- Advertisement -
  • Most Commentedmost commented up
  • Most Emailedmost emailed up
  • Popularmost popular up
- Advertisement -

« News Home

Compromise needed to extend tax cuts, unemployment pay

Published: Mon, December 19, 2011 @ 12:00 a.m.

House Republicans maintain that increasing the top rate for the nation’s highest wage earners would cripple the ability of “job creators” to do what they do best.

Yet there is little evidence that the George W. Bush tax cuts resulted in the creation of jobs, or that the extension of those cuts through the first three years of the Obama administration has created jobs.

So it would seem that the jury is still out on how effective tax cuts at the top are in creating jobs or how much damage would be done by reversing them.

Targeted tax cuts aimed at encouraging people or corporations to invest in the United States — rather than sock the money away or divert it overseas — would seem to hold the most promise for job creation, but Washington doesn’t seem to be very good at hitting targets.

House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, his Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., and others are now rattling their sabres because the Senate reached an agreement on a tax bill. It’s not an agreement to raise taxes in any way on the rich, but an agreement to maintain a 2 percent tax cut for every working American who pays into Social Security. Unless something is done, just about everyone’s take-home pay will be cut by 2 percentage points Jan. 1, when the 4.2 percent payroll tax reverts to its normal 6.2 percent.

The House passed a one-year extension of the tax cut, but it couldn’t get a majority votes in the Senate because the Republican majority in the House demands spending cuts to cover the cost, while the Democratic majority in the Senate wants to close some tax breaks for the wealthy.

A sign of dysfunction

That the House and Senate — or Republicans and Democrats — couldn’t reach a compromise on this before the 11th hour only shows how dysfunctional Congress has become. Boehner has the votes to pass take-it-or-leave it legislation in the House and expects the Democratic Senate to ratify whatever he wants. If that were the way it was supposed to work, we wouldn’t need two legislative bodies or two parties.

It is unfortunate that this partisan game of chicken has reached the point that the best that could be achieved was the Senate’s two-month extension, which passed on an overwhelmingly bipartisan vote of 92-8. But presumably Senate Democrats and Republicans believe that the two-month extension might finally allow them to agree on a way to pay for the $200 billion cost of the cut. Putting more money in people’s pockets is a good idea, but taking it out of the Social Security Trust Fund at a time when everybody acknowledges that changes in Social Security are inevitable is a bad idea.

A dangerous blame game

Boehner can reject the two-month compromise, but blaming it on Democrats is going to be a hard sell when everyone starts paying higher Social Security withholding taxes in January. And, because of another section of the bill, hundreds of thousands of people in most states will see their unemployment benefits end.

And while questions remain about how much of their tax breaks the wealthy have been pouring into job creation, there is no question that middle class taxpayers and unemployed workers pour their windfalls right back into the economy. The money they spend on food, shelter, transportation and clothing goes into the pockets of small businesses and other working men and women throughout the economy.

Boehner might want to think about that if he intends to head home to Dayton for Christmas without accepting the Senate compromise.


1CompMan(162 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Both Democratic and Republicans have failed the country by continuing the FICA 2% reduction. And people wonder why Social Security is in trouble. Seniors spend money and vote more often. They will never revert back to the 6.2% as it will be perceived as a tax increase in an election environment. Dicussions should have been to tax credit on all Adjusted Gross Income up to FICA limits $110,000 (not just W2) as in the past. ($400 single / $800 couples) This would have stimulated all income earners; and those who have interest, dividends, social security payments. Our political leaders have no right to proclaim they are protecting the interest of seniors. Ryan, Brown and Portman need to hear your views.

Suggest removal:

2Woody(493 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Jobs aren't being created because businesses aren't aware of teh rules they will be playing by. Think Nancy Pelosi, "We have to pass it before we know what is in it."

Suggest removal:

3palbubba(812 comments)posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Amen mjnovaksr. The Senate and the Vindy are morally bankrupt trying to convince we the people that the House Republicans are the culprits when it is actually the do nothing Senate and the President of change that threatened to veto any extension legislation that contained job creating pipeline as a part of it. I hope that none of you are buying into this propaganda.

Suggest removal:


HomeTerms of UsePrivacy StatementAdvertiseStaff DirectoryHelp
© 2016 Vindy.com. All rights reserved. A service of The Vindicator.
107 Vindicator Square. Youngstown, OH 44503

Phone Main: 330.747.1471 • Interactive Advertising: 330.740.2955 • Classified Advertising: 330.746.6565
Sponsored Links: Vindy Wheels | Vindy Jobs | Vindy Homes