After an 83-15 vote on the motion to proceed in the Senate, final passage could apparently come as soon as today. Tom Coburn, who voted no, isn’t typically willing to cede all the post-cloture time to speed things along, and he could hold out until Friday if he so chose, but the indications are that he won’t. In case you were wondering how serious he was about stopping the bill.
The real problem comes in the more partisan House, where Democrats are doing a lot of jawing about changing the bill. Mitch McConnell laid down a familiar marker by saying that the House can’t change one word of the bill or the deal’s off. This is what’s known as “bipartisan compromise.”
The Kentucky Republican’s comments came in a statement shortly after the Senate agreed to move toward final passage of the tax measure, which would extend Bush-era tax cuts for two years and unemployment benefits for 13 months. McConnell struck the deal with the White House last week.
“We now urge the House leadership to bring this bipartisan agreement to a vote without political games or partisan changes designed only to block this bill’s passage in the House. If the House Democratic Leadership decides to make partisan changes, they will ensure that every American taxpayer will see a job-killing tax hike on January 1st,” McConnell said in the statement.
McConnell may not have the support of his own party in the House. Republicans in the grassroots have become more strident against the bill in recent days, and noted weather vane Mitt Romney has an op-ed today where he slams the bill, mostly because it doesn’t make the Bush tax cuts permanent and because it adds to the deficit (yeah, I don’t get it either). He also wants to create “unemployment savings accounts,” which sounds fine until you realize that would mean that individuals, not businesses, would pay for unemployment insurance with their own money. I don’t think House Republicans will necessarily cater to the base on this one, but you may see some erosion of support. But that only matters if House Democrats use the opportunity.
The White House is fixating on the stimulative impact and avenues for job creation in the bill, which they’re doing a good job of overselling. It appears that House Democrats want a vote on some amendment, more as a way to vent than anything real. They have focused on the estate tax provision, which is one of the more egregious parts of the deal, but also one cherished by the big money-loving Republicans. It’s likely that any estate tax increase from the baseline of the deal wouldn’t attract enough support in the House to pass, particularly from millionaire lame duck Blue Dogs looking at their own estate futures (and future employment as lobbyists for their wealthy contributors). The original House estate tax proposal, which created a $3.5 million dollar exemption and a 45% rate, only won by a 225-210 count. This proposal, with its $5 million dollar exemption and 35% rate, will probably have more support from money-loving Blue Dogs, and all the Republicans.
There are several other points at which to attack this legislation, which I may go into further. Preventing an effective tax increase on between 30 and 50 million workers making under $20,000 a year seems like the best place to start. You can even pay for it by phasing out the payroll tax cut for high incomes – there’s no reason why Alex Rodriguez or Tom Cruise need an extra $2,136 in their pockets, and it won’t impact their buying behavior, which is the entire point. But unfortunately, that’s not where the House is looking. Indeed, their resistance seems largely ephemeral.




51 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Steny really knows how to play hardball:
Your “an 83-15 vote” link goes to a WikiLeaks story.
Barbara Boxer voted Yeah. Any way for me to retract my Nov vote for her?
Roll call here.
First, regarding “that individuals, not businesses, would pay for unemployment insurance with their own money.”; not true everywhere:
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Which_states_require_employee_contributions_for_unemployment_taxes
Second, though this is old, it does give good info about U/I taxation:
http://www.policyalmanac.org/social_welfare/archive/unemployment_compensation.shtml
And ,as I have commented on and written a diary about, the U.S. simply has too many people for it’s ‘production’ needs(and that includes services) and the entire world will be facing the same problem in the future:
http://groups.google.com/group/holistic-quantum-relativity-hqr/browse_thread/thread/b9dea67b2cdcf4e5
House Democrats standing firm in opposition to a sellout POS bill from the Preznint?
That’ll be the day.
You know, on some level you’ve really gotta hand it to the wingnuts. It takes a certain amount of self control and talent to be able to continue to spew that kind of bullshit without laughing and/or having your head explode over the congnitive dissonance.
Romney wants to create “unemployment savings accounts”?
We already have them, they’re called “savings accounts”.
LOL.
Yep, true dat!
oooooh the idiocy: it burnz.
