Pelosi "urging" Obama to repeal Bush tax cuts

[Enrique]

http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0109/Pelosi_urging_Obama_to_move_faster_on_taxcut_repeal.html

Pelosi "urging" Obama to repeal Bush tax cuts

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi tells Politico she's "urging" President-Elect Barack Obama to quickly repeal Bush administration tax cuts for the wealthy -- not wait for them to expire in 2010, as Obama has suggested he might do.

"He has the full package of what he wants to do, and we'll respect what he is saying, but put me down as one who is urging repeal," said Pelosi, ducking into her Capitol office suite to watch Obama's dour speech on the economy.

Pelosi supports Obama's push to include $300 billion in middle-class tax relief but she has long been a critic of Bush's cuts for families making over $250,000 a year.

Obama said he would get rid of the cuts during his campaign, but has softened his stance in recently weeks, saying the dire state of the economy could force him to abandon the idea of quickly repealing them, for fear of worsening the contraction.

(...)

[sandnsea]

1. Those are supposed to pay for health care

If he gets rid of them now, what are we going to use to pay for health care?

[Enrique]

2. wait, I'm confused

a repeal of the tax cuts would increase revenue.

What do you mean the tax cuts were intended to pay for anything, isn't it the other way around? Or am I misunderstanding you?

[sandnsea]

11. Repeal the tax cuts, the increased revenue

is supposed to go towards paying for health care. Dean ran on it, Kerry ran on it, Obama ran on it, I think even Hillary ran on it.

[John Q. Citizen]

5. He might be forced to go to single payer to make health care affordable. It would be a bummer for

the insurance companies and their stock holders, for big pharma, and for people who make their money price gouging, but for the rest of us it would be a good thing.

Unfortunately due to the economy, we just might have to accept single payer.

But hey, I'm willing to volunteer. If it helps the country. :-)


The Missoulain had a front page article today about how all the Obama meetings state wide on health care everyone is saying we need single payer or it isn't change.

Earth to Max, earth to Max, come in Max.

[sandnsea]

13. It will still need to be paid for

You don't think the bottom 50% are ever going to be able to pay for full health care, do you?

[John Q. Citizen]

19. We already pay for it, but we are being ripped off. We jusrt need to stop the rip off and

put the stolen money into health care.

We are the most expensive system because we are the most ripped off.


By making a graduated income tax based system everyone pays in something instead of the cost shifting we now have where many pay nothing for infrequent and only emergency care. So they would be paying during their lives when they made income. At least something.

Of course the disabled, unemployed, etc get care too.

But we put all the money currently from medicare/medicaide/CHIP and all state and local programs into the pot, and we finance the rest from tax receipts.

So we cut out the duplication and redundancy and we are all covered under on publicly collected insurance pool thus spreading the risk and lowering the costs as much as possible.

Today we spend 40% more per person than the next most expensive system, so ours will be kick ass without spending a dime more that we do now.

[sandnsea]

21. A graduated income tax system

Means that the wealthy pay more - and that "more" was supposed to come from shifting the Bush tax cuts to a health care plan. It's going to be expensive, no matter what kind of plan it is.

[John Q. Citizen]

24. they already pay more so it's a wash. Ask GM. Ask small business people.

Everyone knows we are being ripped off.

Everyone knows it's already the most expensive for the least return.

[sandnsea]

25. Oh okay, they're taxed too much

silly me. I guess we better let them keep their Bush tax cuts then.

I didn't realize the left had made the entire loop and were now the right.

[John Q. Citizen]

29. Let them keep the tax cuts so they can pay it out in health care taxes. i'd go for that.

PS

What are you flipping out about? did I offend you?

[sandnsea]

30. However you want to phrase it

But the plan is to repeal the tax cut and use that money for the health plan. Same difference.

And I am not flipping out. I don't understand why people pretend they never heard anybody say we should repeal the Bush tax cuts to pay for health care. It's annoying.

[John Q. Citizen]

31. Actually, they shouldn't keep all the tax cuts, just some, and then those can go to

their share of our new system, but as health care taxes instead of as revoked cuts. It will make them feel better.

Obama can cut the middle class taxes and then charge them their share and they will come out far better on the far side.

[Two Americas]

6. how?

How do tax cuts for the wealthy pay for health care?

[blendermax]

12. Because the wealthy will use their tax savings to fund healthcare programs for the poor

or not, lol.

[sandnsea]

14. Like Howard Dean said, the repeal

of the tax cuts.

I really don't understand why people enjoy acting stupid. This has only been the plan for 6 fucking years now.

[Two Americas]

17. no need for insults

You weren't clear in your post. You said "those are supposed to pay for health care. If he gets rid of them now, what are we going to use to pay for health care?"

The assumption people made was that "those" meant the tax cuts for the wealthy. I think you mean to say the repeal of the tax cuts would pay for health care.

Did you mean to say that the tax cuts would pay for health care, or that the repeal of the tax cuts would pay for health care?

