creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Deb Saunders
Debra J. Saunders
27 May 2012
When Will Obama Reform Presidential Pardons?

As a candidate for president in 2008, Barack Obama pledged to "immediately" review federal … Read More.

24 May 2012
In the House, Is 80 Over the Hill?

When Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., lost the GOP primary to challenger Richard Mourdock this month, Beltway … Read More.

22 May 2012
Democrats' War on Money

Cory Booker, mayor of Newark, N.J., came across as a moderate, sensible Democrat when he said on "Meet … Read More.

Larding the Path to Economic Recovery

Share Comment

When former GOP House Speaker Newt Gingrich proclaims a measure to be "good for the country," that usually means it's good for Gingrich. When President Obama tells the media that his $858 billion compromise tax package is the fruit of negotiations with GOP "hostage-takers," you have to wonder if he even wants it to pass.

Obama finally figured out that Democrats have only hurt themselves in pushing for an extension of the Bush tax cuts — except for the top 2 percent of earners. You don't raise taxes on anyone during a shaky recovery.

Even so, I think Democrats like Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland are right to object to the measure's $23 billion estate-tax "giveaway."

I'd be happy to discuss philosophical questions on death taxes after the budget is balanced. For now, the country can't afford it. The Concord Coalition sees "no stimulative effect" in this tax break. Congress would do well to return the estate tax rate to 2009 levels — 45 percent for estates over $3.5 million — instead of 35 percent after $5 mil as per "the deal."

The tab for extending unemployment insurance benefits for 13 months is $56 billion. In this deal, neither the left nor right pays for its peanuts.

Obama boasts that he won a one-year 2 percent Social Security payroll tax reduction in lieu of his lesser "Make Work Pay" 2009 tax credit.

Remember all those liberal complaints about how wrong it was for George W. Bush to cut taxes while America is at war — make that two wars?

Well, forget all that.

Obamaland clearly isn't worried about further destabilizing Social Security.

Ahead of predictions, this year, Social Security began to pay out more — a projected $41 billion — than it takes in. This scheme only makes the situation worse.

Every politician's favorite economist, Mark Zandi of Moody's, called the payroll-tax holiday one of the compromise's "big surprises." The biggest surprise of all would be if Washington doesn't make this temporary tax cut permanent. As Tax Foundation analyst Nick Kasprak observed, "It's a lot easier to cut taxes than it is to raise them."

Then there are billions in corporate welfare, including tax breaks for NASCAR, rum-makers and film producers. Farm-belt senators wanted to extend a 45-cents-per-gallon ethanol subsidy that goes to Big Oil. They got it.

Left Coast Democrats protested and demanded funds for "clean energy." They got it, too.

With 81 senators voting for the package Wednesday, clearly the measure would have passed without the pork. But this Senate doesn't know how to pass a bill without larding it with goodies for special interests.

Having trashed this bill, I nonetheless understand why Democrats and Republicans would vote for this poor excuse of a compromise. They are afraid not to.

Zandi predicts it will add 1 percentage point to the nation's 2011 GDP and create jobs "ensuring that the still-fragile economic recovery evolves into a self-sustaining economic expansion."

No one wants to damage the recovery. Then again, if America's small businesses had known sooner that their taxes wouldn't be going up in January, the recovery likely would be on surer footing already.

E-mail Debra J. Saunders at dsaunders@sfchronicle.com. To find out more about Debra J. Saunders, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2010 CREATORS.COM


Comments

1 Comments | Post Comment
"I'd be happy to discuss philosophical questions on death taxes after the budget is balanced. For now, the country can't afford it."
It's not a philosophical question to those robbed by the government between now and some unlikely-ever-to-be-seen future date when the budget is balanced.
All taxes are opportunistic--all governments basically seize whatever the can get, from wherever they can get it, to just shy of the point of rebellion or economic collapse. But estate taxes are more opportunistic than most--there is exactly zero legitimate justification for robbing the dead.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Henry Miller
Thu Dec 16, 2010 7:00 AM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Debra J. Saunders
May. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31 1 2
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Author’s Podcast
Roland Martin
Roland S. MartinUpdated 20 Jun 2012
Marc Dion
Marc DionUpdated 28 May 2012
Steve Chapman
Steve ChapmanUpdated 27 May 2012

31 Jul 2007 U.N. Chief's Tepid Sense of Security

8 Jan 2009 Empty Seats

14 Aug 2008 Boxer Bullies Senate's Birth Doc