The president gets snookered and we pay the price

Oak Lawn (IL) Reporter | 6/12/03 | Michael M. Bates

[mikeb704]

Some economic facts of life are obvious. You can’t take money out of a bank account unless someone has put money in it. You can’t get a rebate on a product if you don’t buy it. You can’t take advantage of lower interest rates if you don’t take out a mortgage.

Only in Washington, D.C. can basic economic truisms be turned on their head. That’s the case with the expanded child tax credit.

Less than a month ago, Mr. Bush signed a multibillion dollar tax cut that will issue checks of up to $400 to most middle-income families. The reimbursement is the result of an increase in the child’s tax credit to $1,000 from the current, partially refundable $600.

But then the Left went into a collective hissy fit because the legislation didn’t do enough. Sure, it provided refunds to taxpayers. But why in the world should those who don’t pay taxes not be eligible as well? Should people be denied a tax cut merely because they don’t pay any federal income tax? Talk about unfair.

"These are hardworking couples who put in a hard day’s work," argued Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-AR). No one said they weren’t, but no matter. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) took a break from hawking her new book of fiction to wail: "This administration is waging war on poor children."

"George Bush promised to leave no child behind, and with the stroke of his pen yesterday, he left 12 million children behind," said Democrat presidential candidate and Mr. Ed look-alike Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts.

Jumping on the issue were the dependable Washington Post and New York Times. The Post ran an editorial titled "Children left behind" in which it bemoaned, "Stiffing these children." The Times’ Bob Herbert wrote: "The fat cats will get their tax cuts. But in the new American plutocracy, there won't even be crumbs left over for the working folks at the bottom of the pyramid to scramble after."

According to the Post’s David Broder, "Something got screwed up in terms of your priorities if you think it’s more important to get rid of the dividend tax than it is to take care of 11 million kids."

Peter Jennings began his ABC World News Tonight broadcast with, "We’re going to begin here in Washington tonight because now that the President’s tax cut has become law and people thought the dust of debate had settled here, it turns out that a whole lot of people in the country who could use the money are not going to get it...."

And so the debate was framed. As usual, it was the cold, heartless, fat cat protecting Republicans against the warm, loving, ultra virtuous Democrats and other libs. And, as is so often the case, it’s all for, you guessed it, THE CHILDREN.

It was no contest. Republican whip Roy Blunt of Missouri audaciously proclaimed that his party had nothing to fear in terms of a backlash as long as Americans understood that it’s only the families who don’t pay taxes who wouldn’t be getting a tax cut. "This is a tax credit, not a . . . number-of-children benefit program," he pointed out.

That’s fine but for one small problem. Most American’s don’t have an understanding of the issue. They hear sound bites and watch what Big Media tells them and then move on to more important matters, such as keeping up with what’s called reality TV. They don’t realize that the expanded child’s credit is not a tax cut. What the Left wants, predictably, is more welfare. Which is exactly what this debate is all about.

Blunt’s boss, House majority leader Tom DeLay, has expressed his opposition to expanding the child’s tax credit to non-taxpayers as the Senate did last week. Monday, the president decided to get on the bandwagon before it rolls over him. He’s now encouraging the House to go along with the Senate.

Mr. Bush is yielding to the inevitable, made inevitable by our lack of interest in policy issues. I’m disappointed in him and I’m disappointed in us.

This is a textbook example of how the Left keeps racking up victories no matter who’s in the White House and no matter who controls Congress.

[mikeb704]

Taking a break from Mz Klintoon.

[theDentist]

Were you surprised? The press remains blind to facts, and open to any twisted bull the liberals put out.

What the Repubs should have done is agreed to the new "inclusions", but add on a rider making all the Bush tax breaks and cuts PERMANENT.

[blackdog]

This whole debate is a result of the 8000lb elephant standing in the middle of the room nobody wants to mention......Payroll taxes!

The social security tax and medicaid taxes are brutal on a family earning less than $30,000. Instead of talking about that, it's being avoided like a big pile of dog crap. It's tough to explain that those taxes being confiscated are not "taxes".

Just like a blow-job isn't "sex", some forms of taxes are not "taxes".

Journalists should be taken out back and have their hands broken. Their singular explanation of a multi-point issue(but still simple) like this tax cut is criminal. Jayson Blair did more honest reporting.

[blackdog]

Excellent point!

What's also not being mentioned is that the states are going to be raising taxes by far more than the Bush plan offers at the federal level, in effect wiping out the relief. It was never your money in the first place ITHO.