I’m amazed that some days I can STILL be amazed by these scum-sucking bottom dwellers rapaciously ripping us all off. What. a. putz. Romney is.
Mitch must be worried; he called them the House DemocratIC Leadership….
Yes. Thanks for the links. Agree.
And what do our “elected” politicians do about it? Does the fable about Nero fiddling whilst Rome burned ring a familiar note??
I marvel at the stubbornness of the fact that fifty million American workers’ taxes will go UP as a result of this deal. That fact, documented on HuffPost last weekend and further here at FDL, refuses to be touched by any mainstream media. Or Democratic officeholders.
It is as if that stubborn fact is toxic, if true.
I wish someone could convince me that the fix is not in, that Congress will revert to failure mode and the Bush tax cuts will expire automatically.
The U.S. public has been lied to for so long they prefer embracing the myth and the lie rather than facing the truth.
Also, I find that adding money to a savings account (any kind) requires that I first come up with the excess cash somehow. Anyone else notice that?
Sorry.
IMO it would be doing you a disservice for anyone to even try.
Yesterday I mentioned this to a wingnutty distant relative (who, truth be told, has rarely ever exceeded $20K in income) to no avail. He’s convinced that trickle-down is the ONLY way, and that he’ll be out of a job if the overlord at the top of his particular pyramid does not get a few shipping pallets of tax cut.
AM talk radio keeps the serfs in line.
Sorry but the fix is in. Pelosi and the dems do this little dance everytime they are about to screw their base. They squawk and make noises about what they wont accept and how it isn’t fair to the middle and working classes and then they accept it as inevitable and sign off on the deal. There is no way that a democratic house led by Pelois is not going to fall in line with what the rich and powerful want. Even losing the majority is not enough for them to stand up for us. The democratic party is no longer of any use to working and middle class families and will have to be destroyed from the ground up before it can be of use again. There truly is only one political party in the US.
Is there some sort of analysis out there that suggests it isn’t true?
I’m having a hard time understanding how it could possibly be not true. There are lots of folks for which 2% of their wages is less than $400 I would think. I guess it’s possible, even likely, the 1/3 figure (some say this would be 1 of every 3 workers) is overstated, but certainly there are workers out there for which 2% of their wages is less than $400.
Heh, yeah, funny that.
At 2010 your relative with taxible income of $20,000 will owe $2,581 in federal tax.
If we revert to the 2001 rates, he’ll owe $3000.
some of the cultists were waving around some white paper late last week as ‘proof’ we sanctimonious purists were wrong and just “hated” Obama . . . until one of the site’s stalwarts pointed out it was a Morgan Stanley white paper – lmao
Does China give out personal loans? Seems like they loan to our bankrupt country pretty easily…
jeepers creepers, reallY? I think the unemployment bennies are in there just to give cover for voting for the thing (tax breaks for campaign donors)
I don’t think “sanctimonious” means what Obama thinks it means.
silly hippies !
just borrow the money from your Hedge Fund !
{ David, please recheck your link in your post at the phrase “an 83-15 vote” ’cause I’m seeing something not on topic. }
Primary Steny Hoyer and Pelosi if they bring this to the floor.
Simple as that. Maybe progressives can’t take down Obama, but surely we can Pelosi and Hoyer if we use the full force of our outrage!
Enough! Enough with this kabuki bullshit!
Obama proved it hostage taking works. Let’s roll.
Let’s get tea-party medieval on their ass.
mmm, OK, thanks.
I’ll google Morgan Stanley White Paper and see if I can read it.
Ugh I suck at using teh Google. That got me several hundred thousand hits of which I clicked through 4 pages before giving up.
One of these days I’m gonna learn how to really utilze teh Google. I hope.
I consider myself a democratic socialist, I would love to move to Canada or even Iceland. But one thing that baffles me about “our” liberal position on all this is the estate tax. I don’t like the estate tax. Supposing I had an estate worth 5 mil. I happen to have 5 kids. Suppose I had 6, 7, or 8 kids, as lots of people do. I die, leaving them the fruits of my life’s work. That’s less than a mil apiece. At 45% estate tax, close to half of it must first go to the government. That leaves some 2.6 million in my estate to be divided among my actual 5 kids, or my hypothetical 8 kids. I just don’t like that. The government wastes the fruits of people’s work. It uses our confiscated money to fly the president on Helicopter AF One to places he could drive to in 10 minutes. That kind of crap. And the wars. And Haliburton and Blackwater. And missing money in Iraq. And cash payoffs to drug lords in Afghanistan.
