.
.
.
The increasingly famous “Gang of Six,” a bipartisan group of senators attempting to come up with a universally acceptable proposal to increase the debt limit, unfortunately has instead come up with a “plan” that makes it impossible to know how it would work. The media and lawmakers try and make it sound like the core problems are terribly complex when they are in fact very simple – our government needs to spend no more than it takes in.
The so-called “Gang of Six” plan proposes to eliminate the Alternative Minimum Tax, lower tax brackets overall and to “reform” mortgage deductions, charitable deductions and retirement savings. http://money.cnn.com/2011/07/20/news/economy/gang_of_six_taxes/index.htm Unfortunately, because none of the details of the plan have been released (only a vague “outline”), it is IMPOSSIBLE to tell the tax impact of the plan.
The plan could have draconian impacts on the average taxpayer whose primary tax reducing strategies involve paying for a house (the mortgage deduction) and saving for retirement (the retirement savings deduction). Both of these deductions are going to be reduced and limited under the plan proposed by the Gang of Six meaning that your “tax deductible” 401K won’t be so tax deductible any more. http://www.christianpost.com/news/gang-of-six-proposal-hinges-on-eliminating-amt-52588/
To offset these increased taxes, the plan of the “Gang of Six” eliminates the Alternative Minimum Tax and generally reduces tax brackets. Again the plan lacks the necessary detail for intelligent analysis. The plan doesn’t specify the exact rate for each of the new brackets, but rather offers a range of between 8% and 12% for the lowest bracket; 14% and 22% for the middle bracket; and 23% and 29% for the top bracket. For some tax filers rates could be a little higher … or not. For instance, with a proposed range of 8% to 12% for those in the lowest bracket, it’s not clear whether the final rate chosen would be above or below the 10% rate in effect today.http://money.cnn.com/2011/07/20/news/economy/gang_of_six_taxes/index.htm
Much like Obamacare, Congress is once again asking us to “trust them” with the details. As we saw with Obamacare, the details make the deal. I can’t see how the public can support any proposal with such an uncertain outcome for all taxpayers.
That’s the wrong gang of six in your photo – where’s Coburn, Conrad, Durbin?
This plan seems to be dead on arrival anyway – Oboehner seems to have worked something else out just as bad but more likely to pass.
Let’s both try to do some local stories now, while Larry’s gone!
I thought all politics were local?
Ha, an abuse of the reflexive property of equality. Tip meant that we should focus locally and everything grows from there.
Vern. I’m watching you.
Just attended a Family Action PAC luncheon wiht some of your close friends. Perhaps Newbie will give you their names.
As to Gang of Six photos. I had one in my story crosshairs but realized that it was copyright and had no desire to get you into any hot water.
Nice. The GANG has a deal that is purely verbal BS. When will we truly see a few hundred page document with all its fine print?
We’ve travelled down that road once in this administration and should have learned our lesson for accepting “trust us” statements. Any Republican Senator who agrees to this verbal concept without giving the voters a chance to vet out and question the details should be kicked out of office.
“When will we truly see a few hundred page document with all its fine print?”
You mean, like the CCB bill that didn’t specify spending cuts? Is that the kind of detail you’re demanding?
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-07-18/republicans-pressing-for-a-balanced-budget-fail-to-deliver-details-on-how.html
anon. This is one case where I failed to write down what I am about to add.
On FOX News after 5 p.m. O’Reilly had a short chart showing the daily increase in our national debt under Bill Clinton that was about $500 million dollars. Just below Bill was George W at around $1.4 billion. Although our involvement in two wars surely has/had an impact we agree that it was a huge increase. W was a big government president .
However, the last name on the chart was president Obama. And how much did it report?
Somewhere north of $4 billion per day. Agree or not we cannot sustain that level of spending no matter who sits behind the desk in the oval office.
To demonstarte how partisan politics is alive and well the Senate finally voted on Cut, Cap and Balance along party lines. The final score was 51-47 rejecting the House Bill.
The current US Senate is made up of 51 Democrats, 47 Republicans and 2 Independent’s. As of now I do not have the list of senators who voted for, against or simply did not particpate for whatever reason.
So goes the end of politics as usual as pledged by candidate Obama. ” As a candidate, Barack Obama vowed to change the way Washington worked and to end politics as usual.”
Well if you don’t think that Obama is making a good faith effort, relatively speaking, to “change the way Washington works,” then you’re simply blinded by partisanship. Fer chrissake Larry, he compromises on EVERYTHING, and he doesn’t control the Senate. He can’t impose his will on Congress.
anon. Great leaders are able to get both sides to compromise. Apparently, even after threatening to cutoff or delay our Social Security checks due next month, your man has failed.
We are not grading beyond pass or fail. No B,C or D grades in these high stakes matters.
While I disagree with his actions when president, Ronald Reagan compromised to fix fiscal challenges.