[finnman69]

tHAT'S HOW I WOULD HAVE PLAYED IT...

ok, you guys want a welfare break disguised as a tax cut...fine..lets make other parts of the tax cuts permanent...
DEAL?

[Stirner]

"What the Repubs should have done is agreed to the new "inclusions", but add on a rider making all the Bush tax breaks and cuts PERMANENT."

In addition to that, they should have gone along with the fiction that the expanded child care credit for non-tax payers is a tax cut. The president could say, "I wanted a bigger tax cut, but some in Congress put a $350 Billion limit on things. Now that the Democrats want to make the tax cut even bigger, I'm glad they have seen the light and acknowledge that tax cuts are a good thing."

[Steven W.]

you don't understand - the objective IS to talk about payroll taxes and the like, to sepearate the wall that previously separated income taxes from social security, so the DemoncRATs can bust open the budget even more.

[blackdog]

Yes, but do you think the Democrats spending the $600 tax credit that the person not paying taxes will be getting is better? I see it as a zero sum gain. At least the family that gets it even though they should not does not mean I would rather see Byrd spend it on another Byrd memorial or Daschle spend it on a muffler or emergency farm bills.

Every dollar that is not spent by congress is a good thing.

[DoughtyOne]

"This is a textbook example of how the Left keeps racking up victories no matter who’s in the White House and no matter who controls Congress."

These words are golden, but sadly those who desperately need to hear them and understand them the most, are mesmerize by a good man and a misguided concept of what reasoned support should be.
 Thus the true meaning and missed value of them will continue to cost our nation dearly.  And enabeling that eventuality, many will pat themselves on the back as they facilitate a further slide into oblivion.

[ex-snook]

"some forms of taxes are not "taxes". "

We have a bingo. Somehow the GOP has a partitioned view of taxes and isolate income taxes as the only tax that should be cut. These wild and crazy guys are giving W-2 taxes (social security) to those getting dividend tax cuts. Talk about redistribution.

[blackdog]

That's still better than the money going to Washington. Welfare for working people of welfare for bloated gubmint is the choice to be made here. I'll settle for the lesser of the two evils.

[blackdog]

I would think that there is a supreme court argument over giving "Income Tax Cut Refunds" to people who do not pay "Income Tax". It is no longer a tax issue but an entitlement issue and should be handled by HHS and not the IRS. The IRS collects taxes. They are not a welfare agency.

Every penny of the "tax rebate" that goes to families who pay no taxes should come off the bottom line on the HHS budget. Guess how fast that will stop?

[blackdog]

When do the new witholding tables go into effect? I read them posted on the IRS website, but when can employers start the adjustments to witholding? That's the rebate I'm interested in. Steady cash flow.........

I would rather see the $600 per child credit given to everyone when they file next season. If it shows up that way, repealing it with a sunset will show it as a tax increase when the sun goes down.

[Redwood71]

"This is a textbook example of how the Left keeps racking up victories no matter who’s in the White House and no matter who controls Congress."


This may be a case of wanting is better than receiving. When it becomes election time in a little over a year, it needs to be brought up that Bush was "compassionate" and willing to sacrafice some of the money that could have been needed for our national security or put forward for assistance for lower drug prices or shoring up social security or medicare for alittle longer or.......Let's just remember this and let the liberals have their victory. But, let them suffer the pangs of the defeat with it when they need to be reminded of the money that would have been set aside for the lack of services they are bitching about. And you can be absolutely assured they are going to. And this is in addition to the tax cut they wanted. Sometimes it's better to be an ant than a grasshopper.

[ex-snook]

Yes you are right because it's called 'income tax cut'. But then have another companion bill which reduces taxes other than income. Suppose the double tax was eliminated on the corporate side. Then that would not have to be passed on to consumers in prices. Also 'hidden' taxes on gasoline, telephone and the wad of other taxes in consumer product prices. GOP 'tax reduction' is FUBAR.

[DoughtyOne]

I agree with your suggestion. As an after the fact remedy, it's about the only option I can see as remotely productive.

[hunter112]

I'm with you, better to give a little bit now, and get the Congress we want (fillibuster-proof), to really reform the tax system from the ground up.

[StoneColdTaxHater]

The biggest problem is that the American public is for the most part ignorant as hell. We have the collective attention span of infants and the DEMS play to that with emotional arguments rather than address facts. Facts take too long to process, emotions are quick, down and dirty. Nothing will ever get better until we all wake up.

[mikeb704]

Absolutely agree.

[Stultis]

"The fat cats will get their tax cuts..."

Hey, I bet those of you trying to raise a family on $27K didn't know you were "fat cats". Ponder that one while sailing your yacht through the Greek islands.