So why can't thew Dems use reconciliation for tax cuts?

[booley]

I originally stated this on another thread but now I think I should ask DU as a whole.

I am not going to pretend I am an expert on Congress. However a few things I have noticed.

First, the Bush tax cuts were put into place through reconciliation. That is why they had to be temporary.

Secondly, the GOP is pushing this so hard, willing to deny middle class tax cuts if they don't get what they want because they can't sell letting the super wealthy pay even less of their tax obligations by itself. It's hard to convince people to support selfishness if they themselves don't get anything or already have it.

And last, the Dems still have a majority in both houses until January. They don't need a filibuster proof majority only a simple majority for reconciliation.

So why couldn't the Dems just do a reconciliation bill that only covered the middle class. Yes it would be temporary but people wouldn't remember that, only that the Dems gave them a cut in taxes. The GOP , meanwhile would have to fight for a cut specifically for those who already have lots and lots of money. The Dems would have 2 years to play that up in time for the next election.

I find it difficult to believe that I am the only one who thought of this. I am sure someone here will flame me about why this is a bad idea, ect ect...

[phleshdef]

1. Reconciliation can only be used once per year.

[booley]

3. what else did we use reconciliation on this year?

Sorry I don't recall.

[phleshdef]

4. Er, we used it to pass healthcare reform. Reconciliation was used to amend the Senate bill.

[cdsilv]

2. not really a tax 'cut', just extension of the current rate....avoidance of an increase...

...splitting hairs really. BUT - if the dems do this, my disposable income will not go UP, but if they don't do this it will go DOWN.

[Bucky]

5. Reconciliation is only an effective work-around when your party controls both houses

Come January, that's over with