This Is our Village

Wednesday, December 15, 2010

GOP makes a cash grab

GOP makes a cash grab
President Obama should be commended for fighting to include additional tax cuts for working Americans during negotiations with congressional Republicans over the approaching expiration of the Bush tax cuts. Giving struggling American families extra spending money will provide our economy with a desperately needed boost.
Yet, one method by which the compromise tax bill provides American workers with $120 billion in tax relief reveals an ulterior motive on the part of Republican negotiators. Instead of spending that money on either a direct, one-time refund to the middle class or a refundable tax credit twice the size of the expiring Making Work Pay initiative, the plan enacts a temporary 2-percent reduction in employee contributions to Social Security.
If we picture ourselves one year from now, it is easy to see why Republicans are enthusiastic about a payroll tax cut from 6.2 percent to 4.2 percent. The debate over the expiration of the Bush tax cuts has illustrated that taxes are easy to cut but hard to restore. So, one year of reduced employee contributions to Social Security could easily become two years, and some will surely argue they should even be made permanent.
The payroll tax has served as Social Security's independent revenue stream, preventing it from contributing to the budget deficit. To make up for lost revenue, this plan requires Social Security to be replenished with general funding, or in other words, deficit spending. The payroll tax has also protected the hard-earned retirement benefits of American workers from the red pen of those determined to dismantle this vital program. Under this plan, a large part of Social Security revenues could ultimately be subject to the discretion of Republican leaders who support diverting it to the stock market or cutting benefits. Worse, if the reduced payroll tax were made permanent, Social Security's long-range funding gap would more than double, converting a modest shortfall decades away into a crisis right around the corner.
Maintaining a permanent lower rate would require the general budget to provide Social Security with a growing amount of revenue at a time when the focus of Congress will be squarely on cutting spending. Congress would then face the unpalatable option of choosing between veterans benefits, defense programs, and children's nutrition, or starting to dismantle the only pillar of economic security relied on by millions of American retirees.
Democrats concerned about a payroll tax cut are not, as some have suggested, engaged in fear-mongering. If anything, we fear that the White House, with its laser-like focus on the critical task of providing middle-class families with tax relief and protecting benefits for unemployed workers, may have unintentionally overlooked this threat to Social Security. This November, Americans did not vote to dismantle Social Security. We cannot ignore the fact that in poll after poll, workers have reaffirmed their willingness to contribute to Social Security in exchange for some basic security at retirement or in the event of a disabling injury or illness.
Congress can help struggling families, boost consumer demand and encourage job creation by enacting tax cuts that have the added bonus of preventing an unprecedented threat to Social Security. A refundable tax credit or singular payment of $800 for individuals and $1,600 for families would actually put more money in the pockets of people who need it most. This viable alternative shares the same price tag as the proposed payroll tax cut and should garner bipartisan support.
Social Security is a promise kept between retirees of today and retirees of tomorrow. It provides two-thirds of retirees with over half their income, lifts 20 million Americans out of poverty, and enjoys overwhelming support from the American people. However, since its enactment there has been a small minority of dissenters gunning to dismantle it. The work of previous Congresses to protect Social Security from budgetary attacks has frustrated those efforts. Even as Congress rushes to deliver middle class tax relief, it is imperative that we get this compromise right.
It would be a real shame if shortsightedness on the part of today's leaders neglected the wisdom of the past and undid a promise that has spanned generations of Americans.
U.S. Rep. Ted Deutch, a Democrat, represents the 19th district of Florida, which includes parts of Palm Beach and Broward counties.
Read more:


  1. Duetch voted Yes on the Dream Act which gives Amnesty to ILLEGAL ALIENS.

  2. Mike, for your info:
    Over three million students graduate from U.S. high schools every year. Most get the opportunity to test their dreams and live their American story. However, a group of approximately 65,000 youth do not get this opportunity; they are smeared with an inherited title, an illegal immigrant. These youth have lived in the United States for most of their lives and want nothing more than to be recognized for what they are, Americans.

    The DREAM Act is a bipartisan legislation ‒ pioneered by Sen. Orin Hatch [R-UT] and Sen. Richard Durbin [D-IL] ‒ that can solve this hemorrhaging injustice in our society. Under the rigorous provisions of the DREAM Act, qualifying undocumented youth would be eligible for a 6 year long conditional path to citizenship that requires completion of a college degree or two years of military service.

  3. An Illegal Alien is an Illegal Alien.

  4. Mike: American Citizenship is not a "given" for everyone. Some of us chose and are allowed to become American. Others, like the children of Illegal Aliens, will have that choice with the Dream Act. They have "...lived in the United States most of their lives and want nothing more than to be recognized for what they are, Americans."

  5. Huffington Post
    Dream Act
    DREAM ACT VOTE PREVIEW - Elise Foley: "Going into the DREAM Act vote tomorrow, it still looks unlikely that the bill will squeeze past 60 votes. The bill has about 52 sure "yes" votes, including Republicans Richard Lugar and Bob Bennett. Advocates are hoping some as-of-yet undecided Dems and moderate Republicans will come around, too. Advocates are targeting senators from states with large Latino populations -- George LeMieux, that means you -- and Republicans who supported the bill before. Orrin Hatch, the bill's original sponsor, and 2007 advocate John McCain won't budge on their opposition. But Sam Brownback, Susan Collins, Kay Bailey Hutchison and Olympia Snowe -- all of whom supported the bill in 2007 -- theoretically could. Then Dems would just need to convince a couple more of their own.
    I see Old Orrin won't be voting for ILLEGAL ALIEN AMNESTY.

  6. Dream Act fails Cloture, America wins :)


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.