Political Ruminations

Paul Ryan is a Very Serious Deficit Hawk....or Not

The image is from Chris Hayes, and I think this pretty much puts the lie to the notion that Paul Ryan is a Very Serious Deficit Hawk.

As can be seen from his voting record, Paul Ryan was unconcerned about the deficit when voting for Bush era policies, and in fact, Ryan continued to vote for the extension of the Bush era tax cuts for the wealthy even after Obama took office.

Full Text Transcript and Video-President Obama Economic Speech in Cleveland Ohio on June 14, 2012

Watch the full length video of  President Obama’s economic speech in Cleveland Ohio on June 14, 2012:

Full Text Transcript President Barack Obama Economic Speech at Cuyahoga Community College in Cleveland, Ohio on June 14, 2012

THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you!  (Applause.)  Thank you, everybody.  Good afternoon, everybody.  (Applause.)  It is great to be back in Cleveland.  (Applause.)  It is great to be back here at Cuyahoga Community College.  (Applause.)

I want to, first of all, thank Angela for her introduction and sharing her story.  I know her daughter is very proud of her -- I know her daughter is here today.  So give her a big round of applause.  (Applause.)  I want to thank your president, Dr. Jerry-Sue Thornton.  (Applause.)  And I want to thank some members of Congress who made the trip today -- Representative Marcia Fudge, Representative Betty Sutton, and Representative Marcy Kaptur.  (Applause.)

Morning Quote: Jay Carney

Obama Press Secretary Jay Carney (press gaggle June 6) on raising tax rates on upper-income Americans:

“ President Clinton, in 1993 -- and I'm old enough to say this from experience because I covered him -- passed a budget plan that included raising rates on upper-income Americans. At the time, Republicans in the House and the Senate, including the very leaders that we have today, decried that budget plan as one that would cause a recession, economic decline, increase deficits, all the worst possible outcomes. What happened? The longest peacetime expansion in American history, 22 million jobs, and a situation where the middle class saw its incomes rise, not just for the wealthiest Americans.

Let's fast-forward to the eight years prior to President Obama taking office. Those same Republican leaders supported policies that led to a situation where the record surpluses that President Clinton bequeathed on his successor were transformed into record deficits when President Obama took office. The prescription that the Republicans put forward has been tried and it was a woeful failure. ”

Carney also pointed out that the president does not support the extension of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest 2 percent, saying that President Obama “will not extend ... the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthiest 2 percent.” When a reporter continued to press him on the issue of a short-term extension, Carney responded, “He will not -- could I be more clear? -- he will not support extension of the upper-income Bush tax cuts.”

Chart of the Day

President Obama’s proposed budget will do some serious deficit a$$-kicking, according to the chart prepared by the CBO, as seen below.

Kevin Drum explains:

The light blue line is their "baseline projection" which assumes that all current laws stay in effect forever and the Bush tax cuts all expire at the end of the year. It shows the federal deficit nearly disappearing by 2017. The dashed line is their "alternative scenario," which assumes extensions of the Bush tax cuts and a few other things as well. It shows the federal deficit improving a bit, but then deteriorating to 6% of GDP by 2022.

The dark blue line is the Obama budget, and it's somewhere in between. But here's an important point that you can't see just from looking at the chart: Obama's budget reaches primary balance in 2018. This means that federal spending is in balance, and the only source of the deficit going forward is interest payments on the national debt. At that point, the debt-to-GDP ratio is stable. That's a big milestone.

Via Bob Cesca

Morning Quote: Andrew Sullivan on President Obama’s Job Performance

“On the economy, the facts are these. When Obama took office, the United States was losing around 750,000 jobs a month. The last quarter of 2008 saw an annualized drop in growth approaching 9 percent. This was the most serious downturn since the 1930s, there was a real chance of a systemic collapse of the entire global financial system, and unemployment and debt—lagging indicators—were about to soar even further. No fair person can blame Obama for the wreckage of the next 12 months, as the financial crisis cut a swath through employment. Economies take time to shift course.

But Obama did several things at once: he continued the bank bailout begun by George W. Bush, he initiated a bailout of the auto industry, and he worked to pass a huge stimulus package of $787 billion.

 

All these decisions deserve scrutiny. And in retrospect, they were far more successful than anyone has yet fully given Obama the credit for. The job collapse bottomed out at the beginning of 2010, as the stimulus took effect. Since then, the U.S. has added 2.4 million jobs. That’s not enough, but it’s far better than what Romney would have you believe, and more than the net jobs created under the entire Bush administration. In 2011 alone, 1.9 million private-sector jobs were created, while a net 280,000 government jobs were lost. Overall government employment has declined 2.6 percent over the past 3 years. (That compares with a drop of 2.2 percent during the early years of the Reagan administration.) To listen to current Republican rhetoric about Obama’s big-government socialist ways, you would imagine that the reverse was true. It isn’t.

 

The right claims the stimulus failed because it didn’t bring unemployment down to 8 percent in its first year, as predicted by Obama’s transition economic team. Instead, it peaked at 10.2 percent. But the 8 percent prediction was made before Obama took office and was wrong solely because it relied on statistics that guessed the economy was only shrinking by around 4 percent, not 9. Remove that statistical miscalculation (made by government and private-sector economists alike) and the stimulus did exactly what it was supposed to do. It put a bottom under the free fall. It is not an exaggeration to say it prevented a spiral downward that could have led to the Second Great Depression.

