Patterico's Pontifications


Candidates Vote on Tax Cuts and Earmarks

Filed under: 2008 Election — DRJ @ 2:59 pm

[Guest post by DRJ]

In what has been described as a symbolic vote, the Senate and House voted today on extending the Bush tax cuts:

“The Senate on Thursday rejected the idea of renewing many of President Bush’s tax cuts as all three major presidential candidates interrupted their campaigns to cast their votes. The House approved a budget blueprint that would raise taxes by $683 billion over the next five years. The Senate did embrace Bush reductions aimed at low-income workers, married couples and people with children.

The House budget plan would provide generous increases to domestic federal programs but still is designed to bring the government’s budget back into the black by letting all of Bush’s tax cuts expire at the end of 2010. That plan passed the House on a 212-207 vote with Republicans unanimously opposing it.

The Senate voted 99-1 to extend the cuts for some workers as well as couples and parents. Senators voted 52-47 to reject a move to extend tax cuts for middle- and higher-income taxpayers, investors and people inheriting businesses and big estates.

The votes were mostly symbolic, but they put senators in both parties on the record for when the tax cuts actually expire in three years.

Arizona GOP Sen. John McCain, Republican presidential nominee-in- waiting, voted for the full roster of Bush tax cuts. Rivals Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., and Barack Obama, D-Ill., both voted against them.
Obama and Clinton both promise to reverse Bush’s tax cuts for wealthier taxpayers, but the Democratic budget they’ll be voting for would allow income tax rates to go up on individuals making as little as $31,850 and couples earning $63,700 or more.”

Tonight’s vote on earmarks is expected to bring more bad news for conservatives because “opponents of ‘pork barrel’ projects [are] expected to lose a late-night vote to ban such earmarks for a year, despite the endorsement of all three presidential candidates.”


5 Responses to “Candidates Vote on Tax Cuts and Earmarks”

  1. When the democrats decry Bush’s rax cuts for the wealthy I always wonder what their definition of “wealthy” was. Bush’s tax cuts knocked 7.8 million families off the tax paying rolls.

    Looking at your post, DRJ, and accounts of the competing House and Senate bills, it looks like the democrat definition of wealthy begins at income of $31,850 for an individual and $63,700 for families. Who knew?

    daleyrocks (906622)

  2. proving once & for all that when the Dem’s talk about “Change!”, they’re referring to what will be left in your pockets after they’re through.

    guess we’ll have to hold our noses in November after all, not that i trust McLame to do any better.

    redc1c4 (f249d0)

  3. This and Obama wants to institute a Carbon Tax on the US. That will make sure everyone is dependant on the Government as no one will have any money.

    PCD (5ebd0e)

  4. How do they expect middle class and married couples to provide housing and food for the family if they keep taking all the money they earn. If they would drill for oil in Alaska and quite buying oil from the middle East and let Iraq rebuild their own country, maybe there would be money to use for American programs. A democrat is only looking for ways to line there own pockets. I wouldn’t vote for Hillary or Obama if they were the only ones on the ballot. I think a monkey could do a better job.

    Alice Saling (115fd7)

  5. The demacrooks want to end tax cuts incease our taxes so they can have money ill gotten cash for their pork projects

    krazy kagu (9e308b)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2270 secs.