Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

I didn't see this posted. I heard parts of the speech but haven't seen a transcript yet.

I'm looking forward to seeing most of this enacted.

1 posted on 01/07/2003 11:04:15 AM PST by B-bone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last
To: B-bone

What a great speech!

Bush Unveils Economic Stimulus Plan
Tuesday, January 07, 2003

WASHINGTON — President Bush will seek to make 2001's $1.35 trillion tax cut plan permanent and accelerate cuts slated for 2010 as part of his $674 billion economic stimulus package, he said Tuesday.

"Americans are scheduled to receive tax cuts in 2004 and 2006 ... and the time to deliver tax rate reductions is now, when they can do the most good for American businesses," Bush said in a speech to the Economic Club of Chicago.

Bush said the nation was hit by a triple-whammy -- recession, terror attacks and corporate scandal -- but the economy is still moving forward.

"In spite of successes we have more work to do, because too many of our citizens who want to work can't find a job and many of our busineses don't have the confidence to invest and create new jobs."

Bush said more needs to be done, and called on Congress to accelerate the tax break for married couples, scheduled for 2009, and speed up the tax credit for families with children, who aren't scheduled to get the break until 2010.

"A family of four with two earners and $39,000 in income would receive more than $1,100 in tax relief real money to help pay the bills and push the economy forward," Bush said "And the sooner Congress acts, the sooner help will come."

Under the president's plan, 92 million taxpayers will get an average $1,083 tax break, as tax cuts scheduled for 2004 and 2006 are phased in this year instead. The child credit would give an additional $400 to 34 million families who currently claim up to $600.

The cost of the bill will be $102 billion this year. The 10-year cost of the child credit is $91 billion, the marriage penalty reduction is $58 billion and reducing the marginal rates is $64 billion.

The administration's fact sheet on the plan estimated that 46 million married couples would receive an average tax cut of $1,716 this year, while 23 million small business owners would receive tax cuts averaging $2,042. The tax cuts would be retroactive to Jan. 1.

The plan would also eliminate taxes shareholders pay on dividends. According to the president, since companies must already pay a tax on the dividends before they are distributed, they are currently taxed twice.

"I am asking the United States to abolish the double taxation of dividends," Bush said.

Democrats, however, complained that the president's plan is aimed at the wealthiest Americans.

"Most Americans who have investments in the stock market have it through their IRA or their 401K, so that is tax-free anyway," said House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California.

The Urban Institute-Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center estimates that 41 percent of the benefits would go to the elderly, but most of that would go to wealthy retirees. Only 6 percent of the benefits would go to elderly people with incomes below $50,000.

On Monday, Democrats announced a $136 billion plan they say targets the people who actually need the help.

Democrats want to give a $300 tax credit to all taxpayers, even those who don't make enough to owe anything. They also propose a couple of business incentives, including a deduction for new investment.

Democrats want to double the amount of investments -- from $25,000 to $50,000 -- that small businesses can claim as a deduction on their income taxes. They would expand a bonus program for businesses who make large investments, but would require them to make the purchases this year.

Under the Democratic plan, states would get $31 billion for homeland security, highway, Medicaid and unemployment insurance programs.

A White House aide criticized the Democratic plan, saying that shifting federal money to states is not a stimulus.

And Evans said the Democrats' package is mainly a spending plan that may help some people temporarily but doesn't benefit the economy much.

"You've got a choice to make. Do you want to put the money in the hands of the American people in the form of tax cuts and create incentive for this economy to grow or do you want to spend? And I think the president made it very clear (he wants to) put the money in the hands of the American people, and let them spend it," Evans said.

On Tuesday, Bush also proposed "re-employment accounts" of up to $3,000 that people can use for child care, transportation and other costs of finding a new job.

The $3.6 billion, two-year plan would put $3,000 into individual accounts for unemployed job hunters to draw from to pay for child care, job training, transportation, moving costs and other expenses of finding a job, senior White House officials said.

A person who lands a job in 13 weeks would be able to keep any money left over in their account, the officials said.

The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said 60 percent of the bonus money would go to the person when they get a new job. The rest will be awarded after six months on the job.

The $3.6 billion will divided among states based on their levels of unemployed.

Republicans and Democrats do agree on the need to help the nearly 800,000 workers who have received nearly a year of unemployment benefits so far but who are still looking for jobs. Benefits expired at the end of December.

The Senate agreed by a voice vote on Tuesday to extend benefits by 13 weeks. A bill must be presented to the president by Thursday to avoid an interruption in benefits .


2 posted on 01/07/2003 11:06:24 AM PST by RobFromGa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: B-bone
I could really make do with an extra $1100 or so. $600 to invest and $500 to spend!
3 posted on 01/07/2003 11:06:49 AM PST by xrp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: B-bone
Did I hear Bush's speech correctly in that he is proposing accelerating all of the tax cuts in his previous tax package so that they retroactively come into effect on January 1, 2003 or did I hear that part wrong?
4 posted on 01/07/2003 11:07:33 AM PST by vbmoneyspender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: B-bone
I heard most of President Bush's speech - it sounded wonderful to me. Great speech, but so many people will never hear it, except for a small soundbyte tonight while they're rushing to get dinner on the table. I wonder why he chose to give the speech at 1:15PM ET when most people are working. Wouldn't it have been better delivered during "prime time" tonight? Gives the 'RAT media too many hours to spin it back to "tax cuts for the rich" in time for the 6:30PM news.


