Good luck if the Democrats win
By Donald Lambro
Monday, November 6, 2006


Two things will likely happen if the Democrats regain control of Congress Tuesday: Federal social welfare spending will go up and the core of the Republican tax cuts will be repealed.
We know this will happen because Democratic leaders have said so numerous times, in their campaign statements and in their election agenda.
Since President Bush's tax cuts were enacted in 2001, the Democrats' have been calling for their repeal, repeatedly ridiculing them as "tax cuts for the rich" when the bulk of the provisions are aimed at those in the middle class and below. "I can't see Democrats opposing the rates that are being paid at the bottom two-thirds of the tax code," said Democrat Robert Reischauer, head of the liberal Urban Institute think tank.
But Congressman Charlie Rangel of Harlem, who would become the Democratic chairman of the powerful tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee, told Bloomberg News not too long ago that he could not think of a single tax cut he would want to extend before they are due to expire by law in 2010.
An analysis by the nonpartisan Tax Foundation shows us just what is at stake for middle-income families if the tax cuts were repealed: A family of four (with two children under the age of 17), taking the standard deduction on an income of $50,000 a year pays a federal income tax bill of $1,365.
If the Bush tax cuts were never enacted, or if they were repealed, their tax bill would be $3,320. Not only does this family benefit from the lower income tax rates in Bush's cuts but also from the doubling of the child tax credit to $1,000. A family of four earning $75,000 a year presently has an income tax bill of $5,115. That bill would shoot up to $7,538 if Democrats had their way and the Bush tax cuts were never enacted.
A worried Charlie Rangel late last month, as Republican congressional candidates pounded their opponents on the tax cut issue, put out a hasty statement denying that he had any intention of raising taxes on the middle class. "Democrats have a long history of supporting targeted relief for middle-income families," he said.
Rangel said he would only "close tax shelters and eliminate benefits for companies that move jobs overseas." As for the across-the-board tax rate cuts Bush enacted, he simply dodged the question about what he would do, saying, my gosh, 2010 was "light years away from the debate before us." He hoped he would be able to provide middle-class relief, however, he told reporters.
His evasiveness, following Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi's repeated claims that Democrats would raise taxes on upper income Americans, drew suspicion from Republican tax-cutters.
"Charlie Rangel's a master politician, but when he talks about everything being on the table and tax cuts for the middle class, my eyes begin to widen," said former Rep. Jack Kemp, the architect of the Reagan tax cuts in the 1980s. "When you start targeting tax cuts to a class of people, you are entering the arena of redistribution of wealth," Kemp told me.
This is exactly what Rangel and Pelosi have in mind. The "pay-go" rules they say they will institute would require that any tax cuts be offset by spending cuts or higher taxes on someone else. Thus their plan would call for raising taxes on the higher income brackets to finance lower rates elsewhere on the income scale.
But it is unlikely that the Rangel-Pelosi Democrats will want to tamper with the lower 10 percent rate for workers in the bottom tax bracket or for those in the middle who now benefit from the Bush rate cuts. Their targets: raise the death tax, boost capital gains and dividend taxes on investors and hit upper income brackets harder.
"Democrats are for taxing the super-rich, though it has yet to be defined where super-richdom begins," says Reischauer, the former Congressional Budget Office director.
One tax hike scenario discussed in Democratic circles would push for tax hikes limited to six-figure incomes, corporate profits, investor gains and higher death taxes in exchange for an extension of Bush's other tax cuts. "They will try to find some way to raise taxes to finance their spending programs," former House Republican leader Dick Armey told me.
As for spending, an examination of the Democrats' campaign agenda, titled "A New Direction For America," proposes to increase a broad range of social welfare spending by hundreds of billions of dollars. One analysis by the National Taxpayers Union puts an annual price tag of some $80 billion on the Democrats spending wish list, but that is likely to be only a small part of their spending plans.
A Senate cost analysis of Democratic spending amendments for fiscal 2006 and 2007 totals $95.2 billion and $74 billion respectively. One of the plans in their agenda is an income redistribution scheme aimed at lower to median income Americans that would match the first $1,000 contributed to an IRA account at a cost of nearly $40 billion over five years. So if you think federal taxes and spending are bad now, wait until the Democrats get a hold of the government's purse strings.



Donald Lambro is chief political correspondent for The Washington Times.

__________________
Damned right I'm an equal opportunity offender, I'm a Conservative!

Yes thank God for Charley Rangel, a rare voice of reason in a sea of insanity. Rangle would never raise taxes on working families. This a pack of lies formulated by Carl Rove to scare the be-Jesus out of conservatives. Rangle will roll back the tax cuts on the richest 25%, progressively more as the richer you are. I only hope he makes them retroactive from their inception. My greatest hope if Pelosi gets to be leader, is to immeadiately start Impeachment proceedings and progress to a trial for treason for Bush, Cheney and Carl fucking Rove!

__________________
"I suppose I always knew America would eventually break the planet, like some ghastly, hyperactive toddler that gets hold of a mobile phone and then smashes it repeatedly against the edge of a table". Quote from british journalist.

