Senators Strike Child Tax Benefits Deal

AP | 6/05/03 | MARY DALRYMPLE

[kattracks]

WASHINGTON (AP) — Unable to shake Democratic demands that minimum wage workers get the same benefit from a $1,000 child tax credit as other families, Republicans in the Senate struck an agreement to expand the benefit for low-income families and extend the benefit to more high-income couples.

"There is a deal," said a spokesman for Sen. Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., who has been advocating the change since President Bush signed a $350 billion tax cut last month.

The strategy, designed to diffuse a growing storm over a bigger child tax credit for middle-income but not low-income families, gives both Republicans and Democrats a reason to back the bill.

Minimum wage workers would get the same rebate check, worth $400 per child, going to other families later this summer — giving Democrats a rare victory in a Republican-ruled government.

Married couples making up to $140,000 could claim the full credit for two years at the end of the bill's 10-year horizon. That change would limit the so-called "marriage penalty" in the credit and give Republicans a win.

Republicans resisted changing the law, which currently offers the credit to families who pay income tax and gives minimum wage workers — those who get enough tax benefits to see their income taxes eliminated — a partial refund.

Some Republicans have historically supported refundable tax credits, such as the much larger earned income tax credit, as a way to encourage low-wage workers to stay in the labor force and avoid welfare.

Backed by a strong push from community activists, Democrats pointed to the tax cut enacted last month as concrete proof that Republicans favor the wealthy over the poor.

"This administration is waging war on poor children," said Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y. "The reality is that they are steadily and surely trying to turn the clock back on all of the programs and supports that working families and their children need and deserve."

The legislation also reduces the five definitions of a "child" used for different tax deductions and credits to a single definition. The bill's $10 billion cost will be offset by an extension of customs fees.

[DeathfromBelow]

Let's talk about GOVERNMENT SPENDING. Let's talk about dollar devaluation. Let's talk about fiat money.Speaking of fiat money here's a good line, ". Like war and death, fiat money always walks hand in hand with debt, usury, income tax, oligarchy, big government, militarism, and, in the end always produces tyranny and impoverishment".

Let's all go out and BUY GOLD! that will fix em. sarcasm off

[DeathfromBelow]

Cause single guys keep knocking up the welfare recipients, so we have to pay more taxes just to keep up.

[Bill Davis FR]

and what kind of income tax break are our senior citizens on social security getting????isn't it time we repeal the clinton social security tax???

[Orangedog]

Why arent they assessed a special tax for the privilege of each child?

Now THERE is the right way to use the phrase "...for the children"!

[GraniteStateConservative]

It's simple really. Single people supported Gore more than Bush in 2000.

[eboyer]

"and what kind of income tax break are our senior citizens on social security getting????isn't it time we repeal the clinton social security tax??? "

Contributions were always pre-tax weren't they?

If so I don't understand your complaint.

[Ga Rob]

You know what I think....I think the people who this money belongs to would do the right thing with it...pay down debt, pay for school, invest, etc. They will NOT head out to Walmart to buy the latest Game Box, X-Box, whatever the hell you call it.....Do you know what I think the people who get this rebate and do not deserve it will do????

I think they will say...."HHHmmmmm, I have $400, I'm gonna go buy some new clothes" GREAT!! They go to the Mall, they buy their new clothes and they spend $700...."I'll just use my MasterCard and when the bill comes I'll pay that whole $400 to the bill and that'll be allgood"....the problem is they get drunk and party over the weekend and spend the $400 on booze, women, whatever. They are more in debt....they continue this cycle until they file bankrupt.....NOW WHO BENEFITS???

[RAT Patrol]

I have a problem with cutting educational spending outright though. See, I have a problem with speaking in terms of money minus the more important ingredients of effort and quality. It doesn't COST more to try harder. It doesn't cost more to choose sane and effective curriculum. Get rid of the politics like environmentalism, multiculturalism, revisionist history, whole language, new new new new NEW lame math, etc.... End the huge disparities between administrative funding and classroom funding. Do more with the money that's there.

