Media Ignores This Coming Veto

[red states rule]

The liberal media has been telling us how Pres Bush never took mout his veto pen - then when he does they whine about it

Now, pres Bush plans to veto a big tax increase passed dy Democrats.

I thought Dems promised not to raise taxes?



Major Media Ignore Bush's Veto Threat over Tax Bill
The planned tax hike carries a billion dollar bill according to Bloomberg.

By Jeff Poor
Business & Media Institute
7/2/2007 4:44:11 PM

A bill that would increases taxes for investors and threaten the U.S. economy attracted warning of a presidential veto, but no major news coverage.

“The ramifications of this [bill] are dire for the U.S. economy, federal revenues, and ordinary investors,” wrote Phil Kerpen in National Review Online.

The Washington Post included this cost estimate from Bloomberg in a June 22 story:

“Lawmakers are targeting carried interest as part of a broader examination of how hedge funds and buyout firms are taxed. Informal estimates show that taxing carried interest at the same rate as salaries may generate at least $4 billion a year in additional taxes, Bloomberg said.”

The bill that President George W. Bush threatened to veto was introduced by Michigan democrat Rep. Sander Levin. It would change the current rate of taxation on investment partnerships like pensions, hedge fund and venture-capital investments from the capital gains rate of 15 percent, to the income tax rate – which can be as high as 35 percent.

White House Press Secretary Tony Snow told reporters on June 27 Bush would veto any “broad moves” by Congress to change the tax rate currently in place.

“This is not an administration that's predisposed toward tax increases,” Snow told The New York Post.

Economist Larry Kudlow of CNBC explained why Bush’s veto was important during an interview on Hugh Hewitt’s radio show on June 29.

“It is precisely the president’s low capital gains tax rate, low dividend tax rate and low income tax rate that has helped this economy and stock market enormously even though the poor guy doesn’t get any credit,” said Kudlow.

for the complete article

http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2007/20070702164012.aspx

 

[onedomino]

The Dems should pass legislation that reduces spending rather than raises taxes, if they were serious about the health of the US economy. If the Dems get their way regarding taxes, America will have economic growth rates, and unemployment stats, that are similar to the social welfare states of Western Europe. Spending, except for national security (including energy programs, and other scientific research) must be suppressed. If there are states that do not think such spending is enough, then let them pass the taxes that will support the programs they want.

 

[red states rule]

The Dems should pass legislation that reduces spending rather than raises taxes, if they were serious about the health of the US economy. If the Dems get their way regarding taxes, America will have economic growth rates, and unemployment stats, that are similar to the social welfare states of Western Europe. Spending, except for national security (including energy programs, and other scientific research) must be suppressed. If there are states that do not think such spending is enough, then let them pass the taxes that will support the programs they want.

Dems deny (as their supporters) they are raising taxes. Watch and see, if any libs post on this thread they will try to spin the fact they are raising taxes

Dems promised they would reduce spending and pork - they are increasing it beyond what Republicans did

 

[uscitizen]

Anter the spending binge of Bush and the republican controlled congress, the raising of taxes is inevitable.
It now just depends whos taxes gets raised....

 

[JeffWartman]

Dems deny (as their supporters) they are raising taxes. Watch and see, if any libs post on this thread they will try to spin the fact they are raising taxes

Dems promised they would reduce spending and pork - they are increasing it beyond what Republicans did

Democrat...Republican...it's all the same...

Democrats DO want to raise taxes. It's still not good for the economy.

But Republicans have no moral high ground to stand upon regarding this issue.

None. You have increased government at an alarming rate.

Both parties need to go.

 

[mattskramer]

I thought Dems promised not to raise taxes?

Bush senior promised no new taxes. Look. There is very little difference between Democrats and Republicans when it comes to honesty and integrity. Anyway, do you have an official statement form Pelosi or other ranking Democrat promising to never raise taxes - or are you simply subtly throwing up a straw man?

