What will Kerry do with Bush tax cuts this year

[dansolo]

Kerry has positioned himself as championing the middle class tax cuts. Bush is already pushing for legislation this year to make them permanent. But, with GOP in control, other tax cuts will also be made permanent. So what will Kerry do when the vote comes up?

1. Vote for the bill and hope that people don't notice that the rich will get more tax cuts.

2. Vote against the bill and be attacked by Bush for "raising" taxes on the middle class.

3. Avoid the vote, so when it gets brought up so he can claim both positions.

Howard Dean was honest enough to point out that all of Bush's tax cuts need to go, and he was attacked by Kerry. I am looking forward to see how Kerry will manage to wiggle his way out of this situation when it comes up. You better believe that this is exactly what Bush planned when he set the cuts to expire in 2005.

[jpgray]

1. Dean is right, but his position is in flux right now

I recall he was reconsidering his tax cut position. It was right, so I hope he doesn't.

[Nicholas_J]

9. Not a single economist

Conservative or Progressive, agrees with Deans ideas on reversing the tax cuts.As a matter of fact, when the Dems were trying to fight the Bush tax cuts, they got a bunch of Nobel Prize winning economists to discuss the tax cuts and they stated that what was needed to help the economy was a middle class tax cut, but no cuts to the rich.

Which is what Kerry and Edwards are standing on, and Dean is not.

Deans stance, at least according to British Economists will result in another recession, and possbibly a rolling, worldwide depression, as a repeal of the middle class tax cuts will take close to 750 billion dollars out of the economy over the next eight years, virtually brining the economy to a worse place than Bush brought it too, and resulting in even more loss of jobs as people stop spending what Dean is removing from their paychecks, and companies bottom lines start bottoming out again. That is simple common sense, Dena will be taking money that is spent by the middle class out of the economy, meaning less sales meaning more layoff's meaning even less sales, and on and on. The rich do not spend their very large tax cut immediately, so they have little or no effect on the economy. Even a mere 308 that Dean claims (and is incorrect as Dean is selecting a single person earning 40,000 a year and not the average family with two kids earning the median 44,000 a year) puts money immediately into the economy. It was the middle class part of the tax cuts that has brought the markets back to nearly the same levels they were at the height of the Clinton administration. All that is needed is to repeal the cuts for the rich to begin to deal with the deficit, while keeping the cuts to the middle class to keep money being spent, and everything corrects itself. remove it all and the economy crashes.

[isbister]

2. Dean was not honest about the tax cuts

and my guess would be that Kerry will consult with the Democratic leadership in the Senate and vote against bush's cuts for the rich if his vote is needed to make the difference. If they don't need his vote one way or another, I imagine he will not vote.

He probably will be speaking out loudly against the trickle-down tax cuts, too.

[lastknowngood]

4. the act of a coward

if you don't stand against evil you stand with it.

[MAlibdem]

7. But

That's sort of like a cry for a kamakazi attack. You have to strike when the iron's hot. If he needs to, I'm sure Kerry will vote. If not, then he will improve himself politically (read: with voters, NOT special interests), and wait for an opportunity when he can set the agenda, which will include rolling back the tax cuts on the uber-rich (read: the ones we can roll back with moderate GOP support in face of deficit unless we are fortunate to have Dem controlled House or Senate...that'd be nice).

[lastknowngood]

3. avoid it like he did the overtime bill

he hasn't got the guts to do otherwise.

[papau]

5. not a problem - a vote in 2005 does not cause a problem - no need for a

2004 vote- since the revision to tax law would take place well before you file in 2006 for 2005.

It is a false choice - and does not pass the laugh test

but our idiot media no doubt will have a few hours of air time to say that Kerry's not voting to make them permanent in a 2004 vote proves some GOP point.

not that they are right wing acting GOP controlled media whores - they just act that way.

[IndianaGreen]

6. Kerry already referred to any rollback of Bush's cuts as "tax increases"

when he attacked Dean's budget proposals. It would be another waffle on Kerry's part to now change his tune, again!

[Feanorcurufinwe]

8. What will Dean do after he drops out of the race?

Of course Kerry will vote against -- your question is ridiculous.

[quaker bill]

10. Spend it funding his campaign.

[sangha]

11. a recent poll showed almost 75% against new tax cuts

Do the math

[dansolo]

12. So you are saying that Dean is right?

New tax cuts would include making the middle class tax cuts permanent.

[Edge]

13. He'll avoid it.