Posted on 04/19/2018 9:08:26 AM PDT by jazusamo
One of the Left's favorite anti-tax reform tactics involved loudly griping about how the law's corporate tax cuts were permanent (there's a good economic argument for that, of course), whereas the tax cuts for individuals and families are set to expire -- which is where the misleading "tax increase" talking point comes from. Those taxes would only increase if Congress allows them to, and based on recent history and the tough political dynamics, the likelihood of reversing all or most of the recently-enacted tax reductions is slim to none. Nevertheless, Democrats carried on as if Republicans were deliberately targeting taxpayers with a hike down the road, demanding that the tax cuts be made permanent. They knew full well that the GOP was playing a budgetary game in order to shoehorn their bill through under "reconciliation," which allows for passage with a simple majority in the US Senate. The on-paper sunsetting of the new rates was necessary to make the math work, pure and simple. In an effort to exploit this technicality, Democrats called up a vote to extend the middle class tax cuts indefinitely, which Republicans defeated for procedural reasons. The ploy succeeded, handing Democrats a campaign-ready claim about (eventual and unlikely) GOP tax increases. Soon after passage, National Review's Rich Lowry urged GOP leaders to call their opponents' bluff:
"First thing Republicans should do when they are back is make Democrats vote on extending all the middle-class tax cuts"
A leading Democratic criticism of the tax bill is that the middle-class tax cuts expire. This should be very easy to remedy — Republicans should make the Democrats vote on extending them as soon as Congress comes back next year. If Democrats don’t go back on what they’ve been saying about how terrible it is that these tax cuts are temporary, passage of an extension should be a big, bipartisan accomplishment in the new year that everyone can feel good about.
Well, it may not have been the very first thing on the Republicans' agenda this year, but it looks like Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell are gearing up to heed this advice. First, from the House side :
The House will vote this year to make individual tax cuts permanent, Speaker Paul Ryan said Tuesday. Ryan, R-Wis., didn’t provide a date, but said “we fully intend,” to pass legislation that would make permanent the reduction in individual tax rates included in the new comprehensive tax reform law. “That is something we will be acting on later this year,” Ryan said...Republicans will use the tax vote later this year pressure Democrats closer to the midterm elections, according to Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist.
Why, that almost sounds like crafty strategic thinking. Meanwhile, over in the Senate :
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is weighing whether to force a vote on making the GOP's temporary tax cuts for individuals permanent. The Kentucky Republican told reporters Tuesday the chamber "may" hold a vote this year on extending the tax cuts. While the 2017 law provided permanent tax cuts on corporations, tax cuts for regular people expire in 2027 due to Senate rule constraints..."If they are interested in making the individual rates permanent that’s something we ought to take a look at. I don’t know why we wouldn’t want to do that," McConnell said...Even if Democrats won't support the proposal, such a vote may have political utility after Senate Democrats opposed last year's tax measure. Ten Democrats are up for reelection this year in states that President Donald Trump won, and voting against tax cuts a second time could be fodder for Republicans looking to pick up Senate seats.
They wouldn't merely be voting against tax cuts for a second time ( every last Democrat in Congress voted 'no' on the succeeding tax reform law), they'd be voting explicitly against the very middle class tax cuts they'd previously complained didn't go far enough. And if they flip-flop to 'yes,' they'd risk angering their resistance-minded base while again affirming the Republican point that their law did, in fact, slash taxes for middle income families. Quite the self-inflicted dilemma. I'll leave you with McConnell wryly attacking Democrats for attending a left-wing rally to repeal tax reform earlier this week. That's what hardcore partisan tribalism requires of them, of course, but they were protesting a law that is undeniably working and boosting the US economy and employment picture . Their previous demagoguery has been exposed by reality , yet they keep digging:
“I noticed that a number of my Democratic colleagues attended a small protest rally yesterday. It was right here, on the Capitol grounds. Apparently it was put on by a number of left-wing pressure groups, including MoveOn.org, Planned Parenthood, and Big Labor. So what were they protesting? What outrage brought leading Democrats to join this protest on the East Front of the Capitol? Turns out, it was the fact that Republicans let middle-class families and American small business keep more of their own money. That’s right. Democrats are rallying to repeal your tax cuts. Never mind that our pro-growth tax reform has led to thousand-dollar bonuses, pay raises, educational opportunities or other new benefits for millions of Americans. Democrats still want to repeal it. Never mind the new estimate that says tax reform will yield more than a million new jobs in the next decade. Or the fact that jobless claims are at their lowest level since 1973. No amount of good news will shake Democrats’ confidence that they know how to spend the American people’s money better than the American people."