 

[red states rule]

Anter the spending binge of Bush and the republican controlled congress, the raising of taxes is inevitable.
It now just depends whos taxes gets raised....

No it is not

I understand libs have this obsession with raising taxes - but the facts go against them

Revenues are at record highs and the deficit has been shrinking for the last 4 years

 

[red states rule]

Bush senior promised no new taxes. Look. There is very little difference between Democrats and Republicans when it comes to honesty and integrity. Anyway, do you have an official statement form Pelosi or other ranking Democrat promising to never raise taxes - or are you simply subtly throwing up a straw man?

Dems used the same line as Clinton did. they said the "middle class" would not see a tax increase - nut Dems voted to repeal ALL the Bush tax increases

Retired couples will see a tax increase. The "working class" (who libs claim they care about) will see their tax rate go from 10% to 15%

I guess libs care so much, they need to screw them with a 33% tax increase to pay for their liberal compassion

 

[mattskramer]

Dems used the same line as Clinton did. they said the "middle class" would not see a tax increase - nut Dems voted to repeal ALL the Bush tax increases

Retired couples will see a tax increase. The "working class" (who libs claim they care about) will see their tax rate go from 10% to 15%

I guess libs care so much, they need to screw them with a 33% tax increase to pay for their liberal compassion

Whatever. The bottom line is that Bush Sr. promised no new taxes. You can twist it as hard as you can. You can make excuses for as long as you like. It does not change the fact that Bush Sr. promised no new taxes. He lied. When it comes right down to it, there is very little difference between Democrats and Republicans – particularly when it comes to honesty and integrity. To what degree or another the Repubs try to pull the same stunts as the Dems – and vice versa.

 

[Gunny]

The liberal media has been telling us how Pres Bush never took mout his veto pen - then when he does they whine about it

Now, pres Bush plans to veto a big tax increase passed dy Democrats.

I thought Dems promised not to raise taxes?



Major Media Ignore Bush's Veto Threat over Tax Bill
The planned tax hike carries a billion dollar bill according to Bloomberg.

By Jeff Poor
Business & Media Institute
7/2/2007 4:44:11 PM

A bill that would increases taxes for investors and threaten the U.S. economy attracted warning of a presidential veto, but no major news coverage.

“The ramifications of this [bill] are dire for the U.S. economy, federal revenues, and ordinary investors,” wrote Phil Kerpen in National Review Online.

The Washington Post included this cost estimate from Bloomberg in a June 22 story:

“Lawmakers are targeting carried interest as part of a broader examination of how hedge funds and buyout firms are taxed. Informal estimates show that taxing carried interest at the same rate as salaries may generate at least $4 billion a year in additional taxes, Bloomberg said.”

The bill that President George W. Bush threatened to veto was introduced by Michigan democrat Rep. Sander Levin. It would change the current rate of taxation on investment partnerships like pensions, hedge fund and venture-capital investments from the capital gains rate of 15 percent, to the income tax rate – which can be as high as 35 percent.

White House Press Secretary Tony Snow told reporters on June 27 Bush would veto any “broad moves” by Congress to change the tax rate currently in place.

“This is not an administration that's predisposed toward tax increases,” Snow told The New York Post.

Economist Larry Kudlow of CNBC explained why Bush’s veto was important during an interview on Hugh Hewitt’s radio show on June 29.

“It is precisely the president’s low capital gains tax rate, low dividend tax rate and low income tax rate that has helped this economy and stock market enormously even though the poor guy doesn’t get any credit,” said Kudlow.

for the complete article

http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2007/20070702164012.aspx

If that bill reaches the President, the Democrats will have proven they're not smart enough to see its potential impact on the next Presidential election.

 

[red states rule]

The sad thing is, some people are trying to spin this as NOT a tax increase. Dems are only letting the tax cuts expire

Given the huge amounts of spending increases the Dems want - along with the pork they are adding to the spending bills - this huge tax increase is needed just to keep pace with the Dems spending spree

But the problem is, the tax cuts will bring in LESS revenue as it will choke off the economic growth and investments being made now