Home Mobile Archives Reader Blogs Register Login

Friday, October 13, 2006

Democrats Still Planning On Raising Your Taxes

Ugh...

President Bush and Republican Senate and House candidates are talking more about taxes in speeches, debates and TV spots after polls showed it is the Republican Party’s best issue in a tough midterm election season.

“One of the most important issues on the ballot this November is taxes,” Mr. Bush said this week in stumping in Georgia for former Rep. Mac Collins, seeking to unseat Rep. Jim Marshall, the incumbent Democrat. “There is a fundamental difference between the Republican and Democratic parties on this important issue.”

After being off the campaign radar for months, the tax issue is now turning up in races from Virginia to Minnesota, with a little recent help from Democrats.

Republicans grinned from ear to ear last month when the ranking Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee, New York Rep. Charles B. Rangel, just about guaranteed tax increases if his party takes over the House after Nov. 7. Asked whether Democrats would consider raising taxes across the whole spectrum of income, Mr. Rangel said, “No question about it.”

Some Republicans say Mr. Rangel and his party will soon regret those words.

“Republican tax cuts have removed lots of low-income Americans from the tax rolls, so is Charlie Rangel telling those low-income folks if he and the Democrats take over, they’ll put those folks back on the tax rolls?” said American Conservative Union Chairman David A. Keene. “So is he saying his supposed constituency will get to pay taxes again?”

I think a lot of people are underestimating just how powerful a message this tax stuff is.

Think about it.  The case Democrats are making in this election is premised on corruption (DeLay, Ney, Foley, etc.) and the war in Iraq/national security, but while many Americans care deeply about those issues neither impacts them as profoundly in their day-to-day lives as tax policy does.

I think most Americans are, for better or worse, more worried about their paychecks and their yearly bottom line then they are about the NSA monitoring phone calls or what is going on in the middle east.  The Democrats have come right out and said that they’re going to raise taxes if they get into office.  I think Republicans need to counter that by pointing out that they’ve been cutting taxes, which in turn has sparked incessant growth in our economy and shrinking deficits in our national budget.  But most importantly of all, Republicans need to tell Americans that if Democrats get into office all of our take-home paychecks are going to be significantly smaller.

If that message can be effectively delivered to voters the Democrats aren’t going to see much gain come November.

Comments

Avatar for aNONOMILSY

Wouldn’t they need Bush’s help to do that?

aNONOMILSY on October 13, 2006 at 08:48 am
Rob
Rob
19961 comments
Send a private message

Yeah, but if Dems get a majority in Congress it is likely going to last longer than two years.


When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

robport.gif border=0

Rob on October 13, 2006 at 08:50 am
Avatar for Lonely Federalist

IIRC, the tax cuts came with a sunset in (2010?) They will automatically expire, unless extended (or made permanent) by both a Congress and a President.  A (D) Congress would just vote not to extend them or make them permanent, and they would thus expire and default back to the previous tax levels.

I’m surprised Bush isn’t working the “make the tax cuts permanent” in this political season.

Lonely Federalist on October 13, 2006 at 09:59 am
Avatar for konagod

The sad fact is, sooner or later, someone is going to have to raise taxes, and if the Republicans hold power long enough, it will have to be them.  Does anyone think the war on terror is paying for itself?

konagod on October 13, 2006 at 12:27 pm

No, konamoron. Cutting the base tax rate has increased(and will continue to) tax revenue. Expanding economy means expanded tax revenue. More people working means everyone pays less, while increasing the amount collected. Increasing base tax rates decreases tax revenues. Raising taxes shrinks the economy. Fewer people working, and those working paying higher taxes, decrease tax revenues. Now toddle on back to Daily Kos or DU and be happyhappy joyjoy. And don’t forget to vote Democrat, 9 out of 10 KKK members do.


Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

2Hotel9 on October 13, 2006 at 12:42 pm
Avatar for konagod

2Hotel9: your statement sounds nice but isn’t quite reflecting our current reality.  But dream on, and check with me again in about 4 or 5 years.  Be sure to make note today of our high-paying jobs and compare it to what we’re likely to see a few years down the road.

You want a preview?  Do some research on industry and manufacturing jobs in Michigan.

konagod on October 13, 2006 at 12:54 pm
Avatar for konagod

And for the record, I rarely ever vote for a Democrat.

“konamoron”

konagod on October 13, 2006 at 12:55 pm
Avatar for electnixon

manufacturing jobs in Michigan.


Michigan?  Home of the UAW and organized labor?  Your right, compare Michigan to more business friendly areas of the country and you’ve got a study in Democrat vs. Republican labor policies.  Nice example.
electnixon on October 13, 2006 at 01:09 pm
Avatar for electnixon

Your right

correction: you’re

electnixon on October 13, 2006 at 01:10 pm

Thanks, konamoron! You could not pick a better example of your party, the Democrat Party, fucking up a perfectly good manufacturing and agriculture economy than Michigan. You once again prove the old adage"like shooting fish nailed to a planck.” Thank you very much.


Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

2Hotel9 on October 13, 2006 at 02:37 pm

konagod, You want a preview?  Do some research on industry and manufacturing jobs in Michigan.

Where they suffer high taxes and low state revenue.

Piss poor example in support of your case for higher taxes konagod. On the converse, it is an excellent example for those who point out the folly of raising taxes.

But why don’t you go a step further? Check out Detroit. Sky high taxes, a “living wage”, high welfare use = virtual wasteland. The abandoned skyscrapers downtown are pretty in a way though. Maybe you can go on that.

likwidshoe on October 13, 2006 at 05:32 pm

The beauty of federalism is that States can experiment on what works better. 

If the high tax high spending worked you wouldn’t have to adopt these policies nationally.

It’s the low tax states in the south that are growing at the expense of the Michigans and New Yorks.


[W]hat you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.


The Whistler's signature
The Whistler on October 13, 2006 at 05:41 pm

TW:

The beauty of federalism is that States can experiment on what works better.

Moreover, they get to pick the solution that works the best for their circumstance.  With the central government imposing the solution, the solution that gets picked is the one that works the best in heavily populated regions.

This country is pretty unique in how it divides control between the federal, state and local region—undoubtedly one of the reasons for its relative success!

Carrick on October 13, 2006 at 07:14 pm
Rob
Rob
19961 comments
Send a private message

With the central government imposing the solution, the solution that gets picked is the one that works the best in heavily populated regions.

This is the argument I’d make against the federal minimum wage.  If the Democrats get in power and hike the minimum wage some $2.00/hour that’s going to be major here in North Dakota where $2.00 is a lot more significant than, say, California or New York.


When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

robport.gif border=0

Rob on October 13, 2006 at 07:54 pm

This is the argument I’d make against the federal minimum wage.  If the Democrats get in power and hike the minimum wage some $2.00/hour that’s going to be major here in North Dakota where $2.00 is a lot more significant than, say, California or New York.

That’s a great point, Rob!

Carrick on October 13, 2006 at 08:01 pm
Rob
Rob
19961 comments
Send a private message

Thanks.

It’s a point you can make in a lot of instances.  There’s a reason why the founders kept the Constitution fairly concise.  They were an opinionated group of men, and undoubtedly they had feelings about social issues like marriage, etc., but in their wisdom they left those social issues to the states to figure out.  Because allowing the states to solve those problems in a variety of ways is the easiest way to satisfy the greatest number of Americans.

That’s why it’s so absurd that people are trying to get definitive solutions to social issues like gay marriage and abortion from the federal government.  In fact, I think the abortion issue remains so contentious to this day because the courts didn’t let federalism take its course.

The 10th amendment is one of the most important amendments in the constitution, but in modern times it is also one of the most overlooked.


When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

robport.gif border=0

Rob on October 13, 2006 at 08:14 pm

Interesting editorial from a conservative Kansas newspaper.

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?BRD=1459&dept_id=155743&newsid=17284084&PAG=461&rfi=9

I believe the Republican legislature in Michigan raised the minimum wage there because the Rs didn’t want to see it get on the ballot.

Puzzlefeet on October 14, 2006 at 04:40 am

Carrick:

With the central government imposing the solution, the solution that gets picked is the one that works the best in heavily populated regions.

I think rather what happens is what get’s picked is what’s politically expedient, not what’s best.  Since it’s imposed on the country as a whole you can’t point to say North Carolina as a way we should do it. 

Rob:

There’s a reason why the founders kept the Constitution fairly concise.  They were an opinionated group of men, and undoubtedly they had feelings about social issues like marriage, etc.,

Are you saying that they were the bloggers of their time.  Hmm, sheds new light on the federalist papers.


[W]hat you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.


The Whistler's signature
The Whistler on October 14, 2006 at 05:11 am
Avatar for aNONOMISLY

well, brace for higher taxes, ‘cuz one very fat lady just sang

aNONOMISLY on October 14, 2006 at 11:34 am

aNON, do you remember 2000, or 2004? All the same people said all the same things, almost verbatim. Do a bit of archive trawling and see for yourself. And don’t stop at those years, look at the Op-Eds and polling for every mid-term since 1994. The wheels on their bus have been going round and round in the same ruts for 11 years.


Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

2Hotel9 on October 14, 2006 at 01:51 pm
Avatar for Mickey

I’ve never seen a tax that a democrat didn’t like.

Mickey on October 14, 2006 at 03:33 pm
Page 1 of 1        

Post a Comment


Before commenting, please recite:

Grant me the serenity to ignore the trolls,
the courage to debate with honest opponents,
and the wisdom to know the difference.

Name   
Email   
URL   
Human?
  
 

Upload Image    

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Note: Notifications will only be sent to confirmed email addresses.

    

By submitting your comment you agree to our terms of service.