Bush Wants House to Pass Child Tax Refunds

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush would sign a bill ensuring that low-income workers benefit from an increase in the child tax credit if the U.S. House of Representatives follows the Senate's lead and passes the measure, the White House said on Monday.

White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said Bush wants the Republican-led House to pass the bill quickly so he can sign it into law.

"He understands they're going to take a look at some other tax matters. That's their prerogative," Fleischer told reporters. "But he wants to make certain that this does not get slowed down, bogged down. He wants to sign it."

Democrats have criticized both Bush and Republicans who control Congress for dropping a provision from the $350 billion tax cut bill Bush signed into law that would have allowed low income workers to benefit from the child tax credit increase.

Democrats have called the tax bill, which cuts taxes on dividends and capital gains on investments, a sop to the rich.

The Senate last week overwhelmingly approved a measure that would allow low-income families to benefit from the $400 increase in the child tax credit even if they do not earn enough money to pay federal income taxes.

House Republican leaders have suggested they may try to get more tax cuts out of the deal. Majority Leader Tom DeLay, a Texas Republican, said he would only support the child tax credit measure as part of a broader tax cut bill.

Spoken like a true doublethink conservative.

First off, please don't brand me with your labels. Everyone within the Republican Party or the Conservative movement is not required to think and act exactly alike on every issue. Petty insults and fights over who is more conservative are tearing apart the party from the inside.

That said: it is a fine thing and quite commendable to pursue, promote, and vote a purist philosophical line. However, there is also something to be said for political pragmatism. The cost of this payment is low in terms of the budget, and even in terms of its net percentage of the overall tax relief package. It is, however, popular and presents a potential noisy problem in '04. Why not turn the situation into a positive? Why not use the issue to gain back some of what was lost in conference? The tax relief package will now certainly total MORE than the $350BB the libs insisted was a hard cap, and the President can claim even more political credit for tax policy.

Like it or not politics is a game of compromise. Those who seize the winning issues can dominate the debate and better forward their preferred agenda. To sell the idea that tax cuts are in fact good for everyone goes a long way towards eliminating sunsets and passing even more relief. I apologize not an ounce for being glad that this president is better at the game than the libs.

lOOK,it is the lower and middle class of working people,who pay most of the interest rates in this country.The upper middle and upper class people usually has enough money to pay for most of their purchases therefore,they have more money to spend.Why should they be getting a tax break? Most lower class Americans makes 5.15 per hour,compared to say 50.000 yrly.upwards, where the lower income citizens have too pay three times the intrest rates, to have anything of value.Therefore putting more money into the econimy.So why shouldn't they get the tax break also? GET OVER IT

So why shouldn't they get the tax break also? GET OVER IT

Because, by definition, it is NOT a tax break. Call it a welfare payment, call it charity, call it "Bush wants to buy your vote" but calling it a tax break is a LIE.

Notice no one seems to be concerned about all those people with children who make over 120k. They aren't getting a "tax break" and they actually pay income taxes.

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.