10 posted on 01/07/2003 11:13:43 AM PST by nutmeg (I hate 'RATs!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: B-bone
an end to taxes that shareholders pay on dividends -- a move denounced by Democrats as a politically motivated windfall for the rich.

The Democrats are idiots if they think only the rich own equities. I am firmly, inextricably entrenched in the middle class, and the owner of some stocks. Every year, I have to pay income taxes on the few hundred dollars in dividends earned. This is ridiculous. It's time for all of us "not rich" to let the Dems know that we welcome even the slightest of reductions in the monstrous burden that is the federal income tax.

15 posted on 01/07/2003 11:16:25 AM PST by mountaineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: B-bone
I hope it gets enacted, too. The Spin machine is cranking up already,though. CNN is already talking about the "so-called marriage tax penalty".

Nothing so-called about it. It exists. Period.

18 posted on 01/07/2003 11:18:12 AM PST by wbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: B-bone
The president's plan isn't the best, but it isn't the worst either. After listening to his speech, it's clear that he still thinks all of us peasants still work in factories, though.
21 posted on 01/07/2003 11:18:43 AM PST by Moonman62
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: B-bone
What about the death tax?
23 posted on 01/07/2003 11:19:18 AM PST by grobdriver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: B-bone
CNN's Lou Dobbs looked stunned as he called Bush's speech "Bold". "Bold".... Jim Ellis of Business Week agrees, but he wouldn't agree that it would be effective. , Lou Dobbs says he was surprised at it's boldness. "Big gamble" says Ellis, "is most of the benefits are going to be in the off years." (Whatever that means). Judy Woodruff says the House has it's own plan, and interviews John Edwards within in just a few minutes of the speech ending. "is the president right", she asked John Edwards. "No" says Edwards..."this is a taxcut for the rich."... "it's an enormous budget buster" says Edwards. The president's plan is "loaded up for the richest Americans instead of putting help in the hands of the ones who need it...and it's not fiscally responsible.", says Edwards. "What they're doing is put ornaments on it, but it's not helping normal people. He's accelearating taxcuts for the rich."

John Edwards is so fullofshit..his eyes are brown....and so predictable, I'msorry I bothered to report what he said.

The discussion after this, between Paul Begala and Tucker Carlson was really fun. Maybe the transcript will be up soon, and I'll add it here. Little Tucker finally managed to score...but then again, President Bush's position is pretty easy to defend.

24 posted on 01/07/2003 11:19:27 AM PST by YaYa123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RepoGirl
bumpity bump bump bump!
29 posted on 01/07/2003 11:25:07 AM PST by Big Guy and Rusty 99 (How about passing the time with a game of solitaire?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: B-bone
OUtstanding speech at first blush. I at least loved his "NOW! DAMMIT!" attitude and the fact that he used common sense against Congress: If a tax cut is good for teh nation in three years, then it is good now. Congress should be embarrassed by his use of common sense to demand enactment of their tax bills.
32 posted on 01/07/2003 11:27:27 AM PST by PatrioticAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: B-bone
WHERE ARE THE SPENDING CUTS?
66 posted on 01/07/2003 11:45:56 AM PST by Glenn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: B-bone
Great speach, great plan...and how can you be sure

By the squeeling of the democrats

97 posted on 01/07/2003 12:04:18 PM PST by The Wizard (Go Bush, Go)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: All
Immediately after President Bush's economical proposal speech, an ad site on Yahoo was swamped by the Rats in Congress. Go to this link to see what all the Rats need after President Bush's speech: (Yahoo Ad Link for Rats in Congress)
120 posted on 01/07/2003 12:17:43 PM PST by Grampa Dave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: B-bone
WOW...a Reuters article that stated the facts and didn't add an extra four hundred words of Democrat rhetoric to show the public that Dems love people and President Bush is an EEEEEVEEEEL BUSINESSMAN.
122 posted on 01/07/2003 12:18:22 PM PST by cake_crumb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: B-bone
I'm a huge fan of any and all tax cuts. Now when is he going to push for the elimination of the IRS? By the way....where does that $600B number come from? Is that money going in, or what? If so, where is the money coming from if we get tax cuts? Is he planning on tacking $600B to the already obscene national debt?
144 posted on 01/07/2003 12:37:35 PM PST by hove
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: B-bone
a move denounced by Democrats

Now there's a shocker

157 posted on 01/07/2003 12:49:33 PM PST by pfflier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: B-bone
Sorry to be a wet blanket, but I believe President Bush is making a huge mistake in implying that the president actually has that much influence on the economy. The economy runs in cycles that have very little to do with who is in the office of the president at the time. The time delay between policy and impact on the economy is often years. The massive debt that has been amassed by the citizens of this country is going to come due with devastating consequences and the president, federal reserve, etc. have little hope of circumventing the coming crash. Well, unfortunately the Clinton bubble has not fully deflated. Can you say Hoover?

Remember how as the economy was booming through the 90s, conservatives were saying that this was in spite of Clinton. Now, why do we act differently when a Republican is in the White House? How about some consistency on the right?
177 posted on 01/07/2003 1:14:30 PM PST by Rockitz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: B-bone
Bush Unveils $674 Billion Economic Plan

And every democrat i talked to today is mad as hell about it!

204 posted on 01/07/2003 2:41:55 PM PST by ATOMIC_PUNK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: B-bone
very impressed with his package bump
208 posted on 01/07/2003 4:32:13 PM PST by TheRedSoxWinThePennant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson