Posted on 12/02/2017 1:37:52 AM PST by Kaslin
FINAL UPDATE - The votes are in, and the ayes have it. After a marathon evening of debating and considering amendments, the US Senate has approved the GOP's tax reform bill, which would simplify the tax code and cut taxes for the vast majority of American households, small businesses and corporations. Every Republican voted yes, except for Tennessee's Bob Corker. Democrats uniformly voted no. This is a big legislative victory for the GOP, which overcame a great deal of ferocious opposition -- much of it rooted in misinformation -- to pass the legislation. Up next, a conference committee with the House. But here's your summary for tonight:
FINAL: With Vice President Pence presiding, the US Senate approves a major tax cut & simplification package, 51-49. The bill will now head to a conference committee, where it will be merged with the House-passed bill.— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) December 2, 2017
UPDATE III - It's now looking official: Senate Republicans have the votes to pass tax reform. Arizona's Jeff Flake announced he's jumping on the bandwagon, and the finalized legislation includes a (paid for) amendment sought by Maine's Susan Collins that mirrors the House-passed SALT (state and local tax deduction) compromise. That strongly suggests that she'll be a "yes," too. Add it up, and that's 51, negating the need for Vice President Pence to break a potential tie. Depending on Bob Corker's mood in a few hours, McConnell might even get all 52 GOP votes. But all he really needs is 50-plus-one, and he says he's got 'em:
BREAKING: McConnell walks onto the floor and tells reporters: “We have the votes.”— Frank Thorp V (@frankthorp) December 1, 2017
ORIGINAL POST - The Republican-held House of Representatives did its part by passing a tax overhaul earlier this month, with zero Democrats supporting the effort. That bill cut taxes and boosted after-tax incomes, on average, across every income group in the country, and is projected by nonpartisan analysts to grow the US economy and create close to one million new full-time jobs. It would also lower the tax burden on job-creating small businesses (key small business advocacy groups have endorsed the Republican push), and make America's extremely high statutory and effective corporate tax rates far more competitive internationally. But we've seen this movie before. With the "resistance" in full demagogic throat, and Democrats bound in lockstep opposition, will the GOP's narrow Senate majority fumble the ball, as they did on Obamacare? We'll know soon enough, and tea leaves are mixed. A vote is expected later today. As we brace what's next, let's first note three developments from yesterday (see update) that may portend a successful outcome (see update II) for Mitch McConnell's conference:
(1) John McCain is a committed "yes." As the Senator who more or less single-handedly killed his party's "repeal and replace" efforts in July, having him clearly on board is a huge boon to Republican leadership. McCain's official statement touted the expected benefits of the bill -- acknowledging concerns about it, but ultimately determining that the legislation's upside was strong enough to secure his support:
After careful consideration, I have decided to support the Senate #TaxReform bill. Though not perfect, this bill will deliver much-needed reform to our tax code, grow the economy & provide long overdue tax relief for American families. https://t.co/BeWZAT0SjM pic.twitter.com/6qwYhmyE5p— John McCain (@SenJohnMcCain) November 30, 2017
He even specifically addressed and endorsed the proposal's provision that would repeal Obamacare's tent pole, the federal individual mandate tax: "I have also argued that health care reform, which is important both to the well-being of our citizens and to the vitality of our economy, should proceed by regular order. This bill does not change that. As a matter of principle, I’ve always supported individual liberty and believe the federal government should not penalize Americans who cannot afford to purchase expensive health insurance. By repealing the individual mandate, this bill would eliminate an onerous tax that especially harms those from low-income brackets. In my home state of Arizona, 80 percent of people who currently pay the individual mandate penalty earn less than $50,000 per year," he wrote.
(2) The nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation released its "dynamic scoring" analysis that the Senate bill would add less than $1 trillion to deficits over a decade, as opposed to the on-paper $1.4 trillion figure reached under "static scoring." The reason for this is that JCT anticipates the tax relief package would add nearly one percentage point to GDP growth over the next ten years, resulting in new revenues. Many supporters will argue that JCT underestimates the economic benefits of tax reform, but their report still offers two positive data points:
Jt Tax Cmte forecasts tax bill will increase GDP "by about 0.8 percent on average over the 10- year budget window. That increase in income would increase revenues, relative to the conventional estimate of a loss of $1,414 billion..by $458 billion over that period."— Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) November 30, 2017
(3) For what it's worth:
Just spoke w/ Senate leadership source who I'd characterize as hopeful but never quite confident on the "repeal & replace" whip count over the summer. Sounds *much* more confident on tax reform today, despite some issues still being ironed out. #fwiw— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) November 30, 2017
That was the state of play late yesterday afternoon, with my well-placed source telling me McConnell and company were in a "really good place" in terms of corralling the requisite 50-plus-one votes. The source stopped short of guaranteeing passage at the time, but described potential holdouts as playing an active and "constructive" role in shaping the bill throughout the process, carried out through regular order. Susan Collins is said to be in a decent spot, and McConnell's "substitute amendment" (effectively the bill that was formally debated on the floor) was co-sponsored by...Lisa Murkowski. The three squeakiest wheels, I was told, were outgoing Tennessee Senators Bob Corker and Jeff Flake (who want a deficit-related "backstop" to reduce the tax cuts if economic growth falls short of targets), and Wisconsin's Ron Johnson. Johnson been characterized as a "hard no" in the media, but he's a pro-business, low-tax conservative at heart. I'm not so sure he's still in the 'nay' column, considering his evolving posture (this was from Wednesday evening-- and see update below):
We still have work to do, but I have been working with the administration and Senate leadership to make progress toward a better bill. - rj #taxreform— Senator Ron Johnson (@SenRonJohnson) November 29, 2017
The bigger challenges appear to stem from the other two Senators, who emerged at the center of some floor drama last evening, which bubbled to the surface in full view of reporters. (My source quoted above still sounds optimistic, but last evening was a setback). Relevant parties spent the overnight hours seeking to hammer out an accommodation to address Corker and Flake's deficit concerns after the Senate parliamentarian ruled that a proposed "trigger" mechanism compromise did not pass procedural muster under reconciliation rules. Might that eleventh-hour wrinkle cause the upper chamber GOP to once again face-plant? Stay tuned for the yeas and nays, which may again blow up in embarrassing fashion -- or could result in a big policy and political win for Republicans. In the meantime, the Left is shouting as loudly as possible to kill the bill. Some of their biggest claims are false. Equip yourself with the facts, and help educate others. The empirically-supportable truth is that the vast majority of taxpayers stand to benefit from tax reform. Nevertheless, every single Senate Democrat marched along to Chuck Schumer's beat and voted against even debating the proposal, some of whom defended their decision with nonsensical explanations like this:
I voted against the motion to proceed on the Republican #taxreform plan because I haven’t seen a final bill. I’m still trying to work w/ my R colleagues & @realdonaldtrump to find a bipartisan way forward.— Senator Joe Manchin (@Sen_JoeManchin) November 29, 2017
He couldn't vote to advance a debate over how the final bill would look because he...hadn't seen the final bill, or something. Got it. I'll leave you with a parting thought for Mssrs. Corker and Flake:
Think very carefully, Sens Flake & Corker.
If you jointly jeopardize tax reform, it would (a) risk defeating your own long-held policy goal, (b) reek of anti-Trump pettiness, & (c) reinforce idea that GOP should prioritize personal loyalty to Trump in primaries. Lose-lose-lose.— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) December 1, 2017
UPDATE - As I predicted above, Johnson is now a 'yes,' and despite last night's worrisome snag, my sources are telling me that things are again looking good. They stopped short of an airtight guarantee, but both said they expect a successful vote at some point today:
?? Sen. Ron Johnson tells Milwaukee radio WISN 1130 minutes ago he is a "yes" vote https://t.co/b0eJAzNIJL— J.D. Durkin (@jiveDurkey) December 1, 2017
"The question seems to be, how many Republican votes are they going to get? Is it going to be 50, 51, or 52? But, at this point...it would be really shocking if they didn't get to 50 which is what they need." - @guypbenson— America's Newsroom (@AmericaNewsroom) December 1, 2017
This is what I've heard within the last hour, having spoken w/ several plugged-in sources. Sounding like 49 locked-in 'yes' votes, w strong likelihood that at least 1 more comes into the fold. Leadership optimistic about a vote later today. https://t.co/59dtanMrcl— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) December 1, 2017
UPDATE II - It looks like this is happening (or maybe not?):
BREAKING: Second-ranking Senate Republican, John Cornyn of Texas, says GOP has the votes to pass sweeping tax overhaul.— The Associated Press (@AP) December 1, 2017
New: Sen. Bob Corker tells @siobhanehughes the bill will probably pass:
https://t.co/wspkmPMJ0H via @WSJ— Richard Rubin (@RichardRubinDC) December 1, 2017
Big potential problem for GOP leaders: Susan Collins disputes Cornyn’s claim that they have her support for the GOP tax bill. (They see her as their 50th and pivotal vote)
“I can’t imagine why Senator Cornyn is speaking for me,” she told me. “I speak for myself”— Laura Litvan (@LauraLitvan) December 1, 2017
“Taxes, however, can and will go up at the will of our Federal Masters.”
You bitch about high SALT being removed but blame high taxes on the feds? What an idiot!
Go back to your State masters and complain about those high State and Local Taxes.
The problem isn’t with the states the problem is with the feds. Today you’d be a Hamilton follower believing in a strong leviathan central government.
Kneel to your money masters
So we should keep the highest corporate tax rates - compared to many countries - MUCH higher - in the world? That’s your argument?
I can’t believe the absolute crap I am reading on here from some people on a supposedly conservative forum. This is straight out of the Democrat propaganda machine - word for word.
“They chose instead to pick “winners” and “losers.””
They didn’t pick anyone. Changes in taxes do affect people, but your immaturity and stupidity fails to see that.
