Posted on 01/03/2012 1:10:44 PM PST by presidio9
Wrong. The president doesn’t have the power to raise taxes. That privilege is reserved for Congress. Reagan might have signed tax increases proposed by Congress, but, literally speaking, HE did not raise taxes.
Bingo! He approved tax increases. He compromised with a Democrat Congress to get things done. His ideology generally won the day... but he did have to make some concessions... remember amnesty? He held up his side of the bargain... Congress did not.
It bothers me when ideologues on both sides ignore history. It bothers me ever more when they try to change it.
Reagan made the best deal possible in 1982 with democrats in control of congress, but Tip O’Neall reneged on the spending cuts. Ms Stahl was half right on her assertion, but mislead viewers by not telling the full story.
It’s almost like Media Matters is executive producer for 60 Minutes.
Funny how the leftists never want to mention the fact that he massively cut the top tax rate from 70% down to 28%.
What an underhanded approach to rewriting history. This article might as well have said conservatives will have to accept that a lot of socialist legislation was passed under Reagan — which is true, but those laws weren’t composed by Ronald Reagan and certainly were not in line with Reagan’s philosophy. R Reagan was swimming upstream against an intense opposition by the leftists but despite that opposition he made great strides in reducing tax constrictions while clearing the road for economic growth. He inspired optimism and entrepreneurial drive. And, he did it with a smile. Reagan had a way of seeing through to winning a war and not being defeated by each little battle—that was one of his great attributes.
Somehow I don’t think closing loopholes carries the same weight as out and out raising of tax rates.
“proceeded to raise taxes seven out of the eight years he was in office.”
Kinda ironic that the writer never quantifies the accusation.
Reagan was saddled with a heavily Democrat congress who insisted on raising taxes. Liberals always like to create the pretense that Reagan initiated the tax increases when in fact he was hostage to a Dem Congress that insisted on them and had the power to stymie him. The simple fact is he dramatically reduced the top tax bracket from 70% to 28%, Despite a heavily Dem congress insisting on subsequent tax increases Reagan left office with Americans dramatically paying less in net taxes than when he entered office.
Reagan agreed to a compromise which included raising taxes in exchange for the democrats reducing some spending. In typical democrat style, the taxes were implemented, but the spending cuts never materialized. The truth is in the congressional record, should you care to do the research instead of trying to rewrite history.
When Reagan took office in 1980, there were 16 tax brackets ranging from 0% ($3,400 or less) to 70% ($215,400). When Reagan left office in 1988 there were 2 brackets: 15% (income up to $29,750) and 28% for income over $29,750). Coincidentally, revenues increased from $517.1 billion to $909.2 billion. Sadly, the democrat controlled congress spent at an even faster rate (from a -$73.8 billion dollar deficit in 1980 to -$221.2 billion dollar deficit in 1986).
Facts really are stubborn things.
These leftist in the article are all damned liars and here’s why: They know perfectly well the difference between a president signing legislation into law and a president leading legislators to write a particular law. They know perfectly well that Reagan, given absolute power would have turned away the legislation they link to him personally.
It’s so absurd it’s almost funny. If ordinary Americans remember President Reagan as a tax-cutter rather than a tax-raiser, it’s not because they are victims of some kind of elaborate deception perpetrated by the Great Communicator. It’s because President Reagan, well, cut tax rates.
Even the left-leaning web site Slate didn’t buy the "1982-biggest-peacetime-tax-increase in history" line when it was used against one of its congressional creators, Sen. Robert Dole, in the 1996 presidential campaign. Slate said, “most of Dole's tax increase was actually the partial repeal of future tax cuts that had been enacted in 1981 but had not yet taken place. Despite Dole's bill, taxpayers received more than $375 billion in tax cuts over the following three years… Almost $50 billion of Dole's 1982 projected revenue was supposed to come from cracking down on tax cheats, by adding staff to the IRS, and requiring financial institutions to withhold interest and dividends the way employers withhold wages. (This provision was repealed the next year, before it could take effect.) Is getting people to pay taxes they already owe but would otherwise escape a ‘tax increase’?”
Look closely, because this is likely to be the first and last time I ever quote Reason magazine to make a point about Ronald Reagan.
First, the author needs some private schooling on how to put together a thought succinctly.
Reagan first led the cause to re-write the tax code to “flat” tax type simplicity and lowered the highest brackets into one. Over the years, as the simplicity was molested, loopholes were closed and indeed, there was likely more of a tax burden on the wealthiest while at the same time making the tax code simpler. There were less nooks and crannies for armies of accountants to exploit, thereby making the whole tax code better.
To make the ridiculous jump that these we all tax increases is absurd and dishonest. Yes, taxes did get raised after they were cut under Reagan's watch, but not at his behest, like (add any democratic president here) did and still does.
Funny how they try to peg tax increases on Reagan but give Clinton credit for welfare reform.
Reagan first cut taxes to help fix a bad economy. then,since raising taxes slows down the economy,once the economy was strong, he raised taxes to prevent it from becoming overheated.
When a liberal says, “let’s not quibble over the definition of” something, you can be sure that is exactly what the liberal has done.
Tax increases do not make the economy grow.
Now, admit that Obama is 100% responsible for this economy being in the doldrums the way it is. No one else, no blaming predecessors, no blaming staff. He’s managed this thing from the beginning, Bush even asked him what HE wanted to do with the TARP thing, since he had been already elected. This is the obama recession, no one elses.
Tax increases do not make the economy grow. They may be less destructive at some times than others, but they are never con-structive.
This is pertinent and the answer will tell you whether Mary Smegma has a valid point or is full of crap.
Reagan signed into law some domestic spending that was demanded by the Democrats, to get the defense spending needed.
Rather like the deal that GW Bush made to get the ‘surge’ to win in Iraq.
compared to the high price of the Afghanistan ‘mini-surge’ bought by the Obamination’s massive domestic spending increase, Reagan and Bush look like freakin’ genius negotiators.
The fact is that the tax burden on Americans of all strata was lower when Ronald Reagan left office than when he took office. Thus, Reagan was a tax cutter, not a tax raiser. And this doubled revenues over a decade (following the increases in revenues from the Coolidge tax cuts and the Kennedy tax cuts.)
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.