You’d think, listening to the Republican debates, that Obama has raised taxes. Again, this is not true. Not only did he agree not to sunset the Bush tax cuts for his entire first term, he has aggressively lowered taxes on most Americans. A third of the stimulus was tax cuts, affecting 95 percent of taxpayers; he has cut the payroll tax, and recently had to fight to keep it cut against Republican opposition. His spending record is also far better than his predecessor’s. Under Bush, new policies on taxes and spending cost the taxpayer a total of $5.07 trillion. Under Obama’s budgets both past and projected, he will have added $1.4 trillion in two terms. Under Bush and the GOP, nondefense discretionary spending grew by twice as much as under Obama. Again: imagine Bush had been a Democrat and Obama a Republican. You could easily make the case that Obama has been far more fiscally conservative than his predecessor—except, of course, that Obama has had to govern under the worst recession since the 1930s, and Bush, after the 2001 downturn, governed in a period of moderate growth. It takes work to increase the debt in times of growth, as Bush did. It takes much more work to constrain the debt in the deep recession Bush bequeathed Obama.”

- Conservative-Independent, Andrew Sullivan, excerpted from a Newsweek cover story. The quoted portion of the article focuses on President Obama’s job performance in regards to the economy.

Full Text Transcript & Video: President Obama Speech in Osawatomie, Kansas

Watch the President give what is arguably the best speech of his presidency:

Text Transcript: Remarks by the President on the Economy in Osawatomie, Kansas

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you, everybody. Please, please have a seat. Thank you so much. Thank you. Good afternoon, everybody.

AUDIENCE: Good afternoon.

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I want to start by thanking a few folks who’ve joined us today. We’ve got the mayor of Osawatomie, Phil Dudley is here. (Applause.) We have your superintendent Gary French in the house. (Applause.) And we have the principal of Osawatomie High, Doug Chisam. (Applause.) And I have brought your former governor, who is doing now an outstanding job as Secretary of Health and Human Services -- Kathleen Sebelius is in the house. (Applause.) We love Kathleen.

Well, it is great to be back in the state of Tex -- (laughter) -- state of Kansas. I was giving Bill Self a hard time, he was here a while back. As many of you know, I have roots here. (Applause.) I’m sure you’re all familiar with the Obamas of Osawatomie. (Laughter.) Actually, I like to say that I got my name from my father, but I got my accent -- and my values -- from my mother. (Applause.) She was born in Wichita. (Applause.) Her mother grew up in Augusta. Her father was from El Dorado. So my Kansas roots run deep.

Morning Quote: John Kerry

“We Democrats put a $4 trillion dollar plan on the table. We had $1.3 trillion of cuts, and we had $1.3 trillion in revenue. Now, some of that revenue, we’re not asking that to happen tomorrow or the next day, it could happen in a year. This is a ten-year plan and longer. So we have the ability here to do something that’s fair for all Americans. But unfortunately, this thing about the Bush tax cuts and the pledge to Grover Norquist keeps coming up. Grover Norquist has been the 13th member of this committee without being there. I can’t tell you how many times we hear about ‘the pledge, the pledge.’”

- Sen. John Kerry (D-MA), Super Committee member, on Grover Norquist’s influence over the Republican party.

Quote of the Day

Jonathan Cohn on the #debt ceiling talks:

“Does anything matter to Republicans more than protecting tax cuts for the very wealthy? Developments of the last 18 hours suggest very strongly that the answer is no.”

Via Krugman

Adding......I should have checked the date. Cohn made this remark on July 10, but I suppose it still holds true today.

From the Archives: Who Ran Up the National Debt?

I wrote this piece in 2010, and it was originally posted on another blog. I decided to repost it here in honor of the anniversary of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy.

---

The persistent cacophony from the Republican debt/deficit hawks, who only surface during Democratic administrations, is enough to keep me rolling my eyes in to perpetuity.The most pitiful and annoying aspect of this particular trait in Republicans, is their seeming forgetfulness.

Indeed, I have become consumed with a burning desire to remind them of exactly who is responsible for driving up U.S. debt. And, as you undoubtedly deduced from my graphic, It is the evil triumvirate of three Republican presidents, at least 2 of which are destined to be remembered in history as "The Two Worst Presidents Ever".

Morning Quote: Raise taxes on the corporations!

The town hall backlash over the Ryan budget, which would end Medicare as we know it, and extend tax cuts for the wealthy while decimating other programs, continues.

Rep. Dan Webster (R-FL) threatened to have a constituent thrown out of his town hall because the constituent (Taylor) told him that the state has to “raise taxes on the corporations”.

TAYLOR: What I want to know is, we’ve been able to balance our budget before by raising taxes and lowering spending and we know this because Eisenhower did it, Ford did it, Reagan did it, Bush the first did it, they were all Republicans. I want to know who’s going to pay, who’s going to pay for this? Because I don’t think we should take away Social Security [sic] just because we’re under 55 and public education, we need public education. [Inaudible] That’s wrong.

WEBSTER: The problem is this. Who’s going to pay? Your children and your grandchildren. That’s who’s going to pay. If we continue on this, yes, can we fund a lot of things going up this line? Sure can. But just know, most of it’s borrowed money.

TAYLOR: You need to raise taxes on the corporations! [Inaudible] And stop the wars! Just stop all the warring.

