Can We Admit Now That The Bush Tax Cuts Weren’t Ever Just For The Rich?

bush_cuts.gi

Going back a few years, when Democrats talked about the Bush tax cuts, they described them as though it were tax policy that only benefited the richest Americans. The “tax cuts for the rich” was their refrain, over and over again.

But things have changed. In the context of the current “fiscal cliff” combat, suddenly Democrats are being forced to admit that the Bush tax cuts weren’t just for the rich. The Bush tax cuts actually reduced tax burdens quite a bit for people who are not rich at all.

Case in point, this CBS report about President Obama’s new social media campaign in support of his proposed tax increases:

Mr. Obama is promoting the hashtag #My2K to continue to the conversation about a potential tax increase on the middle class if Bush-era tax cuts are allowed to expire. The keyword #My2K was chosen specifically because, according to the White House, a middle class family of four could see a tax increase of about $2,220.

A tax reduction, thanks to the Bush tax cuts, of $2,200 per middle class household sure sounds like substantial middle class tax relief to me.

Time to admit that, for all those years Democrat demagogues were talking about “tax cuts for the rich” they weren’t being 100% accurate. They were being, you know, dishonest.

avatar

Rob Port is the editor of SayAnythingBlog.com. In 2011 he was a finalist for the Watch Dog of the Year from the Sam Adams Alliance and winner of the Americans For Prosperity Award for Online Excellence. In 2013 the Washington Post named SAB one of the nation's top state-based political blogs, and named Rob one of the state's best political reporters. He writes a weekly column for several North Dakota newspapers, and also serves as a policy fellow for the North Dakota Policy Council.

Related posts

Top