Democrats Cry Uncle on Taxes, Spending

Discussion in 'Politics' started by 82Marine89, Dec 9, 2007.

  1. 82Marine89
    Offline

    82Marine89 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2007
    Messages:
    121
    Thanks Received:
    37
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +37
    Cracks are emerging in congressional Democrats' solidarity, as frustrated lawmakers concede their majority status is not enough to overcome Republican resistance on taxes, spending, Iraq and a host of other issues.

    The fissures, which became obvious this week, are undermining Democrats' hopes for several key achievements this year. They also point to a bruising 2008 election in which Democrats will say Republicans blocked prudent tax and spending plans to score political points on immigration and other hot-button issues.

    Republicans say they simply want to prevent higher taxes of any kind, even if the targets are not-so-sympathetic groups such as oil companies and hedge fund managers.

    After 11 months of insisting that all major programs be paid for with tax increases or spending cuts elsewhere, Senate Democratic leaders acknowledged Thursday they cannot persuade enough Republicans to join them. Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., reluctantly allowed a vote on a long-debated middle-class tax cut that would add billions of dollars to the deficit because it is not offset elsewhere.

    The measure, which the Senate approved 88-5, would prevent the alternative minimum tax from hitting about 25 million more taxpayers, at a cost of about $50 billion to the U.S. treasury next year. Reid's decision puts the Senate at odds with the House with two weeks left before the holiday recess.

    House Democratic leaders still insist on a pay-as-you-go policy, or ''pay-go,'' which they made a centerpiece of their governing principles in January.

    Reid told reporters Thursday that Senate Republicans have used their filibuster powers to block Democratic efforts to change Iraq policy, move a farm bill and pay for the proposed one-year ''fix'' to the alternative minimum tax. He especially complained about Republican demands to offer farm bill amendments dealing with state drivers licenses for illegal immigrants.

    ''We've tried everything we can to address these issues,'' Reid said, citing 57 GOP filibuster threats this year.

    ''We have lived by pay-go,'' Reid said regarding the tax bill. ''But what we want everyone to know is that we have tried every alternative possible.''

    He acknowledged handing a political dilemma to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. The House earlier passed an AMT bill that would raise $80 billion in new taxes, largely on investors and hedge fund managers.

    ''I admire the speaker'' for adhering to the pay-as-you-go principle, Reid said. He added, however, she ''has a little more flexibility from a procedural perspective than I do.''

    Reid's decision will force a pivotal decision by House Democrats: Should they infuriate millions of voters by leaving the AMT unchanged (and hope Republicans get blamed), or abandon the pay-go promise and possibly rely heavily on Republican votes to pass a bill that splits Democrats.

    ''If we waive pay-go on this, I think it opens the door'' to further actions that would raise the deficit and ''border on criminal irresponsibility,'' said Rep. John Tanner, D-Tenn.

    Meanwhile Thursday, congressional Democrats said they face an uphill battle in trying to overcome Senate GOP objections to a House-passed energy bill. Republicans particularly oppose the proposed rollback of $13.5 billion in tax breaks for major oil companies.

    continued here... http://www.gopusa.com/news/2007/december/1207_dems_frustration1.shtml
     
  2. Mr.Conley
    Offline

    Mr.Conley Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2006
    Messages:
    1,958
    Thanks Received:
    115
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    New Orleans, LA/Cambridge, MA
    Ratings:
    +116
    The Republicans are impoverishing our children and grandchildren for short term political gain. I've seen some disgusting things come out of Congress and the White House these past few years, but this is near the worst. What ever happened to the party of fiscal responsibility?
     
  3. Bern80
    Offline

    Bern80 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,094
    Thanks Received:
    720
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Ratings:
    +726
    Would you mind getting real? How exactley?
     
  4. jillian
    Offline

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,551
    Thanks Received:
    13,012
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,427
    You're kidding, right?

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22081728/
     
  5. Larkinn
    Offline

    Larkinn Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,598
    Thanks Received:
    174
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +175
    I sort of like the tax and spend economics better than don't tax, but spend anyway...
     
  6. Bern80
    Offline

    Bern80 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,094
    Thanks Received:
    720
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Ratings:
    +726
    The amount of debt is meaningless if you don't know how much you take in to offset it. To some, yearly household expenditures of $50,000 may seem like a lot, but it isn't if your household income is $300k a year.

    The general rule of thumb for maintaining good household finance is that you should be spending a third of your monthly income on home payment.

    Do you know what government debt comapred to what the country produces (GDP) is?
     
  7. jillian
    Offline

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,551
    Thanks Received:
    13,012
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,427
    Do you know how much we pay each year on interest on that debt?

    Your analogy to someone whose expenses are $300,000 per year is off the mark.

    You asked a question. You got your answer. You can disagree as to the effects of our national debt, but you can't disagree that giving other countries so much power over us simply because they hold our paper is an unhealthy way to run things.

    I wouldn't run my personal life on a credit card. I don't want my government doing that either. It's irresponsible.
     
  8. Larkinn
    Offline

    Larkinn Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,598
    Thanks Received:
    174
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +175
    n 2005 the public debt was 64.7% of GDP According to the CIA's World Factbook, this meant that the U.S. public debt was the 35th largest in the world by percentage of GDP.

    From wiki. By the way its increased quite a bit from 2005.
     
  9. Bern80
    Offline

    Bern80 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,094
    Thanks Received:
    720
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Ratings:
    +726
    yeah that's what I saw too. I'm just curious if that's enough to be worried about.
     
  10. Bern80
    Offline

    Bern80 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,094
    Thanks Received:
    720
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Ratings:
    +726
    now you're mixing terms. Are you talking the national debt (what the government owes it's creditors) or trade debt (the comparison between what we export vs. what we import)?

    One of those really is a problem (trade debt), one of them isn't so much (national debt).
     

Share This Page