WEBSTER: Just a minute. I can hear, everybody in here can hear. So you’re making a choice of whether you want to stay or not.

TAYLOR: Answer the question!

[Audience cheers] [Two men walk out in protest]

Watch:

Constituents Verbally Attack Republican Legislators at Town Halls Over Ryan Budget & Tax Cuts for the Wealthy

Really, I feel like jumping up and down for joy because there has been so little indication over the past 2 years that the average voter even pays an iota of attention to what’s happening in our politics. 

But last night, after I watched the clips from the town hall meetings, I felt something distinctly strange…..I think it might be….hope - even if it is an infinitesimal amount. Why? Because it seems that people are finally starting to get it.

Watch:

Still, knowing how Republicans operate, we can probably rest assured that they will find a way to spin this to their advantage.

Let’s not let them. 

GOP Priorities Exposed

Once again, the GOP tells the American people that we don’t matter.

But tax cuts for milionaires, big oil subsidies (going to the same industry that loves to bilk us for every dime), and tax breaks for offshoring companies…….these things matter. To the GOP.

All this, even as almost every single House Republican voted to end Medicare as we know it, making 165 billion in cuts under the Ryan plan. 

Pitchforks and torches anyone?

Chart via DCCC

More “I’m a fiscal Conservative” Hypocrisy From Alabama Sen. Richard Shelby

From 1987 through the current year, Sen. Shelby has introduced a Constitutional amendment which would require Congress to adhere to a balanced budget

On February 1, 2011, I introduced a Constitutional amendment requiring Congress to balance our nation’s budget.  I have introduced this legislation in every Congress since 1987 and will continue to fight for its enactment.  A balanced budget amendment to the Constitution is the only certain mechanism that will break the cycle of deficit spending and finally put our nation on a path to paying off our national debt.

Recently, Sen. Shelby published a statement in which he states that “Washington must put its fiscal house in order.”

Chart of the Year (Seriously)

'Chart of the Year'...so far, but it is the most enlightening chart I've seen in a while, contrasting the cost of tax breaks for the wealthy and the cost of the draconian spending cuts the 112th Congress is trying to push through. 

From the Center for American Progress:

The chart below compares the 10 safety-net programs slated for deep cuts with the cost of the tax breaks that should also be considered for reduction or elimination to bring the budget into balance. The column on the left is a list of safety-net programs that have already been targets of the House leadership’s budget ax. The column on the right is the cost to specified tax breaks (see bottom of page for sources).

Could the Republican agenda be any clearer?

Via Bob Cesca

Chart of the Day: Income Inequality in the US of A

This just says it all, doesn’t it?! 90% of the income in the U.S. goes to…wait for it….0.01% percent of the people. 90% percent. And these are the people who benefitted from the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. If you wonder who the plutocrats are, the plutocrats who own our world, have a look.
Mother Jones:

A huge share of the nation's economic growth over the past 30 years has gone to the top one-hundredth of one percent, who now make an average of $27 million per household. The average income for the bottom 90 percent of us? $31,244.

Fake Deficit Hawks

Nothing new, but I've been angry at the bullshit right wing budget process over the past few days, and just have to point out that If Republicans really cared about the deficit, they'd be amenable to raising tax rates on the wealthy.

The fact that they adamantly refuse to raise rates on the wealthy is certainly a strong indication that they don't really give a damn about the deficit, OR U.S. debt.

Hell, if they cared, they would demand higher rates. Bastards.

Do Americans Really Want the Bush Era Tax Cuts Extended?

In a word, yes.

While much of the Left online, in terms of both bloggers, and commenters, are very ambivalent about the Obama-GOP tax cut deal, and in fact, many of these same people wanted to let the tax cuts expire completely if they could not be extended for the middle class only, the rest of America wants the tax cut deal enacted. Gallup Polling Matters:

The most important thing to recognize: Americans want some type of action taken before the end of the year to avoid all Bush era tax cuts expiring. Americans do not want the tax cuts to go away as a result of the inability of the warring factions in Washington to agree on what to do about them.

• 66% of Americans support the extension of the tax cuts
• 66% of Americans support the extension of unemployment benefits
• 78% of moderate Republicans support the extension of the tax cuts
• 62% of moderate Republicans support the extension of unemployment benefits
• 64% of moderate Democrats support the extension of the tax cuts
• 85% of moderate Democrats support the extension of unemployment benefits

So could we now please see an end to the endless bitching and the “why didn’t Obama let them all expire” mantra? We online are not the entirety of the American public.

A Comparison of Priorities in the Obama Tax Deal

A chart from the Wonk Room illustrates the most basic difference between the two parties and the gains made in this plan.

The chart aptly illustrates how many people benefitted [millions] from Democratic priorities vs Republican priorities, as well as noting the total cost in billions.

On the Democratic side, we get an extension of the tax cuts for the middle class, a 13-month extension of unemployment benefits, a 1-year payroll tax cut of 2.5% [employee side only], and extended tax credits from the 2009 Recovery Act. These components of the deal will benefit 156 million people, and cost $214 billion in deficit spending.

On the Republican side, they get an extension of the tax cuts for the rich, and a 1-year cut in the estate tax, and those components, the Republicans priorities, benefit 4.8 million people at a cost of $133 billion in deficit spending.

Stay tuned.

