, D.C. political rhetoric, is what that is. That's just empty rhetoric. This plan for a family of four making $40,000 a year would see their tax bill go from $1,178 a year, to $45 a year." May 12, 2003

"Yes, I'm worried about the deficit. I'm worried about the deficit, but I'm more worried about the fellow looking for work. I'm worried about the deficit, but I'm more worried about the single mom who's worried about putting food on the table for her children, so she could find work. And that's where the focus of this administration is going to be." May 12, 2003

"But in spite of the good news, people are looking for work. And as long as our fellow citizens are looking for work, we must act. So long as families are struggling to pay the bills, we must act here in America. So long as small businesses are hesitant to expand and to create new jobs, we must act. And the "we" in this case is the United States Congress." May 12, 2003

"We need at least $550 billion in tax relief over the next decade, big enough to make a real difference in the paychecks of American workers, big enough to help entrepreneurs create more jobs, and big enough to give our economy the boost it needs." May 10, 2003

"The unemployment number is now at 6 percent, which should serve as a clear signal to the United States Congress we need a bold economic recovery package so people can find work. (Applause.) That 6-percent number should say loud and clear to members of both political parties in the United States Congress, we need robust tax relief so our fellow citizens can find a job. (Applause.)" May 6, 2003


And now we have Democrats making the same bullshit arguments, and even Ezra Klein (et tu Ezra) twisting statistics trying to pretend this is not a huge windfall for the top 20%.

Well, I suppose Ezra does have a good paying job that he needs to keep, so there's no reason that he should give a flying fuck about either the truth, or the rest of us in the working class.

[laughingliberal]

28. +1000 nt

[JamesA1102]

30. I trust Ezra

No reason not to. He's always been fair and factual.

[hfojvt]

40. the only reason not to this time

is because I can look at the numbers and see they are crap. Putting the payroll tax holiday on the progressive side is crap, much of that money goes to the top 20% http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9721446#9724586 If this was a Republican plan, Ezra might be rightly complaining about that fact. Oh, and that big graph of the "middle class tax cuts", how much of THAT money goes to people who make over $80,000 (unlike about 80% of households). Much more than 20%, probably about 50%. But sure Ezra, this is a huge victory for progressives. Except the numbers show it is not. Please note, I only start questioning his character AFTER I questioned his math.

[nashville_brook]

42. Good points!

They levels of income were separated for a reason. Not meant to be taken together.

[nashville_brook]

32. that's a devastating analysis and comparison of Bush rhetoric and our current president's

it's too bad none of that worked to employ people, too. can't believe we're going to fall for this again!

[JamesA1102]

31. You can't take a guess? nt

[laughingliberal]

19. Yet, the President is perturbed & petulant that liberals aren't grateful for his hard work. nt

[nashville_brook]

27. +1000

[Modern School]

21. Tax Cuts

Essentially, this was a big giveaway to the richest 1% who will get 25% of the savings. The data above doesn't include the repeal of the Make Work Pay credit http://modeducation.blogspot.com/2010/12/obamas-delusion-of-grandeur-robin-hood.html
which will result in the poorest workers getting a tax increase (those earning less than $20k or $40k for families).

What we really need right now is tax increases for the rich and corporations (if they really care about cutting the deficit), and an immediate end to the 2 big wars.

[nashville_brook]

29. +1000 -- welcome to DU, btw -- :)

[Odin2005]

22. The payroll tax holiday should be on the red side. It's a ploy to destroy SS.

The "holiday" would never be allowed to end because the Right would scream "TAX HIKE!!!", thus damaging the finances of SS.

[silver10]

25. Agreed

The repukes detest Social Security - always have and always will. This is just several more nails in the SS coffin for them. I don't know what is more egregious - allowing the bush-error (where's the jobs that were supposed to result?) tax cuts to continue, or the progressive slow death and destruction of the SS safety net - which is no hair off of the massively fat-cats' asses.

[nashville_brook]

33. ouch -- for real.

[Still a Democrat]

24. Does it really matter if we both wanted something?

I don't get the notion getting something good is negated if Republicans happened to want it as well.

[Hello_Kitty]

26. Because it's not a concession if you're getting something the other side wants too.

Much of what went into the WH "win" column falls under that heading. I have no doubt that the payroll tax cut and the extension of Bush's expansion of the child tax credit would pass as stand alone bills next session.

[Lorien]

34. Anyone have a similar chart from the Bush years?

What they got vs. what we were given in return?

[nashville_brook]

36. not exactly what you're looking for...but interesting

[nashville_brook]

37. this is good too, still not what you're looking for...also this is pre-compromise

[nashville_brook]

38. HERE YOU GO

[krispos42]

45. I think you might mean something like this...

[krispos42]

44. It still blows a $114 billion dollar hole in the budget

Those cuts will generate *maybe* $50 billion dollars worth of economic activity.

If we're going to blow a $114 billion hole in the budget, it should be for something that would generate $150 billion worth of economic activity, like infrastructure. Finishing that tunnel between New Jersey and Manhattan would be nice, for starters.

Hell, I can think of lots of stuff here in Connecticut that I'd like to see get done. Make US-7 a true highway from Norwalk to Danbury. Make CT-25 a true highway from Bridgeport to Danbury. I-384 should be extended from its current terminus in Bolton all the way along US-44 (past UConn) to the Promfret area, then follow CT-101 to RI-101 all the way to Providence. And extending CT-8 up to I-90 might be nice too.