Good to see Republicans blow the political messaging for a change.
House Republican leader John Boehner says he would support extending tax cuts only for middle-class earners even though he considers it “bad policy” to exclude the highest-earning Americans from tax relief during a recession.
President Barack Obama’s top economic adviser said Sunday he is happy that Boehner, R-Ohio, isn’t willing to hold hostage an extension of tax cuts for those earning under $250,000 a year, or more than 97 percent of earners, to try to gain a continuation of breaks enjoyed by the wealthiest [...]
“I want to do something for all Americans who pay taxes,” Boehner said in an interview taped Saturday for “Face the Nation” on CBS. “If the only option I have is to vote for some of those tax reductions, I’ll vote for it. … If that’s what we can get done, but I think that’s bad policy. I don’t think that’s going to help our economy.”
The headline of this story is “Boehner backs tax cuts limited to middle class.” Every 20 minutes on NPR this morning, the headline was “Republican leader backs middle class tax cuts.” Whatever else Boehner said, that he doesn’t prefer the policy, or that he’d only vote for it as a last resort, is irrelevant. He basically caved to the Obama Administration position.
Now, it’s important to recognize a couple things. One, the Democrats had the procedural advantage here. Gridlock, the normal Republican way of doing business, would have resulted in the Bush tax cuts expiring completely. In addition, the tax cuts “for the middle class” are actually tax cuts on the first $250,000 of income. That would be for everyone, including the rich, who would actually see more benefits in real dollars (though not as a percentage of their income). So hijacking the policy would result in Boehner and the GOP voting against a $7,000 tax cut for the wealthy, too.
While that’s true, and this extension would run up the budget deficit significantly, the fact that wages haven’t expanded for the majority of workers in the last couple decades does make me not want to raise taxes on them during a recession to boot. The end result would make the tax code marginally more progressive, though more work needs to be done there.
This is an unusual unforced error for the Republican leadership. They may have had this in the back of their minds, but they just negotiated away the policy in public. And all this at the end of a week where conservative Democrats were backtracking like mad over to the Republican policy of wanting all the tax cuts extended. I don’t think that’s going to happen now. All the Democrats have to do is to call Boehner’s bluff.
…Sam Stein adds that Boehner admitted that only 3% of all small businesses at most would be affected by the increase in taxes at the high end of the scale.



38 Comments


Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Now, Dems need to make TWO adjustments to their plan and OB’s campaign promise on taxes:
the first is implied:
-special dividend and cap gains cuts go ONLY to those with AGI under 250k
-adjust the rates AFTER 250k or make another adjustment so that those making more than that Pay the same taxes they did in the 90s.
In other words, fix this part:
In addition, the tax cuts “for the middle class” are actually tax cuts on the first $250,000 of income. That would be for everyone, including the rich, who would actually see more benefits in real dollars (though not as a percentage of their income). So hijacking the policy would result in Boehner and the GOP voting against a $7,000 tax cut for the wealthy, too.
This can be done in the new law with a separate set of tax tables for those with higher incomes.
OB never promised to keep the tax tables for the rich, just to keep the taxes the same for those earning less than 150/250k.
see item 1
Wow, David, it’s hard to believe there is actually positive news coming from DC. Particularly from the orange guy. Maybe it’s enough to inspire me to go climb the scary ladder outside the house and paint the trim.
Maybe the orange guy is also feeling a little heat?
Boehner Questioned on Ties to Tobacco Lobbyists
Minority Leader Took $340,000 From Tobacco Industry, Says Americans Have a Right to Legal Products That Are Unhealthy
LINK.
Boehner fires back at NYT story alleging cozy ties with lobbyists
LINK.
David, I’m not so sure it was an error.
By supporting the extension, the Repubs took away a mid-term issue the Dems were probably counting on.
As you pointed out, since the rich benefit from the less-than 250K extension and the cut on the greater than 250K would have expired anyway, the Repubs had nothing to lose.
The result is that the Repubs took a populist campaign issue off the table at no cost to themselves.
There’s a way to look at it as politics or policy. On politics, you may be right, but this also looks like Boehner giving in to Obama, on that level. When Democrats try to “take things off the table” in a political campaign it ends up making them look weak, and I’d say that applies here. On policy, taxes on the rich are going back up to Clinton-era levels, and while that’s less than what should happen, it’s very good for issues like income inequality and progressive taxation.
The other part of this is that many, many Republicans are going to disagree with Boehner. This will sow a lot of dissension and discord in their ranks. From a political standpoint, it doesn’t take it off the table at all; it puts the GOP massively on the defensive and at each other’s throats.
I think you have to look at it from the perspective of both politics and policy. The two are never more intertwined than during election season.
The looking weak aspect is more of a Beltway discussion point than a campaign issue. I’m not sure the average voter would care.
The lesser than 250K tax-cuts are something the average voter would likely care about and a potentially fiery populist campaign issue at that – something the Dems could really use right now.
From an election standpoint, the Repubs have turned (intentionally or not) a likely policy defeat into a campaign plus, greatly enhancing their future chances of getting the policy that they want.