RELATED:

- FULL VIDEO & TRANSCRIPT: Obama Press Conference on Tax Cuts - Dec. 7, 2010
- White House: We Wanted a Fight
- TRANSCRIPT: Details on Obama Tax Cut Plan

FULL VIDEO & TRANSCRIPT: Obama Press Conference on Tax Cuts - Dec. 7, 2010

This was an amazing press conference, with an engaged, fiesty, caring president.Transcript below the video.

 

Press Conference by the President

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

2:25 P.M. EST

      THE PRESIDENT:  Good afternoon, everybody.  Before I answer a few questions, I just wanted to say a few words about the agreement we’ve reached on tax cuts.

      My number one priority is to do what’s right for the American people, for jobs, and for economic growth.  I’m focused on making sure that tens of millions of hardworking Americans are not seeing their paychecks shrink on January 1st just because the folks here in Washington are busy trying to score political points.

VIDEO: Obama …It’s tempting not to negotiate.

He was referring to the Republican hostage takers. The hostages, were of course, the millions of people affected by the unemployment benefits extension, along with the middle class tax increase which would occur in January were this deal not made.

 

RELATED:

- TRANSCRIPT: President Obama’s Statement to the Press on Tax Cuts and Unemployment Benefits
- White House: We Wanted a Fight
- TRANSCRIPT: Details on Obama Tax Cut Plan
- VIDEO: Obama to Democrats .. This is a long game. Not a short game.
- VIDEO: Obama …It’s tempting not to negotiate.

VIDEO: Obama to Democrats .. This is a long game. Not a short game.

 

RELATED:

- TRANSCRIPT: President Obama’s Statement to the Press on Tax Cuts and Unemployment Benefits
- White House: We Wanted a Fight
- TRANSCRIPT: Details on Obama Tax Cut Plan
- VIDEO: Obama to Democrats .. This is a long game. Not a short game.
- VIDEO: Obama …It’s tempting not to negotiate.

TRANSCRIPT: Details on Obama Tax Cut Plan

TRANSCRIPT

Fact Sheet on the Framework Agreement on Middle Class Tax Cuts and Unemployment Insurance

The framework agreement announced by the President secures vital tax relief and investments in our workers that will create jobs and accelerate economic growth. The plan has three key accomplishments:

• Working families will not lose their tax cut. A typical working family faced a tax increase of over $3,000 on January 1st. That’s avoided under this framework agreement, and working families won’t see their tax cuts go away next year.
• Focused on high impact job creation measures. The framework agreement includes some of the best measures for jumpstarting growth and job creation, including a full year of emergency unemployment insurance benefits, an about $120 billion payroll tax cut for working families and a continuation of tax credits for working families. This is on top of growth generated by extension of the middle-class income tax rates.

White House: We Wanted a Fight

A senior spokesman for the White House told ABC News that they [the White House] wanted a fight, but Congressional Democrats “wouldn’t throw a punch”.

"We wanted a fight, the House didn't throw a punch," a senior White House official tells ABC News, pointing out that for months before the 2010 midterm elections, President Obama was making the case against the Bush tax cuts for wealthier Americans. "The House wouldn't vote before the Senate, and the Senate was afraid they'd lose a vote on it."

"It was like the Jets versus Sharks except there weren't any Jets," the official said. "Senator Schumer says he wants a fight? He couldn't hold his caucus together."

"This isn't a debate in a lab somewhere," the official continued. "People's taxes were going to go up, and then we were going to have a Senate with a slimmer margin and House under Republican control."

Another senior White House official said that under the new Congress, it was likely all the White House would have been able to get as a concession was maybe seven months of extended unemployment insurance, as opposed to the current deal -- with a payroll tax reduction, business write-offs for investments, and continued child and college tuition tax credits.

The spokesman also indicated that despite the rage coming from Democrats, this was a good deal, emphasis mine.

1) We wanted a fight on these tax cuts, and Congressional Democrats never took up the charge and held a vote;

2) This is a good deal -- and we weren't willing to let taxes go up on middle class Americans, or to deprive the unemployed of insurance benefits, just to prove a political point.

Watch:

RELATED:

- TRANSCRIPT: President Obama’s Statement to the Press on Tax Cuts and Unemployment Benefits
- White House: We Wanted a Fight
- TRANSCRIPT: Details on Obama Tax Cut Plan
- VIDEO: Obama to Democrats .. This is a long game. Not a short game.
- VIDEO: Obama …It’s tempting not to negotiate.

TRANSCRIPT: President Obama’s Statement to the Press on Tax Cuts and Unemployment Benefits

6:32 P.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT:

Hello, everybody.  Sorry to keep you waiting. 

For the past few weeks there’s been a lot of talk around Washington about taxes and there’s been a lot of political positioning between the two parties.  But around kitchen tables, Americans are asking just one question:  Are we going to allow their taxes to go up on January 1st, or will we meet our responsibilities to resolve our differences and do what’s necessary to speed up the recovery and get people back to work?

Now, there’s no doubt that the differences between the parties are real and they are profound.  Ever since I started running for this office I've said that we should only extend the tax cuts for the middle class.  These are the Americans who’ve taken the biggest hit not only from this recession but from nearly a decade of costs that have gone up while their paychecks have not.  It would be a grave injustice to let taxes increase for these Americans right now.  And it would deal a serious blow to our economic recovery.