I’m for income taxes, as much taxation as it would take to give all Americans what they need, free health care and education for all, just as we have cops and firefighters. I’m militantly against extending the criminalistic pig Bush tax cuts, but I think the sneaking-in of an estate tax increase is another step to surfdom. Snealy, sneaky. I think we’re being fooled into saying “baaaa.” It’s not right. I consider it a “death” tax. I’d only agree with such a tax on the monster estates of billionaires and super multi millionaires, like the Wal-Mart clan.
My parents were at one time worth 3 mil. You should have seen them. They were anything but “rich.” Just nice upper middle class workaholics, who sprang from dirt-poor folks in Oklahoma.
There’s a very good and rational reason for the estate tax, and IMO it’s necessary. But that’s not why I responded.
I responded because I believe you may misinformed on the numbers. You said supposing you had an estate worth $5 million and 5 kids, etc. etc. etc. You then claim there would only be $2.6 million left.
That’s an error. The current “compromise” exempts the first $5 million, which means in you’re scenario your kids would get every penny of the estate. The tax rate only applies to every dollar ABOVE the exemption. Also, the current “compromise” uses a rate of 35% after the exemption, not 45%.
There was some talk in Democratic circles of pushing that rate up to 45%, and lowering the exemption down to $3.5 million, and I support that change. Even then, in your scenario where your estate is $5 million, the amount actually left for you kids would be $3.5 million PLUS 55% (remember the tax rate would 45% so you’re left with 55%) of the other $1.5 million which is $825,000 if my quick math is correct. Thus the net result under that plan would be your kids getting $4,325,000 and the estate owing taxes of $675,000. I don’t think that’s unreasonable. And this doesn’t include some other deductions allowed under the estate tax rules when filing.
The estate tax has almost always only affect less than 1% of the deaths each year. We’re talking about the richest of the rich.
Aren’t you forgetting the exemptions? Even with only a $1 million exemption, the tax on a $5 million estate at 45% is $1.8 million, leaving a $3.2 million windfall for somebody.
Any Dems that votes for the OBAMA tax Bill should be primaried.
Senators are easy to primary and beat. (primary elections are base elections, base elections favor progressives)
Oh, and I forgot to even mention that there are actions you can take, legally, to minimize even that amount.
I haven’t practiced in 10 years so it may have changed, but you used to be able to gift up to $20,000 per year to your children tax free also. So you could transfer a great deal of wealth to your children tax free before ever getting to the estate tax.
Really, it’s not as bad as you would think. In my years as an accountant and the thousands of tax returns I filed, I’ve only ever file TWO estate tax returns that resulted in a payment. And those two made your $5 million dollar example look like a night out at McDonalds.
Obama needs to recover 29 million votes he lost from 2008 to 2010, which ain’t gonna happen. He might be able to get there if he can get at least 200K net new permanent jobs per month from now until October 2012. That would get the UE rate to around 7.2% to 7%, which is the breaking point for reelection (Reagan was at 7.2% and falling right before November 1984), but where the hell are those jobs going to come from? That’s a total of 4.6 Million new permanent jobs!!! It’s virtually impossible!! Shouldn’t we be serious about finding a primary opponent?
Why are progressive fat cats not stepping up!
Geffen
Soros
Spielberg
Cmon make some noise
Get behind feingold or Jane shakowski Bernie Sanders etc
Watch, they’ll all vote for passage then tell everyone how they “held their noses” to help the middle class. It’s clear the Democratic Party’s oxygen deprived brain is actually dead from a decade of “holding it’s nose” and voting for crap like this tax bill. I’m afraid this patient cannot be revived.
I had two reactions to this. The first: 3 million dollars is, indeed, “rich.” No, it’s not rich to Bill Gates and the like, but to the vast 98% of us, that’s rich. Maybe they didn’t live like they were rich; that’s different.