It’s so easy to blame Congress. You can point out that we may control the House but your side CURRENTLY has 51 of 100 votes in the Senate not counting the power of tie-breaking by the VP.
If president Obama “doesn’t control the Senate” than Boehner doesn’t control the House.
I never said Boehner doesn’t control the House. But the GOP does, doesn’t it?
Great leaders are able to get both sides to compromise? Oh really. What would Obama have to do to get the House Republicans to “compromise”? Be specific. No new revenue? THAT’S NOT A COMPROMISE!! Approve CCB? THAT’S NOT A COMPROMISE!!
So what then? What does a House GOP compromise look like? Spell it out for us.
anon. The only priority that president Obama should be devoting all his time on is negotiating behind closed doors with both sides, not holding multiple press conferences blaming everyone else for the stalemate other than himself.
Lock yourselves in a room and don’t come out until you have a plan that all parties can sign up with.
And by backroom proposals that is not to exclude those in Congress who need to be players in any final decision making. We have 435 elected Representatives in Congress along with 100 Senators. I do not accept a deal brokered by only 7 players. As of today, based on the Aug 2nd deadline, there is not adequate time to draft, read, question and vote on a plan of this magnitude. I would hope that we do not have a huge rubber stamp on every elected officials desk to be used simply to beat the clock.
Well, it’s nice that Larry is not the President’s boss, during this time that Obama is obviously putting 90% of his waking hours into making this thing happen. What kind of pressure would he feel if he had to face Boss Larry every time he wanted to come out of the room for a smoke or a walk?
Vern. I am very familiar with multi-tasking. I can walk and chew gum simultaneously just as the president can take a drag while thinking of how he can please everyone in the room. From my recollection of his campaign rhetoric one would expect him to be able to pull this off. I would love to provide some solutions but he has not returned my emails and all calls to the president are screened.
Larry,
The Debt ceiling limit vote has always been a “housekeeping” vote, nothing more, until now.
Under our last President, congress voted to raise the limit 7 times, what’s different?
Oh yeah, we have a Democrat as President and a Republican House, this is pure partisan politics brought to us by the Republican party.
They are willing to crash our economy just to ruin Obama’s chances for re-election.
From The Washington Monthly;
Let’s set the record straight anyway, in case anyone’s forgotten. Congress could, today, pass a clean bill that raises the debt ceiling. It would immediately end the crisis, reassure investors and markets around the world, and clear the way for Democrats and Republicans to go right back to fighting again. The whole process would take a few minutes. It’s no different than having a car headed for a cliff, only to have the driver realize the brake works. All he has to do is step on it.
Since 1939, Congress has raised the debt limit 89 times. That’s not a typo. The issue has come up 89 times, and in 89 instances, Congress passed a clean bill. In fact, in two-thirds of these instances, there was a Republican president, and no one ever used the vote as leverage for a reward.
During the Bush presidency, Republicans raised the debt ceiling, without strings or preconditions, seven times. The current GOP leadership in Washington has voted to raise the debt limit 19 times.Bush’s former budget director said this “ought to be treated as the housekeeping matter it is.”
Anonster. Housekeeping? We debate spending trillions of dollars and call it housekeeping. I don’t care which party first made that remark but it is anything other than responsible fiscal policy making
Larry, you still haven’t told us what the Republicans should compromise on? What are they giving? What’s the compromise? Spell it out for us?
At one point a few weeks ago they were trying out the line that they were compromising just by considering raising the debt ceiling. I think they encountered too much derision with that howler.
VErn. They read the Juice blog and feel support from each of your readers.
anon. As we leave for a vacation I leave it to Vern to respond on my behalf.
anon. I know it will be painful but why not try watching FOX News where our Congressional leaders will lay it all out for you. I’m sworn to secrecy.
Larry,
The money has already been spent.
Remember Bush’s TWO UNFUNDED WARS, HIS HUGE TAX CUTS AND MEDICARE PART D?
This is the credit card bill for that foolishness.
Anonster. What abour Fannie and Freddie and their close friend Barney Frank?
Hate to break it to you but on president Obama’s watch the budget committee recommended a 2012 base Department of Defense budget of $530,024,959,000. You can’t blame this expenditure on president Bush.
The 3-TRILLION dollar unnecessary and illegal invasion of Iraq was 100% Bush. And so were the even-more disastrous tax cuts for the wealthy that are the biggest driver of our deficit. I’ll grant you Clinton and Bush were equally guilty of the mad de-regulation that led to our financial crisis. Mostly this all falls onto Bush and Cheney, I’d say.
There is a “tax increase” I would be for.
Bring back the excise tax on excessive pension and accumulations.
Back in the eighties when the code was redone, there was a excise tax on the rich mans pensions, on the part over 150,000 per year and also a on values above 1 million or 5 million or so.
When congress saw it was going to hit them and their government conies it got tossed.
Thank you Cook.
That is one idea we have not heard from any of the talking heads on the tube