Quote of the Day: Gingrich Says Let Rich People Decide How Big They Want Their Tax Cuts to Be

This would be funny if it weren’t so Godawful pathetic. Gingrich on Fox News Sunday, via Think Progress:

What Republicans ought to do is say to people who create jobs, how many years does the tax code need to be extended for you to make an investment decision? I mean, the goal’s not to have an annual extension of the current tax code, and then have every business in the country trapped saying, “I don’t know.  I want to make a 20 year investment in a factory.” … There is a number, but I would have the business leadership of the country describe the number.

Yeah, good idea, Newty. Fox in the henhouse, and all that. Yet…..Gingrich, in the same segment, suggests that unemployment be reframed as a worker training program.

No money for the unemployed, but Paris Hilton, et al, should be able to decide how much of a tax cut they want.

Watch:

 

Gingrich’s proposal, to cut off unemployment benefits while giving a massive windfall to the most fortunate, is a recipe for skyrocketing unemployment.  The economy grows by nearly two dollars for every dollar spent on unemployment benefits “because recipients typically spend all of their benefit payments quickly.” The money “ripples through the economy into supermarkets, gasoline stations, utilities, convenience stores.” Flush with the revenue provided by these new consumers, those businesses are then able to hire additional workers and diminish the ranks of the unemployed.

Full story on Think Progress.

Video & Transcript: Alan Grayson Goes After Fox News Hosts/ Bush Era Tax Cuts for the Wealthy

Via Huffington Post:

Grayson took to the House floor to debate the extension of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy with seven large cardboard slides, each complete with a color headshot of the person and a description of how prolonging the current tax rates for the top two-percent of income earners in the United States would benefit those individuals.

His argument: Fox News contributors such as Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly and Sarah Palin, as well as the previous president of the United States himself, support, and in some cases aggressively lobby for, the complete extension of the Bush tax cuts because they would pad their pockets with an additional six-figure (in Rush Limbaugh's case, seven-figure) sum each year.

"They want tax cuts for the rich because they want a tax cut for themselves," Grayson said. "Instead of placating these people and letting them spew out onto the airwaves their lies about the Bush tax cuts without ever revealing the fact that they stand to gain millions, millions of dollars each year from their selfish desire to take advantage of the rest of America, let's do this: Let's take that money and create jobs."

Watch:

FULL TRANSCRIPT:

Madam Speaker, we've heard endless braying from the Republicans, time after time, demanding an extension of tax cuts for the rich in this country. They tell us that somehow extending tax cuts for the rich will somehow create jobs. When we've had tax cuts for the rich for nine years and I haven't noticed a lot of jobs being created in nine years.

Republicans Vote En Masse Against Feeding Hungry American Kids

157 Republicans voted against the deficit-cutting Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act . From Think Progress:

Well-versed in obstructing help to the hungry, House Republicans first blocked, then voted against the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act yesterday, a bill that “would give more needy children the opportunity to eat free lunches at school and make those lunches healthier.” The Senate passed this bill by unanimous consent in August — essentially a 100-0 vote in favor of providing school meals to the nation’s 17 million hungry kids

How do these people face themselves in the mirror every day? And HOW in the hell can they justify demanding that the Bush tax cuts for MILLIONAIRES be extended to the tune of 830 billion dollars, all of which gets tacked on to the deficit, and allow American children to go hungry??!!!

UPDATE 1 - DEC. 3: The bill is on its way to President Obama for signing, no thanks to Republicans in the House.

Unemployment Benefits vs Tax Cuts for Millionaires

From Think Progress:

As The Wonk Room pointed out, the average millionaire will receive $103,809 in tax breaks next year if the Bush tax cuts are extended. Unemployment benefits, meanwhile, average about $290 per week.

Republican priorities literally make them the enemies of the American middle class.

Republicans Hold Expired Unemployment Benefits Hostage

Yesterday, Democrats introduced a proposal to extend unemployment benefits through 2011, at a cost of $56 million, without offsets. Republican, Scott Brown [R-MA] singlehandedly shut them down with a refusal to consider the proposal unless the cost is paid for. 2.5 million unemployed Americans are left with out needed aid just in time for the holidays.

After his objection, Brown offered his own proposal for a year-long extension as long as the Office of Management and Budget finds funds from already approved appropriations to pay for it. But Democrats turned down the plan because, as Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI) noted, “we have to deal with the immediate crisis” and “the families that are struggling today.” This, of course, was the governing philosophy of both parties when they passed unemployment extension seven times under the Bush Administration. In fact, before yesterday, Congress went 40 years without allowing extended unemployment benefits to expire when the unemployment rate was above 7.2 percent. The unemployment rate today stands at 9.6 percent.

And yet, Scott Brown, along with his Republican cronies in Congress, want to give millionaires a gift by extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy at a cost of $830 billion with no offsets.

But, in a video released this morning, Brown defended his opposition, saying he “disagreed” that Congress should “pay for unemployment benefits” by “putting more debt on the credit card.” A curious position considering Brown is more than happy to slap the nation with a $830 billion bill in order to extend the Bush tax cuts for the top two percent of wealthy Americans. In touting the GOP’s absurd logic, Brown and his GOP colleagues champion an extension that provides “virtually no economic stimulus,” while rebuking one that “contribute[s] powerfully to the economic growth that is vital for a healthy budget.”

Watch the faces of the unemployed.

This morning, Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick (D) called Brown’s vote against 60,000 Massachusetts workers “outrageous” and a “question of national character.” “We need Scott Brown to see and be worried about the people of the Commonwealth who are trying to get groceries on the table while they continue to look for work,” he said. But, according to his schedule, Brown is busy focusing on his Christmas-themed fundraisers this week.