Anyway, just my 2 cents : )
I’m guessing that Boehner knew exactly what he was doing and that the Repubs under his control will not break rank.
I’ll also be the first one to admit I could be wrong.
In any event it will be very interesting to see how this shapes out : )
Eh. Boehner of course still wants to cut taxes for the wealthy. And Obama signaled that he would want two votes, one on “what we all agree on,” the 250K and under, and one on the cuts for the wealthy. Watch that second vote get withheld until after the election, and the exact same populist rhetoric employed.
Boehner caves until he uncaves, like probably after the midterms.
If Boehner’s going for this, there’s something in it for him & the R’s.
I’ll wait to see if Obummer scurries around to cut taxes for the excessively wealthy just to be in opposition to the Tan Man. /Sort of snark/sort of not.
Interesting; thanks for the post; wake me when it’s ovah.
At some point, it is a good idea politcally for the Orange Crybaby to start saying yes to something before the mid terms. Democrats are getting some benefit from labelling the R Party the Party OF No.
Boehner gets points by rubes for voting for tax cuts for rubes (and a big portion of upper income earners). He also saves something for his can do campaign promises later. More Tax Cuts! Bring ‘Em On Bush Tax Cuts for Uber Millionaires.
Yes, of course. I believe Boehner’s ‘give-in’ is simply a short-term tactical decision. Boehner’s trying to get as many Repubs elected as possible. After the mid-terms, all bets are off.
I couldn’t agree more. You can bet that after mid-terms, the Repubs will make as much mischief as possible. Things like this second vote promise will be tossed out the window without a care.
The sad thing is that with this two-vote proposal, Obama is doing one more thing that helps the Repub campaign efforts and hinders that of the Dems. A real head-scratcher.
As the economy continues to stall, Boehner will say I told you so. We need more cowbell for the rich. Trickledown, Yeehaw!
$250K is about $3 Grand a week. Anybody here making that kind of dough? (Rhetorical Q.) It is a tax cut for the rich and the middle/low incomes.
Even some (ok, a few) of the Teabaggers are wise to the Culture War and tax/income disparity.
So let’s see, if we all go up to Clinton rates, Govt gets $238 billion/yr more revenue. If the middle class has it’s Bush rates extended, Govt only gets $36 billion/yr.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/11/AR2010081105864.html
So, a few points to consider…
* The middle class got tax cuts of $202 billion/yr.
* The wealthy were not the main beneficiaries of the Bush rates.
* All Clinton rates were in force during the surplus.
* Giving away $202 billion in revenue is not fiscally conservative, and a huge giveaway.
* Either you believe Clinton rates brought prosperity, or you don’t. It’s time to be clear on this idea.
Bingo, he defused an issue that might have been used against them during the next several weeks. Come January they’ll be able to ram through all the tax cuts they want, with the support of many conserva-Dems to boot.
Kind of a no-brainer for Boehner.
Are you fucking kidding me??? They got 90%+ of the tax cuts… A little poking around on the web is in order for you find the REAL Truth of that statement!!
Besides the middle classes real wages have been declining ever since Ronnie… Trickle Down Voodo magic you conservative class war warriors Wingnuts… Go find a rock and climb under it…
Well, it’s not going back to Clinton-era, because the wealthy will still have that extra 7k in tax cuts that they didn’t have then. The politics work very well for the Dems, though.
Book Salon up with Will Bunch’s The Backlash: Right-Wing Radicals, Hi-Def Hucksters, and Paranoid Politics in the Age of Obama hosted by Cliff Schecter
“All the democrats have to do is call Boehner’s bluff.”
And if they don’t?
THEN, will be allowed to say that Barack Obama is part of the problem and not the solution? Pretty please?
Since virtually every utterance out of the mouths of Republicans/Teabaggers are either outright lies, distortions, half-truths, etc., not for a moment do I take Boehner’s statement seriously. This will turn out to be one of many opening positions by both parties in their tiresome strategic and tactical games.
As we saw in the health-care debate, over the course of what seemed like an endless process, both parties and Obama, were on three or more sides of every issue. And in the end, the final product was decided, in this case by a few members of the Democratic leadership in both the House and Senate, along with Rahm and other members of the Obama administration, behind closed doors. And the final product barely resembled any of the initial positions/ statements from both sides.
And although we don’t know what the final compromise will look like yet (and there will, in all liklihood, be a compromise), the following statement from Democratic Congressman/and part of the House leadership, Chris Van Hollen, strikes me as, ultimately, being closer to what the final bill will look like than any statement from Boehner.
Sorry sport, but you’re the victim of misinformation. Obviously $36 billion is not 90% of $238 billion.
Actually, this one time I was rooting for gridlock. Letting all the Bush tax cuts expire on schedule would be the responsible course of action. And it might get some people to stop whining incessantly about deficits.
