Washington — President Bush on Monday campaigned to make his tax cuts permanent, saying that allowing them to expire would be harmful to an already limp economy. The message was perhaps aimed more at voters than lawmakers.
The Democratic-led Congress has shown little interest in renewing most of the tax cuts, and Republicans are seeking to use the issue as political leverage in the upcoming presidential campaign. Democratic presidential candidates Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton both have called for raising income taxes on the wealthiest Americans.
Bush used the five-year anniversary of his signing of the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003, which lowered rates on capital gains and dividends, to make his case that Congress should extend his first-term tax cuts set to expire in 2010.
"The best way to deal with uncertainty is to let people keep more of their money," Bush said following a round-table discussion at the White House complex by current and former administration economic advisers and businessmen.
"Tax cuts have been an engine for economic vitality," he said. "Given the fact that tax cuts have worked, what will be the Congress' response?"
U.S. Rep. Nancy Boyda, Kan., was in Topeka on Monday, and said she supported making permanent the tax cuts that helped the middle class.
But, she said, making permanent those tax cuts for the wealthy would have to depend on how the economy is doing.
"We can't go around invading other countries either that aren't a threat to us and expect to be able to keep all of these tax cuts in place," Boyda said. She said the federal government has to be able to pay for national security without charging the cost to the next generation.
Edward Lazear, chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, said not renewing the tax cuts amounts to a tax increase.
"It's always important to remember that taxation means taking money from the people," Lazear said. "I view taxphobia (a fear of raising taxes) as a blessing not an affliction."
Raising taxes especially in an economic downturn is ill-advised, he said.
"We can't ignore the reality, which is that we are in a slow-growth period right now," Lazear said. "I don't think this period will end up being called a recession, but there is no doubt that the economy is weaker than we would like it to be."
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
SettingTheRecordStraight (anonymous) says…
Were they really tax "cuts" if tax rates (and government spending) were already far too high?
jmadison (anonymous) says…
The Democrats are as bad as Republicans in littering our budget with pork barrel earmarks. Despite the Democrats pledge of transperancy in the budget process, they have reverted to the sad old reality of inserting earmarks into bills at the conference stage of enactment of laws, thus nullifying any debate about the merits of a particular earmark. Our politicians are a worthless bunch. A new party, center of the road with the interests of the citizens at heart needs to be formed.
BigDog (anonymous) says…
Great point jmadison!The "Farm Bill" that was pushed by Democrats was full of pork, including tax breaks for horse owners, a $170 million earmark for salmon put in by Nancy Pelosi, $382 million for watershed projects in 3 states, $1 million for sheep and goat industry, $175 million by Harry Reid for water for desert lakes in Nevada, and these are only a partial listNo wonder Nancy Boyda doesn't think we can afford the tax breaks ..... with legislation like the "Farm Bill" the government can't afford the tax break for average Americans. So much for the promised changes in Washington. Of course some believe these and other earmarks are not wasteful spending.http://www.hpj.com/archives/2008/may08/may26/Farmersfrustratedbyfarmbill.cfm?title=Farmers%20frustrated%20by%20farm%20bill
jasonc_22 (anonymous) says…
Big Dog, since the article said boyda supports the take breaks for "average Americans" (the middle class), i think your comment plays fast and loose with the facts.the bush tax cuts were tilted toward the wealthy, and that tilt needs corrected- increase the cuts for the middle class, and rollback the cuts on the wealthiest Americans.
BigDog (anonymous) says…
jasonc_22Yes, the tax cuts were tilted toward the wealthy ...... they pay the largest percentage of the taxes. But the tax cuts by Bush also moved up the amount at the lower end, those who now don't even file federal tax returns.Why won't Democrats come out and say we are first going to increase taxes on the upper income but in order to fulfill all the promises we are making ..... we will have to increase everyone's taxes.Ohhhhhh wait that kind of honesty wouldn't get you elected.
Centerville (anonymous) says…
Only people like Boyda would try to use tax cuts to redistribute other peoples' money. She's so lame.