The partisan Democrat stimulus bill
Find a Conversation
| Sun, 02-01-2009 - 9:06pm |
Looks like Democrats may want to include at least a single Republican when preparing bills. The partisan Democrat stimulus bill may be headed for some rough waters.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gdDrWnoMueqVFI-Uo1ClxVZur22AD9631OL80
GOP leaders doubt stimulus bill will pass Senate
WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell said Sunday the massive stimulus bill backed by President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats could go down to defeat if it's not stripped of unnecessary spending and focused more on housing issues and tax cuts.
The Senate version of the bill, which topped out at nearly $900 billion, is headed to the floor for debate. The House bill totaled about $819 billion and earned no Republican votes, even though it easily passed the Democratic-controlled House. At some point lawmakers will need to compromise on the competing versions.
McConnell and other Republicans suggested that the bill needed an overhaul because it doesn't pump enough into the private sector through tax cuts and allows Democrats to go on a spending spree unlikely to jolt the economy. The Republican leader also complained that Democrats had not been as bipartisan in writing the bill as Obama had said he wanted.
"I think it may be time ... for the president to kind of get a hold of these Democrats in the Senate and the House, who have rather significant majorities, and shake them a little bit and say, 'Look, let's do this the right way,'" McConnell said. "I can't believe that the president isn't embarrassed about the products that have been produced so far."
Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona, the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, said he was seeing an erosion of support for the bill and suggested that lawmakers should consider beginning anew.
"When I say start from scratch, what I mean is that the basic approach of this bill, we believe, is wrong," Kyl said.
While Democrats defended the bill, they said they were open to considering changes by Republicans. But they also said the unrelentingly bleak economic news demanded action.
"We cannot delay this," said Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the Senate Democrats' No. 2 leader. "We can't engage in the old political rhetoric of saying, 'Well, maybe it could be a little bit better here and a little bit better there.' We've got to pull together."
Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., agreed that more could be done in the area of housing, though he said tapping money in the separate financial bailout fund would be a more likely way to pay for mortgage relief.
Under Obama's plan, strained state budgets would receive a cash infusion, projects for roads and other infrastructure would be funded, and "green jobs" in the energy sector would be created. In its centerpiece tax cut, single workers would gain $500 and couples $1,000, even if they don't earn enough to owe federal income taxes.
Among the major changes Kyl said would be needed to gain Republican support in the Senate was the tax rebate for individuals and couples, which he criticized as going to too many people who didn't pay the tax to start with. He also criticized the bill for seeking to create nearly three dozen government programs and giving states far more money than they need.
Durbin argued that $1 out of every $3 in the bill goes to tax cuts and defended it as aimed at helping working families. While he contended that Democrats were "very open" to Republican proposals, he cited only what he said were calls for more money in job-creating public works projects, typically a Democratic priority.
Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., characterized the proposal as "a spending plan. It's not a stimulus plan. It's temporary, and it's wasteful."
Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, said the bill was designed to help people who have been damaged in the economic meltdown as well as stimulate the economy.
"I never saw a tax cut fix a bridge. I never saw a tax cut give us more public transportation. The fact is, we need a mix," Frank said.
Durbin and Kyl appeared on "Fox News Sunday," DeMint and Frank were on ABC's "This Week," and McConnell and Schumer were on CBS' "Face the Nation."

It won't pass.
I hope the country isn't foolish enough to believe that delaying BO's pork-laden bill long enough for debate will keep us mired in recession longer.
Besides, if ACORN needs funding let them go ask Soros.
Payroll taxes are taxes.
I think your link doesn't consider the situation of the earned income tax credit for low wage earners.
When I visit - http://apps.irs.gov/app/eitc2008/ProcessEligibilitySuccess.do
and plug in a wage earner who made $7,946 (the income you list as the bottom 20% of earners who supposedly pay a lot of tax) the IRS tells me there would be a $370 earned income tax credit for such a single worker with no deductions. The credit gets higher if there are deductions.
When I subtract $370 from the $1,449 this poor person is supposed to pay. I get $1,079 being paid into the system to cover social security, Medicare and other pay as you go programs.
$1,079 divided by a gross income of $7,946 is a 13.6% tax rate after earned income tax credit is considered. 13.6% would be the lowest tax rate on your chart.
Not paying for social security, turns it into a federal welfare program. Not paying for Medicare turns it into a program fully funded by income tax. This would change the nature of these programs.