Agreed. I don’t think any of the Bush tax cuts should be extended, including those on the first 250k in income.
this is MORE dim-0-shit pissing in the wind – who knows how much will end up on their shoes or on orangeman.
the fascists are stunningly effective at lying about the effects of their thieving policies, AND, stunningly effective at getting their thieving policies passed.
our $ould-0ut dim-0-$hit$ can’t manage effective message on any policy, good or bad. after the bullshit on AHIP-care & AIG-care, how many of the average working-their-asses-off-stooges are gonna give a flying fuck about 3 or 4 or 5 dollars and 19 cents a week?
you all fucked me and everybody outta 20? 30? 40? bucks a week for rich pig scum, BUT, now I’m gonna get 2.18 back … every other week … when I hire 14 tax lawyers … wow! let’s have a parade!
can I wear my pink tutu and do cartwheels?
oops, did I mention our $ould-0ut dim-0-$hit$ can’t manage effective message against fascist lies about the effective fascist thieving policies, either, by the way.
remember in Demolition Man, all the restaurants were taco bells? with the current crop of dim-0-fuck$, we’re all on a fast track to company towns of junk-mart.
rmm.
More kabuki in an election year.
http://riverdaughter.wordpress.com/
As US “economic recovery” collapses, White House rules out social relief
a taste:
“There is no contradiction between Obama’s $862 billion stimulus package of 2009 and his administration’s overt shift to austerity today. Both represent the implementation of the ruthless class policy of the American financial-corporate elite.
Last February’s stimulus bill—consisting largely of tax cuts and other incentives for business—was a carefully calibrated measure designed to prevent a collapse in consumer spending, avert a social explosion by creating the impression that the government was doing something for “Main Street,” buy time to carry through the bank bailout and create conditions for a revival of corporate profits and the stock market.
These goals having been largely achieved, at least for the present, the ruling class is intent on keeping unemployment high and using mass joblessness to permanently drive down the wages and conditions of the American working class to those that existed in the 1930s, and to narrow the labor cost differential between American workers and super-exploited workers in China and other “emerging economies.”
I’d like to think the Repubs flubbed on this, but really, they get to keep the holy grail of tax cuts per the administration’s plan. That is preferential treatment of capital gains.
Plus, I actually think this is Boehner realizing he’s going to be Speaker of the House pretty soon and trying to make kissy face with any blue dawgs that might be sympathetic to the causes after November.
The only people this helps–and businesses–are the already well off for the most part. The businesses that are hurting need customers. They don’t need tax cuts. This doesn’t help with the shortfalls of state and local government which in turn doesn’t help the unemployed and poor.
This is Obama playing the same stupid game the Rethugs do. It’s convincing every one they’ll be better off with a little bit for them and a lot for the corporations and businesses by hoping they don’t really figure out that the benefit is going to the big guys.
That doesn’t really happen without examining the capital gains tax. That means a lot of them will just shift their income expectations from salaries to stock bonuses again and that doesn’t work well for any one. It creates bubbles and accounting games and short term thinking.
such a no-brainer that he’s already walking it back.
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2010/09/boehner_tries_to_walk_it_back.php
Do the Dems – does Obama – know how to take this GOP concession, pocket it and bank it, and then ask for more.
If he does not he should review the last two years of GOP actions after he made a concession to them.
shooter242 that 36 Billion is ONLY for those making over 1 million a year.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2010/08/11/GR2010081106717.html
Since we are talking about reverting from 25 to 28 percent, 28 to 31, 33 to 36 and 35 to 39.6 percent, reversing just the tax rates would be about 88 Billion in additional revenue.
http://www.cbo.gov/publications/collections/taxdistribution.cfm
The top quintile paid 86.3 percent of Federal income taxes in 2006.
1.044 Trillion in individual income tax in FY2006.
http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=10068&type=1
From 1996 to 2006 the top quintile household income increased from 185K to 248K.
The middle quintile household income went from 55.6K to 60.7K.
QUITE. EXACTLY. they love the joblessness. it like a bat with nails in it for them.
Rep. Chris Van Hollen
John Boehner talkin like a Republican again.
One Scenario:
The Rethugs take the one-year compromise. They win a lot of seats in the House and Senate in November. Next year with more Republicans and blue-dog Democrats; they now stand a better chance for another extension.
They may think they can take back the White House in 2012; tax cuts for the wealthy become permanent.
This is nothing to be joyful about. Boehner is drawing the Democrat’s hand in so that the Republicans can bite it off. And the Democrats are falling for it hook, line and sinker. Thanks to Boehner, the Republicans are going to look like they’re ready to compromise a little, and steal the campaign thunder, then shut it down, making Obama and the Democrats look like ineffectual fools unable to capitalize on a compromise. And the Democrats, falling for it, will start to give on extending the tax cuts (in addition to spending cuts, of course), and then they will look like they sold out, when Republicans make the cuts permanent. Not an annuity, but a perpetuity. Rope-a-dope redux. For crying out loud, even cockroaches learn after getting burned a few times!
Remember, as Joe Scarborough et al say, only the rich can create jobs. So let’s make fewer richer! Genius!
If Oprah can say “vajayjays” can I say “Boehner caves?”