Even for Middle Class, Tax Cuts Dig Deficit Deeper
Those attacks went nowhere in recent polls, with barely more than a third of Americans supporting tax cuts for the super rich. CBS
and Newsweek respectively found 56 and 52 percent of Americans
supporting eliminating tax cuts for households making above $250,000.
Gallup found that 44 percent supported expiration of the cuts for the
top 3 percent and 15 percent more wanted the tax cuts to expire across
the board.
That left a
defensive Boehner telling CBS's "Face the Nation'' on Sunday, "If the
only option I have is to vote for some of those tax reductions, I'll
vote for them . . . But I think that's bad policy . . . we've got to cut
spending.''
But lest you
think Obama is "winning'' and Boehner is "losing,'' the context of all
this must not be forgotten. America will lose no matter what. Obama is
still upholding one of the most regressive Republican fiscal policies in
modern times. Boehner complained Sunday that the Democrats "haven't
reached out to us for the last 20 months.'' But Obama more than reached
out as a candidate. Looking for that sweet center of middle-class
appeal, he promised, "If you make $250,000 or less, we will not raise
your taxes. We will cut your taxes.''
The cost of the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts has been enormous and will continue to corrode the American economy.
In
2008, in the middle of the presidential campaign, the Center on Budget
and Policy Priorities said that the Bush tax cuts "have been the single
largest contributor to the emergence of substantial budget deficits in
recent years.'' The center said the tax cuts added about $3 trillion to
deficits between 2001 and 2007.
Making
them all permanent, as the likes of Boehner would prefer, would cost
the Treasury $4.4 trillion over the decade, including interest on the
federal debt, the center said. The Tax Policy Center of the Brookings
Institution and the Urban Institute said that while Obama's pledge to
cut taxes was less than presidential rival John McCain's, Obama's plans
would still boost the federal deficit by $3.6 trillion by 2018 (McCain's
would have increased the debt by $5.1 trillion).
While
Obama is saying that repealing the tax cuts for the most wealthy
Americans will add $700 billion back to the Treasury, that only begins
to whittle away at the $4 trillion value of the cuts. Moreover, there is
no evidence that tax cuts did anything to boost either the economy or
personal wealth. According to the Center on Budget and Policy
Priorities, median income in 2006 was $1,300 below its level before the
2001 cuts.
Yet, taxes are
such a third rail in American politics that Obama felt he had no choice
but to act Republican even as he was wooing liberals with his stances
on Iraq and the environment. There has never been an honest discussion
about what the tax cuts, even for the middle class, will cost us in the
long run.
Last week, the new
World Economic Forum's global competitiveness index found the United
States to be slipping in global competitiveness, with a major reason
being our huge deficits. Ending the tax cuts for the wealthy now is only
a first step. Ending the notion that tax cuts are good at all is the
next.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Those attacks went nowhere in recent polls, with barely more than a third of Americans supporting tax cuts for the super rich. CBS
and Newsweek respectively found 56 and 52 percent of Americans
supporting eliminating tax cuts for households making above $250,000.
Gallup found that 44 percent supported expiration of the cuts for the
top 3 percent and 15 percent more wanted the tax cuts to expire across
the board.
That left a
defensive Boehner telling CBS's "Face the Nation'' on Sunday, "If the
only option I have is to vote for some of those tax reductions, I'll
vote for them . . . But I think that's bad policy . . . we've got to cut
spending.''
But lest you
think Obama is "winning'' and Boehner is "losing,'' the context of all
this must not be forgotten. America will lose no matter what. Obama is
still upholding one of the most regressive Republican fiscal policies in
modern times. Boehner complained Sunday that the Democrats "haven't
reached out to us for the last 20 months.'' But Obama more than reached
out as a candidate. Looking for that sweet center of middle-class
appeal, he promised, "If you make $250,000 or less, we will not raise
your taxes. We will cut your taxes.''
The cost of the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts has been enormous and will continue to corrode the American economy.
In
2008, in the middle of the presidential campaign, the Center on Budget
and Policy Priorities said that the Bush tax cuts "have been the single
largest contributor to the emergence of substantial budget deficits in
recent years.'' The center said the tax cuts added about $3 trillion to
deficits between 2001 and 2007.