__________________
The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it. United State Constitution, Art. I Sec. 9 Par. 2

"Dissent is the Highest form of Patriotism" -- Howard Zinn

__________________
The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it. United State Constitution, Art. I Sec. 9 Par. 2

"Dissent is the Highest form of Patriotism" -- Howard Zinn

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/opinion/articles/050502/2dobbs.htm





Lonely in the Middle




By Lou Dobbs

5/2/05


Compassionate conservatism has been the catchphrase of George W. Bush since the presidential campaign of 2000, but those two words must now ring hollow to the more than 100 million Americans who make up our middle class. There is nothing conservative about our rising record budget and trade deficits. There is nothing compassionate about the president's idea of Social Security reform, the rollback of coverage for ever more costly healthcare for working Americans, or the most recent assault on the middle class: the new bankruptcy reform bill that Bush signed into law last week.
It's ironic that Congress approved the bankruptcy bill to impose fiscal discipline on the middle class when the federal government last year ran up a $412 billion budget deficit and a $617 billion trade deficit. President Bush's temerity in signing this legislation was the ultimate hypocrisy in a town already very well credentialed. Add to that hypocrisy the House of Representatives' vote to permanently repeal the estate tax for the wealthy, as Congress further rent the middle class's social safety net.
Compassionate conservatism? The new bankruptcy law was virtually written by the credit card companies and banks, making it far more difficult for American families to erase their debt. The credit card firms are not exactly struggling. Their profits, in fact, have risen steadily over the past decade.
Personal bankruptcy filings fell nearly 4 percent to 1.56 million in 2004, down from a record high a year earlier. But these aren't just lazy debtors taking advantage of a broken system; these are working men and women who have faced hardships and financial failure, and tried to avoid bankruptcy court. A recent Harvard study shows that nearly half of all personal bankruptcies in this country are caused by costly illnesses and medical bills. And surprisingly, more than three quarters of the debtors who sought court protection from creditors had some health insurance coverage at the onset of the illness that triggered bankruptcy.
"Do we run the country for the people, or do we run it for nameless, faceless banks or international corporations?" asks Harvard Law School Prof. Elizabeth Warren. "That was the issue way back as far back as the Depression. The ultimate decision was we run it for the people. ... And now we have made a complete turnabout: We not only don't invest in the middle class, we drain away from the middle class. We tax them harder; we leave them with bigger risks like never before in history. And we take away the last shred of a safety net--bankruptcy. It's war on the middle class."


Bipartisan attack.
It's now a war being prosecuted by both political parties. Neither party in Congress is looking out for the interests of the middle class. Not surprisingly, every Republican in both the Senate and the House of Representatives voted in favor of the bankruptcy bill. Seventy-three Democrats in the House as well as 18 in the Senate joined their pro-business colleagues on the other side of the aisle by voting against the needs of the people. To permanently repeal the estate tax, 42 House Democrats voted in favor of supporting another break for the wealthy. Every Republican in the House except one approved that legislation.
"The middle-class working-family interests are not being guarded on Capitol Hill," says Illinois Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin, who voted against the bankruptcy reform bill. "They are, unfortunately, victims of what has become a tidal wave of pro-business legislation, which has been unfair to a lot of families that are struggling to get along."
Durbin acknowledges that too many in his party are now under the sway of the all-powerful political influence of corporate America. "It's sad that there are many Democrats that felt, initially, this was an easy business vote when the bill came up 10 years ago," Durbin said. "Unfortunately, over the years, the bill got progressively worse and much more unfair for consumers, and many of those same Democrats still stuck with the Republicans."
Abraham Lincoln declared that a government "of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the Earth," but the 21st century has so far seen it certainly diminishing. Unless one political party (and let's hope both) finds the courage to resist corporate interests and put working men and women first, our middle class will be among the loneliest people in a faded nation.

__________________
The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it. United State Constitution, Art. I Sec. 9 Par. 2

"Dissent is the Highest form of Patriotism" -- Howard Zinn

I Love Lou Dobbs, he's about the only one speaking out on this issue!

__________________
"I suppose I always knew America would eventually break the planet, like some ghastly, hyperactive toddler that gets hold of a mobile phone and then smashes it repeatedly against the edge of a table". Quote from british journalist.

I don't care which party you belong to there are no real differences. Bottom line you all play the game.

Unfortunately, those uncorrupted by government don't have enough money behind them to play with the big boys.

So we are stuck with two main parties. Each saying how wonderful they are and how horrible the other is. When in truth they both will end up screwing the average guy.

__________________
"I suppose I always knew America would eventually break the planet, like some ghastly, hyperactive toddler that gets hold of a mobile phone and then smashes it repeatedly against the edge of a table". Quote from british journalist.

__________________
The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it. United State Constitution, Art. I Sec. 9 Par. 2

"Dissent is the Highest form of Patriotism" -- Howard Zinn

Yeah, But then what do we have left. We have to get rid of corporate lobbyists, put in election reform (limit per candidate spending) and impose term limits. When congressmen have been in office for too long, they get lazy and greedy, they forget what it was that made them want to go to congress in the first place and the good old boys club takes over. I think every congressman should have to take a lie detector test before taking office and once a year after, if they fail a barrage of integrity type questions, they are out and the person they won over gets a chance to apply, and if they fail, they have a new election. eventually we'd get a somewhat honest congress, or at least one who new how to beat the test!

__________________
"I suppose I always knew America would eventually break the planet, like some ghastly, hyperactive toddler that gets hold of a mobile phone and then smashes it repeatedly against the edge of a table". Quote from british journalist.