Your State and local officials screw you with high State and Local Taxes (SALT) but you blame the feds. What an idiot!
We’re tired of subsidizing you high-tax States by letting you deduct your SALT and pay less federal taxes so the rest of us pay more.
We in the lower SALT States were the ones YOU screwed all these years!
They can more than fund their own states and probably many times over and hell isnt that the most conservative thing to do defund the fed and bring more spending back home!? Maybe these lib states had it right all along! As misguided as their spending is at least they know who to take care of at home vs. a federal beauracracy.
“Okay, you can stop shi**ing yourself now.
Gosh.”
************************************************
LOL — I guess some folks relish swimming in their own diarrhea. They’ll calm down eventually.
A quick look over at DU tells me all I need to know, they’re livid and I’m happy. Now let’s fire the starting pistol, open the gates and get this race started. This is the second time in my lifetime I’ve seen this country with such an opportunity for growth. Reagan was first and to be honest I never thought I’d see it again. Thank you President Trump! I could not have been given a better retirement gift. I will retire the same day he leaves office after his second term, a promise I made to my wife.
How long before all these people cheering tax increases on blue states are whining about their states turning blue? And what will they do when they have to compete for a job with a percentage of California’s twenty million strong work force? I expect some may rue the day they began chasing people out of blue states.
The super rich carry ALL of us in federal taxes and they pay vastly more than any of us in these boards will ever see in our lifetimes. Why should they? Just because they make more? Do they take any more from government than any of us? In fact the top 5% carry the country in what is paid into the coffers of government.
It is but also the very rich also live in those states and carry the rest of hebcountry in the federal tax burden.
P.S.
In a nutshell, most deductions are nothing more than RESTRIBUTION OF WEALTH.
Taking everyone’s money and sending it to particular groups and places they want to continue operating in particular ways.
So if you state, county, city, etc. is overtaxing or have your homes over-valued, woo-hoo, They get to keep overtaxing since the people never will feel the real brunt of their policies.
Or if they like a particular company and want them to get more money, WOO HOO, people are now nudged to buy their overpriced and under-competed products.
The problem with this free ranging debate is that it is a multi-factorial issue.
One factor that you are not considering is that in many of the high tax states services are covered as part of the tax structure such as garbage pick up, recycling pick up, bulk trash, leaf pickup and a host of other services & social service programs. People in the lower tax states have to pay out of pocket using already taxed dollars for these services.
Why is it equitable that people in the high tax states get to save the tax on the cost of those State/Local services by using pretax dollars and the low tax states don’t?
Money is wasted right & left on pork projects. The lack of fiscal responsibility, where the state taxpayers are sheltered from direct costs is what drives the process.
Everyone’s positions contain some truth but the bottom line is that the journey needs to begin & parts of it will be painful. The loss of SALT is necessary to begin winding down the bureaucratic, social justice, corrupt pay to play world the Dems created.
And this is one of the key issues. If the executives use the money to expand in the US and hire in the US, then Joe Sixpack will perceive it as, "Under Trump I got a good job back, unlike under Obama." If the executives (as I expect) just poss it away on frivolous M&A or buybacks to prop up share prices for executives' vested options, we just may see Bernie Sanders elected.
The two biggest things that need to be changed are the tax deductibility of corporate interest payments (companies use debt to fund expansion, rendering themselves vulnerable to corporate raiders or recession; if companies were forced to issue stock for expansion, we'd see executives planning for the long term rather than stuffing their own pockets)...and the second thing to be changed is the attitude/perception that there's this giant pot of cash that rich people are hoarding instead of sharing it. That's true in Silicon Valley; but most of this is due to the cult of the godlike CEO started by Jack Welch, and his insistence on profit by shagging US employees (where the F is my 'lifetime employability' you lying sack of flaming dung with your $2 million annual pension for life?)
Because I disagree with tax policy doesn’t make me anti anything, Never this or never that. I’m not a cultist, a worshipper, a bow downer...I don’t care if Mickey freaking mouse was POTUS. I stand on principles and not a person. The constitution is not Trump and Trump is not the constitution. I don’t have slobbering love affairs with those we elect.
He is a man that I respect and that is it. As with Reagan, Adams, Lincoln et al.
Good points . I pay from pocket for the services you speak. Good points here
Do you recall this being a campaign issue? Trying to force people to move?
(I expect some may rue the day they began chasing people out of blue states.)
They are not being chased by us they’re being run off by their own state governments, we the people have nothing to do with it. I moved to Cali in the 70’s and left within a year and came back to Texas. Should they choose to stay then the consequences of that decision is on them and will no longer be subsidized by the rest of the nation.
I would dearly hope that my opinion regarding the the tax bill should in no way be misconstrued as showing disrespect to the site's owner. This is his place.
There are several good, solid conservatives in Congress who voted against the House bill, and I agree with them.
In the end, I hope we can come together. This issue is very divisive in many, many ways. It affects people directly.
I thought that the loss of the mortgage deduction credit applied only to mortgages over $500.000, is that still correct?
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.