[sandnsea]

22. Yes I was clear

except to people who wanted to pull shit out of their ass and pretend they had no clue that people have been screaming for the Bush tax cuts to go to health care since 2003 - including you.

[Enrique]

23. I was confused too

still am, in fact. Your insulting responses aren't helping me understand what you meant in your first post. I just read it again and it still makes no sense. It looks like you got things backward.

[sandnsea]

28. Then you haven't been paying attention

If we repeal the Bush tax cuts like Nancy Pelosi wants, then what are we going to use to pay for health care because that is what every Democrat since Dean has proposed.

If you don't understand that it's because you think you're clever pretending not to.

Later. No time for stupidity.

[Two Americas]

26. you lost me

It is just not clear what you are saying, and I have no idea why you are being so hostile.

Again you say "the Bush tax cuts to go to health care."

I think you mean to say "the repeal of the Bush tax cuts (would) to go to health care," but I am still not sure if that is what you are saying.

[PBS Poll-435]

3. Pssst....Nancy....

You are in charge of the people that write the legislation.

Obama can't flip a switch to end the cuts.

[FrenchieCat]

4. Yeah...that's a fight that we need to wage right now Nancy!

we really need to use up the time that we have within the next year to do something that will be getting done anyways! Brilliant! :sarcasm:

[Enrique]

7. so you think we should keep our powder dry

to quote a phrase I've heard a lot.

[FrenchieCat]

9. I think that there are many woes facing us in the first few months of

Obama's presidency. I think this nation is better served concentrating on battles that must be fought, as opposed to those that don't. In particular, considering the elections of 2010.....I don't think we would be best served for the remainding 2 years of Obama's term to focus on repealing something that is going away without the fight that would be required otherwise.

[Enrique]

10. the 2010 elections are an argument for doing it now

if we do it right now it won't be an issue in 2010. I'm with Nancy on this, but I understand why some dems would balk.

[FrenchieCat]

15. We are already in 2009. I'm not sure why you think this being Obama's priority

would help politically in any way.

Again, those who are willing to fight a battle that doesn't need to be waged,
are underestimating the fight that the GOP and their media would put up.

Pelosi is used to fighting prior to caving, so I understand her stance...but
Is the additional revenue, when many will be reporting loses (e.g. capital gains)
really going to provide the bang that would justify the fight itself?
I don't think so.

Obama didn't run so much on repealing the Bush tax cuts as running on a middle class tax cut, and by the way using the end of the Bush tax cuts as a way to pay for them. Since the Stimuli will pay for them instead, the tax cut repeal is not key to passing the middle class tax cuts.....which he did definitely run on.

Making Obama's first 100 days about class tax warfare when we could get the adjustment toward a more balance progressive income tax naturally doesn't make much sense....other than for those who are simply against those tax cuts on principle. Principle is dandy, but I don't think that we need to put Obama's entire agenda at risk for such.

[Enrique]

18. Senate dems are making tax cuts an issue as well

questioning the tax cuts for businesses in Obama's proposed stimulus package. Congress will fight Obama for certain things, but I think the leadership will stop short of putting his agenda at risk. The republicans like those tax cuts, Obama needs some support from them, but the dems shouldn't just lie down.

[FrenchieCat]

20. The Tax Cuts speculated in Obama's plan are for small businesses.....

which is not the same thing as tax cuts for large corporation. Small businesses will need all of the help they can get when filing 2009 taxes. Some of the tax breaks being offered have to do with retaining employees, encouraging asset purchases and assistance in paying health care cost, from what I understand. I think those tax cuts are helpful and useful at this time.

Of course it is better for both parties to question certain offerings (although Obama has yet to officially present anything). If Democrats were all for whatever Obama presents, there would be compromises only to the GOP side that would water down Obama's proposal. If the Democrats start out asking for more than what Obama is asking for from their ideological point of view, they counter the fact that Republicans will do the same...and so it will look quite reasonable that both the Dems and the GOP are factored into the compromise equation of Obama's proposals. In fact, it would ensure that Obama gets closer to what he is asking for, but still seen as a compromise. That may even be the strategy behind what Nancy is now saying. That way, Obama's Stimulus package can pass unscathed.

Anyways, nothing is by accident. I strongly believe that Nancy's posturing is meant to help Obama's package closer to passing "as is" and yet appear as a compromise between what the GOP and the Dems will be demanding.

[camera obscura]

8. I have to side with Pelosi on this one.

The plan Obama presented in the campaign was fine, he shouldn't let anyone tell him otherwise.

[FrenchieCat]

16. She'd end up caving in the end anyways.......

So putting you on her side will not repeal the Bush Tax Cuts at the end. It will only invite the fight and waste in energy in getting and done and then failing. That's what she's known for.

[loyalsister]

27. Timing is everything

Januar- April is tax time. Repealing tax cuts during tax time is a no go. It's what everyone comlaining about. Once there is enough time to get another distraction between taxes and whatever other political brew ha ha is upsetting whoever, people who can afford to pay a little more may be feeling more generous. The idea is to avoid pissing people off about their primary irritant of the day.