My second reaction: here you are worrying about a hypothetical “what if I had $5 million dollars.” A lot of people out there are against higher tax rates, on the off chance that someday they’d be subject to those higher rates. It’s not real likely for any one of us that this will happen and even if it did, as was noted above, the higher rates kick in above certain points. That would be $5 in this case.
Personally, I’d love to have the problem of facing higher tax rates because I was in a higher earning bracket.
Funny how the democratic socialist turns into a Republican once they become the “haves” they’ve railed against over the years.
Each of them should be judged on what they deliver. I’m done with excuses. I don’t want to hear about not having the votes. We send them to Congress to wheel and deal and get the votes.
What have they done to me lately? Paid off the rich and robbed my Social Security.
Al, Amy, I’m paying attention. I’m not voting for that. You may have the power to screw me, but I’m not going to vote to be screwed.
LOL…you are not a socialist. The estate tax is because regardless of how your parents did, we live in a meritocracy(or at least we are supposed). You are supposed to WORK for what you have not rely on your dead parents. Without the estate tax we set up an aristocracy where the very wealthy can live their entire lives without working or paying virtually any taxes at all, yet benefiting from things like public roads, libraries, police and fire departments, etc..
This tax bill will never inspire any ‘rich people ‘ to put more money or time into their businesses..It never did in the Bush years…Actually the rich in this country are sooooooo fat with money that its like watching a 30 lbs cat walk over to the window and look out..Like the 30 lbs cat these rich people are never going to play the business game again…Like the fat cat , they have lost all business vigor.
I just wrote letters to my Senators telling them I was done voting for them if they go through with this madness.
Ten years of tax cuts that implode our economy are now “necessary” to save it.
Boy, you just have to be stupid to follow that logic.
Actually, the post-cloture time – on the bill/deal itself (not on the “motion to proceed,” as FDL News continues to erroneously report, that was unanimously adopted last Thursday, as I explained yesterday) – won’t last past today, Tuesday, as Dick Durbin informed the Senate just before it adjourned Monday night:
At least Senator Coburn – though he’s not forcing the maximum available delay the Democrats handed to him by filing for cloture (assuming that Coburn, rather than Sanders, is indeed the Senator who objected to Reid’s request to waive the regular order for the consideration of legislation in order to speed this deal through the Senate without public amendment or debate) – is doing more than Bernie Sanders did to stop or slow the bill’s passage, despite the vehement public opposition that Sanders expressed last Friday.
Coburn also notified the Senate yesterday that he would be moving to suspend the rules today to try to get a couple of his amendments called up, debated and given a vote on the floor, despite Reid having filled the amendment tree (blocked all floor amending on this deal) last Thursday, right after the motion to proceed was adopted.
Live on C-Span. The good Sen. Harkin will vote against President Obama’s “compromise” tax deal for the rich.
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
OK. Calling out MIchigan. What of you Sen. Carl Levin? And you Sen. Debbie Stabenow? VOTE NO.
Be accountable to the folks back home. No excuses. Do what is right. No more debt to benefit the rich.
And don’t ever try to talk to us about our “entitlements” because you are darn right we are entitled. We are Americans. Its our security and your accountability. Durbin? Straw. Reid? Blocked all floor amending? Big man.
Live on C-span.
WE heard Al Franken. Joke. Compromising.
We heard Sherrod Brown. Apologizing.
What losers, quibbling, condemning only to join the Obama express.
Darlin’, if you’ve got eight kids, the estate tax is the least of your problems.
They sure must do some really good drugs in Congress.
I called Boxer’s office today for an explanation from the Senator as to her yes vote and was told her policy people hadn’t drafted one up yet. Seems they didn’t anticipate a peep from the constituency. I asked the office to relay to the Sen. that I sat her last election her last election out because of her stand on the public option (I threw my button out and wrote in a candidate), but next time I will be aggressively anti-Boxer.
I think Harkin may well be the very last authentic liberal in the Senate. He votes wrong once in awhile but even then it’s probably about what’s good for Iowa. He knows what the word means. He knows where he came from. He’s a keeper of the flame and when those last flames go out is there going to be anyone left with the knowledge of those earlier Americans who struggled to rise from poverty and build the world’s greatest middle class?
Harkin was a great friend of Senator Wellstone. Unfortunately, he has had zero influence on Senators Franken and Klobuchar.