McConnell's taciturn demeanor and dull delivery takes some of the bite out of this counterpunch, but it's really strong messaging that other Republicans should echo.
I’m not getting excited.
They’ll only be “permanent” until some future Congress decides to take them away.
This from the person who said he would be working hard to get the Democrats back in control of Congress in 2018 if the tax cuts passed.
The individual mandate was in fact revived and repealed - that would have never happened if there wasn’t a GOP Congress.
ANWR was finally passed. That would have never happened if there wasn’t a GOP Congress.
Sweeping tax reform finally passed. That would have never happened if there wasn’t a GOP Congress.
There is no line item in the budget funding Planned Parenthood. However, the GOP Congress did pass a bill allowing states to defund it and this was signed into law by President Trump - that was a pretty big deal. That would have never happened if there wasn’t a GOP Congress.
The GOP Senate has confirmed a large number of the appointments - almost none of which would have been confirmed if they were not in control - even invoking the nuclear option to get President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee on the bench - do you really think that would have happened if the Democrats controlled the chamber? Democrats are insisting on the 30 hour rule for every nominee - this is unprecedented - something needs to be done about this if possible but it certainly isn’t something the “GOP Senate” started doing to obstruct the nominees.
Several big regulations enacted by the Obama Administration were rolled back under the Congressional Review Act. That would have never happened without a GOP controlled Congress.
You’ve got the fiscal responsibility thing down pat...that bill was actually passed through the Senate with a minority of the majority party’s Senators even voting for it.
“Then they can blame the president they’ve failed to support and pile on to support the Democrats when Trump is impeached.” That is no doubt the agenda of a part of the inside the beltway establishment - a big loss for their own party can provide the momentum to get rid of President Trump. Hence, why this narrative would be stopped in its tracks with a big victory - difficult to argue “the people” want him gone if his own party is the big winner. A big victory therefore must be delivered that many of them do not want nor do they deserve...some of them would literally be upset “Ah crap - we won!”
People need to know that this is a road-show given that no Congress can bind a subsequent Congress.
But it could be used to good advantage if done with intelligence.
Trump voters are not going to stay home. Others might but not those supporting the President’s agenda. Just because they don’t like a Senator or Congressman his supporters are too smart to let that stop them from voting.
I hope that you are correct.
I don’t mean this directly to you...but
I know there will always be the (R)N(C) apologists here.
Many of the issues, noted by SotS, are quite valid. Your counter, IMO, not so persuading.
All the “if there wasn’t a GOP Congress”, to me, only highlights the big question: Why?
ANWR: 40yrs+ and *finally*? Who’s getting a check?
Taxes: ‘Sweeping’ reform? Please. Revenue-neutral != ‘reform’
PP: Oh, Congress now ALLOWS the State(s) to defund. *SMH*
Appointments: The backlog vs. complete is so lop-sided as to be at a stand-still
O’Care & regs: clipping a toe-nail does not bring down Fedzilla. Cut-grass does NOT stop growing.
I honestly can’t wait for any in the GOP to run on ‘small govt’ a/o ‘fiscal responsibility’....so We can plant a boot up their @ss for the blatant lying. The word ‘Constitution’ comes out of any mouth, they should be strung up by the nearest lamp-post.
The (R)N(C) had failed to live up to ANY of its platform and promises (3 day debates? Posting of all bills on the Internet?) let alone a 40yr promise to abolish the DoEd (they can’t even de-fund PP\NPR\NEA).
They’ve actually given us *WORSE* than the (D): NCLB, TARP, Medicare part D (I believe it was), NSA, DHS...
But, sure, stopped clock. I’d rather ‘look behind the curtain’ before patting ‘em on the back/head.
Everyone seems to think it puts the Democrats in the hot seat. It shouldn't. All the Democrats have to do is reply, "We're onboard with making the middle-class tax cuts permanent but not the ones for the wealthy. So set an income limit of $120,000 or so and we'll vote for it." What is the Republican response to that? Say "no" and the Democrats can say the Republicans killed the bill. Say "yes" and the Democrats can run on protecting the middle-class when the original Republican plan favored the rich and corporations. Either way this isn't a winning issue in November and could blow up in their faces.
And then when the Democrats complain about the extra $1.5 trillion or so it will add to the deficit?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
