« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

The New Democrat Talking Point on Taxes

The Democrats made the rounds over the weekend with their new talking point that they’ve already made substantial spending cuts. Here’s how it goes:

The Democrats are counting $917 billion from the Budget Control Act, passed in the summer of 2011, as proof that they’ve cut spending. By pitting it against the $620 billion in tax revenue hikes from the Fiscal Cliff deal last week, the Democrats are able to say that the ratio of spending cuts to tax hikes has been a 3:2 ratio so far.

The results of this math? The Democrats are poised to ask for further tax increases, because it’s “not enough”. Don’t forget, Obama said that the rich still weren’t paying their fair share in his January 3rd video.

What’s more, both Ben Cardin of the Senate Finance Committee and Chuck Schumer want to include interest savings in calculations, suggesting that the spending cuts so far have been somewhere between $1.1 trillion and $2 trillion — making the ratio seem even larger.

The narrative is shaping up for a new tax fight with the impending debt ceiling debate. The Democrats are going to repeat this “talking point” as a justification for new taxes — saying that the past deals have been tilted toward cuts. Get ready to hear the Democrats repeat these numbers ad nauseum.

COMMENTS

  • torpedoh

    They are hoping we are short on memory and long on trust…

  • freemkts

    Well it’s not surpirsing that Dems would say that. What’s sickening is when Republicans like Lindsey Graham and Tom Cole take to the airwaves and endorse it. That’s what they did with the fiscal cliff and they’ll probably do it again.

  • dfcord

    I suggest this is an old talking point which was brought up multiple times during the election campaign.

    I am curious about what happens if and when the new talking point becomes letting the sequestration run its course.

    Like it or not, a multi-year budget is what was agreed to in 2011. It is obvious the Republicans won’t settle for anything less.

    As I understand it, the bulk of the spending cuts would come from Defense and Infrastructure. Not ideal, but workable.

    If the Republicans were serious about cutting spending, they would demand offsets for every new expense, starting with the $51B emergency appropriations. Not just as a ploy to only cut programs Republicans don’t like, but real cuts which have a chance of getting bipartisan support. For example, in the spirit of the 2011 sequestration agreement, the $51B could be offset by $25.5B cuts to Defense and Infrastructure budgets.