I'm tired of this "all roads lead to swiping more of my money" educational arguments using our own children against us. Maybe our kids need a financially free future too. The arguements are always: If the kids are failing, it's because they're underfunded. If the kids are doing well, they need more money to maintain it. Like Jeb Bush said, "A trillion dollars could fall from the sky into the hands of educators and it still wouldn't be enough."

Show me an end to the cries for more of my money. Are our kids that stupid? Buy 'em a book and give 'em a few hours with it. You might be surprised how easy it is.

[NC28203]

First, those that are renters are paying property taxes, it's just included in the cost of their rent. I concur that those are local taxes.
Second, the federal governement actually is very successful at nickel and diming us out of our money in addition to income and payroll taxes. Have you seen the taxes on a gallon of gas or carefully read your phone bill? So the working poor actually are paying federal taxes. As the table in post #13 states, the lowest quintile pays 4.2% of their income to the federal governement and the second quintile pays 14.2%.

[kevao]

Why should people who don't pay income tax get a refund? That makes no sense at all and is pure socialism...

I'm going to the mall tonight to get rebates for all the products I haven't purchased.

[eboyer]

What are you talking about?

I didn't recommend more money be spent, just that I don't like the idea of "no money".

[Orangedog]

Cause single guys keep knocking up the welfare recipients, so we have to pay more taxes just to keep up.

Well, we can end this nasty cycle by NOT paying for the illegitimate kids. You know, all part of that "smaller government" thing I've heard a couple of times in the past.

[DeathfromBelow]

Have you seen the taxes on a gallon of gas or carefully read your phone bill? So the working poor actually are paying federal taxes. Did you READ my Posts?

THEY AREN'T PAYING ANY FEDERAL INCOME TAXES. When you add up my share, I'm well over the 50% in all those, so enough is enough.

[Consort]

Does any federal tax money go to the states as block grants or by any other means? If so, and some this money is returned to people who pay sales taxes, then am I still wrong?

[CyberAnt]

It's obvious people don't understand how politics works. When you want to win an election ... you don't shoot yourself in the foot by keeping part of the electorate from getting in on the rebate. That's what the dems discovered when they realized that the Rino's voting no for the tax cut had caused that item to be removed from the bill. The dems know that most of the "don't pay tax" people are their constituients - they had to do something to make it look like Bush didn't want to help them - it has backfired - ONCE AGAIN - because now the repubs get to add back in a couple of items they really wanted.

The repubs DIDN'T CAVE! They got an increase in the tax credit for higher income people - many of whom I personally know - who are hard working people who have children - who weren't going to get the rebate. What we got was a erasure of the marriage penalty related to this tax cut.

All you DU's can now go back into your cave - THE REPUBS DIDN'T CAVE - GIVE IT UP!!

[DeathfromBelow]

Does any federal tax money go to the states as block grants or by any other means? If so, and some this money is returned to people who pay sales taxes, then am I still wrong?

And... this makes this additional redistribution of wealth... What more palatable?????

[Kewlhand`tek]

i havent read all the posts but i have a different take on this. Supposedly the Administration wanted these child tax cut benifits democrats said the tax cut was too big then republican took out the child care tax fund and the tax bill passes. the dems then want the child care tax fund back in............seems like Bush is getting his whole tax he wanted..........unfortunately dems will gain big on this , if they hadnt caved in the first place the dems wouldnt have any ammo

[The Wizard]

excellent idea

[MEGoody]

"Could say the same for mortgage interest deduction, health insurance credit for self employed, etc"

It's not income redistribution when you pay less taxes to government. You are simply keeping your own money.

It IS redistribution when people who don't pay taxes get a 'tax cut'.

[Satadru]

I am not the President of the US, not even a member of Congress. If our elected leaders choose not to do anything, they need to step aside.