Bastards.

Reagan Budget Director Blasts GOP Over Tax Cuts Fiscal Irresponsibility

The Republicans in Congress still have not backed down on extending the Bush tax cuts for the top 2% of the wealthiest people in America.

Today on CNN’s Fareed Zakaria GPS, President Reagan’s former budget director and the architect of Reagan’s fiscal policy, David Stockman, took on the GOP over the extension of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. Stockman mercilessly battered them over their lack of fiscal responsibility. Stockman’s remarks as noted by Think Progress:

– We need “a higher tax burden on the upper income.”

– “After 1985, the Republican Party adopted the idea that tax cuts can solve the whole problem, and that therefore in the future, deficits didn’t matter and tax cuts would be the solution of first, second, and third resort.”

– The 2001 Bush tax cut “was totally not needed.”

– On claims that Reagan proved tax cuts lead to higher government revenues: “Reagan proved nothing of the kind and yet that became the mantra and it just led the Republican Party away from its traditional sound money, fiscal restraint.”

– Former Vice President Cheney “should have known better” than claim the Bush tax cuts would pay for themselves.

– “I’ll never forgive the Bush administration and Paulson for basically destroying the last vestige of fiscal responsibility that we had in the Republican Party. After that, I don’t know how we ever make the tough choices.”

 

RELATED POSTS:
~Quote of the Week: Fareed Zakaria on Republican Deficit Hawks and the Bush Tax Cuts
~3 Charts: Bush Era Tax Cuts for the Wealthy vs. Obama Tax Plan

Morning Quote

House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, refuses compromise on Bush tax cuts for the wealthy:

It's too costly. It's $700 billion. One year would be around $70 billion. That's a lot of money to give a tax cut at the high end. And I remind you that those tax cuts have been in effect for a very long time, they did not create jobs.

via TPM

Morning Quote

In his weekly address, President Obama was clear on the future of the Bush tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires.

I recognize that both parties are going to have to work together and compromise to get something done here.  But I want to make my priorities clear from the start.  One: middle class families need permanent tax relief. And two: I believe we can’t afford to borrow and spend another $700 billion on permanent tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires.

If this lame duck Congress will not come to an agreement on the tax cuts, we will all see an increase in our taxes as of January 1.

To read the full transcript of the president's weekly address, click here.

Morning Quote: Howard Dean

In a phone call with Politico’s Roger Simon on November 3, Howard Dean was adamant about what compromise did not mean:

If Republicans think we're going to slow the growth of Medicare and Medicaid and give tax cuts to those making a million dollars a year, we will wrap that around their necks and beat the hell out of them in 2012

My guess is that the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy will be extended along with those for small business and the middle class during the lame duck session, or we will see yet another Republican filibuster, as has been the norm for the Republican members of the 111th Congress.

Kentucky's Greedy Senator Elect, Rand Paul on Bush Tax Cuts For the Wealthy - "There are no poor people"

Last night in Kentucky, Rand Paul talked to Wolf Blitzer [video below]about the Bush tax cuts and why he wants to shield the ultra-wealthy and the mega corporations. Think Progress:

Speaking to CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, Paul announced his intention to do anything it takes to shield the privileged rich and corporate America. Asked if he would end the $830 billion, unpaid-for Bush tax cuts to the rich and return tax rates for the wealthiest bracket to Clinton-era levels, Paul snapped and said such a move would cause a “second great depression” and declared that “anybody who proposes such a policy really is, I think, unfit to be making decisions.”

Paul then clarified his delusional worldview by telling Blitzer that “there are no rich” and “there are no poor.” In Paul’s mind, even taxing yachts would somehow punish the working poor in Kentucky. “We all either work for rich people or we sell stuff to rich people,” concluded Rand:

PAUL: I would say that they must be in favor of a second American depression, because if you raise taxes to that consequence, that’s what will happen in this country. Raising taxes in the midst of a recession would be a disaster for our economy. And anybody who proposes such a policy really is, I think, unfit to be making decisions.

BLITZER: What if they just raised taxes on the richest, those making more than 250,000 dollars a year?

PAUL: Well, the thing is, we’re all interconnected. There are no rich. There are no middle class. There are no poor. We all are interconnected in the economy. You remember a few years ago, when they tried to tax the yachts, that didn’t work. You know who lost their jobs? The people making the boats, the guys making 50,000 and 60,000 dollars a year lost their jobs. We all either work for rich people or we sell stuff to rich people. So just punishing rich people is as bad for the economy as punishing anyone. Let’s not punish anyone. Let’s keep taxes low and let’s cut spending.

Read the full article at Think Progress.

Hey, Kentucky, swell job in electing this Rand-style sociopath.

Krugman: Another Explanation on Why Extending Tax Cuts for the Wealthy is a Bad Idea

Krugman talks a little macroeconomics in terms even the simple-minded can understand.

So: let’s make two not-quite-right but not too far off assumptions. The first is that the economy will be in a liquidity trap, badly needing fiscal stimulus, for two more years. Yes, it could be more than that. But policy making for now operates on the assumption that it will be a limited period. Second, let’s assume that rich people make spending decisions based on a 10-year horizon. Making this longer would actually strengthen the argument.