Making
them all permanent, as the likes of Boehner would prefer, would cost
the Treasury $4.4 trillion over the decade, including interest on the
federal debt, the center said. The Tax Policy Center of the Brookings
Institution and the Urban Institute said that while Obama's pledge to
cut taxes was less than presidential rival John McCain's, Obama's plans
would still boost the federal deficit by $3.6 trillion by 2018 (McCain's
would have increased the debt by $5.1 trillion).
While
Obama is saying that repealing the tax cuts for the most wealthy
Americans will add $700 billion back to the Treasury, that only begins
to whittle away at the $4 trillion value of the cuts. Moreover, there is
no evidence that tax cuts did anything to boost either the economy or
personal wealth. According to the Center on Budget and Policy
Priorities, median income in 2006 was $1,300 below its level before the
2001 cuts.
Yet, taxes are
such a third rail in American politics that Obama felt he had no choice
but to act Republican even as he was wooing liberals with his stances
on Iraq and the environment. There has never been an honest discussion
about what the tax cuts, even for the middle class, will cost us in the
long run.
Last week, the new
World Economic Forum's global competitiveness index found the United
States to be slipping in global competitiveness, with a major reason
being our huge deficits. Ending the tax cuts for the wealthy now is only
a first step. Ending the notion that tax cuts are good at all is the
next.
Those attacks went nowhere in recent polls, with barely more than a third of Americans supporting tax cuts for the super rich. CBS
and Newsweek respectively found 56 and 52 percent of Americans
supporting eliminating tax cuts for households making above $250,000.
Gallup found that 44 percent supported expiration of the cuts for the
top 3 percent and 15 percent more wanted the tax cuts to expire across
the board.
That left a
defensive Boehner telling CBS's "Face the Nation'' on Sunday, "If the
only option I have is to vote for some of those tax reductions, I'll
vote for them . . . But I think that's bad policy . . . we've got to cut
spending.''
But lest you
think Obama is "winning'' and Boehner is "losing,'' the context of all
this must not be forgotten. America will lose no matter what. Obama is
still upholding one of the most regressive Republican fiscal policies in
modern times. Boehner complained Sunday that the Democrats "haven't
reached out to us for the last 20 months.'' But Obama more than reached
out as a candidate. Looking for that sweet center of middle-class
appeal, he promised, "If you make $250,000 or less, we will not raise
your taxes. We will cut your taxes.''
The cost of the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts has been enormous and will continue to corrode the American economy.
In
2008, in the middle of the presidential campaign, the Center on Budget
and Policy Priorities said that the Bush tax cuts "have been the single
largest contributor to the emergence of substantial budget deficits in
recent years.'' The center said the tax cuts added about $3 trillion to
deficits between 2001 and 2007.
Making
them all permanent, as the likes of Boehner would prefer, would cost
the Treasury $4.4 trillion over the decade, including interest on the
federal debt, the center said. The Tax Policy Center of the Brookings
Institution and the Urban Institute said that while Obama's pledge to
cut taxes was less than presidential rival John McCain's, Obama's plans
would still boost the federal deficit by $3.6 trillion by 2018 (McCain's
would have increased the debt by $5.1 trillion).
While
Obama is saying that repealing the tax cuts for the most wealthy
Americans will add $700 billion back to the Treasury, that only begins
to whittle away at the $4 trillion value of the cuts. Moreover, there is
no evidence that tax cuts did anything to boost either the economy or
personal wealth. According to the Center on Budget and Policy
Priorities, median income in 2006 was $1,300 below its level before the
2001 cuts.
Yet, taxes are
such a third rail in American politics that Obama felt he had no choice
but to act Republican even as he was wooing liberals with his stances
on Iraq and the environment. There has never been an honest discussion
about what the tax cuts, even for the middle class, will cost us in the
long run.
Last week, the new
World Economic Forum's global competitiveness index found the United
States to be slipping in global competitiveness, with a major reason
being our huge deficits. Ending the tax cuts for the wealthy now is only
a first step. Ending the notion that tax cuts are good at all is the
next.