Now, consider first what would happen if we extend the tax cuts for the next 10 years. This would add $700 billion to the debt (pdf). If the rich spread their windfall evenly across the decade, that’s $70 billion a year in additional consumer spending — or $140 billion during the period when we need it. So, $700 billion in deficits for $140 billion in stimulus; not a good bargain!

Alternatively, suppose we extend the tax cuts for only 2 years. That’s only $140 billion on the deficit. But the rich, knowing that it’s temporary, won’t spend much of it — if they really operate on a 10-year horizon, they’ll spend only $14 billion a year more, so $28 billion of stimulus when we need it, in return for $140 billion of debt; still a lousy bargain!

Senate Republicans Will Filibuster Extension of Middle Class Tax Cuts if Wealthy Excluded From Extension

Kiss our collective derrieres, Senators. Republican Senators. Mitch McConnell.  F**king Bankster Politicians.

Is there a single Republican Senator who stands for the middle class? The answer is a resounding “NO”.

To a person, every Senate Republican has promised to filibuster an extension of middle class tax cuts if the Bush cuts for the wealthy are not also extended.

Meanwhile, a spokesperson for McConnell said today that every Senate Republican has pledged to oppose any attempt to extend the Bush tax cuts that doesn't include an extension of the tax cuts for the wealthy. McConnell himself has given similar remarks.

The Bush tax cuts are set to expire at the end of the year, and Mr. Obama has strongly urged Congress to extend them for everyone except for Americans making more than $200,000 or households making more than $250,000. Republicans, by contrast have called for a extension of all the tax cuts.

Yeah Mitch, let’s just hand another $100k of taxpayer money to every millionaire household.

Makes perfect sense, since they really, really need it.

A Republican plan to extend tax cuts for the rich would add more than $36 billion to the federal deficit next year -- and transfer the bulk of that cash into the pockets of the nation's millionaires, according to a congressional analysis released Wednesday.

New data from the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation show that households earning more than $1 million a year would reap nearly $31 billion in tax breaks under the GOP plan in 2011, for an average tax cut per household of about $100,000.

A millionaire bailout. In 2011, $31 billion out of $36 billion of the cost for this extension would go to the wealthy. Meanwhile, over the next ten years, we would add $3.5 trillion to both our debt and our deficit.

And, count on Republicans voting against another stimulus, or an extension of unemployment benefits. Cause, hey, you know, let them eat cake.

*Emphasis in blockquotes is mine.

John Boehner Walks Back Stance on Extension of Middle Class Tax Cuts

Not surprising. Political expedience, of course. CBS News:

The leading Republican in the House, and a vocal proponent of allowing an extension of the Bush-era tax cuts for all Americans, including the wealthiest 3% of earners, objected to charges by President Obama that Republicans are holding tax breaks for the bottom 97% of earners hostage unless the wealthiest also get an extension.
In a pre-taped interview to appear on CBS' "Face the Nation" Sunday, Republican House Minority Leader John Boehner said that, if approving a bill to extend breaks for middle class income Americans were "the only option," he would support it.

Yeah, but he was against it before it was for it:

"I think raising taxes in a very weak economy is a really, really bad idea, and most economists would agree with that," Boehner, R-Ohio, told CBS News chief Washington correspondent Bob Schieffer. "And I just think that if we're going to extend the tax cuts for some Americans, why don't we extend these current tax rates to all Americans, and get rid of some of the uncertainty that's out there, so that small businesses can plan, and reinvest in their business, and the new economy?"

President Obama rejects the extension of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy at a rally in Ohio last week:

“With all the other budgetary pressures we have -- with all the Republicans' talk about wanting to shrink the deficit -- they would have us borrow $700 billion over the next 10 years to give a tax cut of about $100,000 each to folks who are already millionaires

Lobbyists Heart John Boehner as GOP Plots House Takeover

Yesterday, The New York Times did a piece on the logistics of the care and feeding of House Minority Leader, John Boehner.

You know, that Republican, that guy that refuses to cast a yes vote to pay for health care for 9-11 heroes because of his fake deficit hawkishness, but demands that we extend the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. The same guy who would become the Speaker of the House, third in line for the presidency, should Republicans retake the House in November. That guy moron.

WASHINGTON — House Democrats were preparing late last year for the first floor vote on the financial regulatory overhaul when Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio and other Republican leaders summoned more than 100 industry lobbyists and conservative political activists to Capitol Hill for a private strategy session.

The bill’s passage in the House already seemed inevitable. But Mr. Boehner and his deputies told the Wall Street lobbyists and trade association leaders that by teaming up, they could still perhaps block its final passage or at least water it down.

“We need you to get out there and speak up against this,” Mr. Boehner said that December afternoon, according to three people familiar with his remarks, while also warning against cutting side deals with Democrats.

That sort of alliance — they won a few skirmishes, though they lost the war on the regulatory bill — is business as usual for Mr. Boehner, the House minority leader and would-be speaker if Republicans win the House in November. He maintains especially tight ties with a circle of lobbyists and former aides representing some of the nation’s biggest businesses, including Goldman Sachs, Google, Citigroup, R. J. Reynolds, MillerCoors and UPS.

They have contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to his campaigns, provided him with rides on their corporate jets, socialized with him at luxury golf resorts and waterfront bashes and are now leading fund-raising efforts for his Boehner for Speaker campaign, which is soliciting checks of up to $37,800 each, the maximum allowed.

Meanwhile, the GOP is already secretly plotting their moves for  "when" Boehner becomes the Speaker.

House Republicans have held a series of private discussions to plot their first moves if they win the majority in November — with plans to use spending bills and subpoenas to rein in President Barack Obama and satiate their own ravenous base.

Republicans recognize they won’t be able to do any broad governing even if they take back the House; they’d hold just one chamber of Congress, or at most one branch of government, if they also win the Senate. So officials familiar with the early discussions say they’ve centered on undoing key parts of the Obama agenda and repositioning Republicans as the party of fiscal responsibility heading into 2012 — a mantle the GOP surrendered during the big-spending George W. Bush years.

The plans presently under discussion include defunding some parts of the new health care law and delaying implementation of others, withholding some of the unspent stimulus funds and using the oversight power of Republican-led committees to investigate the Obama administration.

“The goal, obviously, would be to make it a one-term presidency,” said a GOP lobbyist briefed on the talks.

I will be at the polls in November to vote. We can’t afford to let Republicans govern. Hell no.

---

RELATED POSTS:

~ John Boehner is a Moron Whose Economic Plan Would Devastate the U.S. Economy

~ John Boehner is an Idiot

~ John Boehner wants to repeal the financial reform bill

Video: Obama Rebuts John Boehner's "Economic Plan"

During Obama's speech in Parma, Ohio today, he made it a point to rebut the remarks John Boehner  made to an Ohio audience a couple of weeks ago. Via Jon Cohn, Obama:

A few weeks ago, the Republican leader of the House came here to Cleveland and offered his party’s answer to our economic challenges.  Now, it would be one thing if he admitted his party’s mistakes during the eight years they were in power, and was offering a credible new approach to solving our country’s problems.
 
But that’s not what happened.  There were no new policies from Mr. Boehner.  There were no new ideas.  There was just the same philosophy we already tried for the last decade – the same philosophy that led to this mess in the first place:  cut more taxes for millionaires and cut more rules for corporations.  Instead of coming together like past generations did to build a better country for our children and grandchildren, their argument is that we should let insurance companies go back to denying care to folks who are sick, and let credit card companies go back to raising rates without any reason.  Instead of setting our sights higher, they’re asking us to settle for a status quo of stagnant growth, eroding competitiveness, and a shrinking middle class.

Let's hope that this means the end of bipartisanship for a while.

ht Bob Cesca

John Boehner is a Moron Whose Economic Plan Would Devastate the U.S. Economy

Boehner, Fake Deficit Hawk that he is, would add approximately $3.7 trillion to our deficit over the next ten years if his economic proposals were followed.

Yes indeed, House Minority Leader, John Boehner, aka Orange Man, is one of the biggest and dumbest of the fake deficit hawks, and my opinion of this dunce was once again borne out when he gave an economic address in Ohio this week. Via Huffington Post:

House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) was short on specifics during his much-touted economic address in Cleveland this week, promising to offer a more detailed plan as the election approached.

But the Ohio Republican did outline some ideas about how President Obama could restructure both his White House staff and the economy. And in a subsequent report analyzing his suggestions -- which included the firing of top economic advisers -- the progressive think tank NDN estimates that the plans could exacerbate the deficit by roughly $3.7 trillion over the next ten years.

NDN is, obviously, not an un-biased source in the debate. But they base much of their data on non-partisan indicators. Boehner's suggestions stand little chance of becoming law. They were offered, primarily, as a counterpoint to the agenda that the president is pushing. But NDN's President and Founder Simon Rosenberg makes the case that in a year when deficit reduction is a cause celebre, Democrats would be well served, simply, by highlighting the numbers.

You can read the full report of Boehner’s plan to increase the deficit by $3.7 trillion on Huffington Post.

Fareed Zakaria on the extension of the Bush tax cuts:

Most conservatives have been very concerned about America's sky high deficits. They believe they are a dire and urgent threat to the country's future. So when an opportunity presents itself to cut that deficit massively in one fell swoop you'd think they would jump at the chance, right? But they haven't.

You see, George Bush's massive tax cuts are the single largest chunk of our structural budget deficit.

Take a look at this chart. It shows the deficit growth over the next ten years, and the red stripe shows just how much those Bush tax cuts add to the deficit. Well, those tax cuts are due to expire at the end of the year. Were the tax cuts to expire, the budget deficit would instantly shrink, by about 30% or more than $300 billion dollars.

But Republicans are now adamantly opposed to any expiration of the Bush tax cuts, because, they say, that would weaken the economy. But wait a minute. They have been arguing for the last year that what's weakening the economy most is the prospect of unending budget deficits.

Paul Krugman on the extension of the Bush tax cuts:

We need to pinch pennies these days. Don’t you know we have a budget deficit? For months that has been the word from Republicans and conservative Democrats, who have rejected every suggestion that we do more to avoid deep cuts in public services and help the ailing economy.

But these same politicians are eager to cut checks averaging $3 million each to the richest 120,000 people in the country.

What — you haven’t heard about this proposal? Actually, you have: I’m talking about demands that we make all of the Bush tax cuts, not just those for the middle class, permanent.

Some background: Back in 2001, when the first set of Bush tax cuts was rammed through Congress……

The related charts are telling. And Boehner’s plan to increase our deficit by $3.7 trillion is nothing more than a hideous joke which could become a fact of life if Republicans regain control of Congress in November.