Hoyer Says Democrats Must Accept Tax Deal

[Purveyor]

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer says Democrats have no choice but to fall in line behind the tax cut compromise that President Barack Obama negotiated with congressional Republicans.

Hoyer tells MSNBC in an interview that continuing to fight the deal because it includes cuts for the wealthy would be to put the middle-class and lower tax bracket people at risk and also jeopardize the jobless who badly need unemployment benefits.

MORE...

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2010/12/09/national/w064541S63.DTL

[jaxx]

1. Hoyer is correct.

I can't see how people can justify hurting the unemployed and the middle class. But they're trying hard to do that, what a shame.

[ieoeja]

13. Because jobs for the unemployed would be even better?

Telling business owners that we have scheduled a tax increase in two years suggests they should wring out the most profits they can before then. Two years from now, when the government gets a bigger share of your profits, would be a better time for your company to reinvest in its growth so that money works for you instead of for the country. Because eventually Republicans will gain control and cut taxes again when once again you can suck up as much personal income as possible prior to the next adjustment.

Of course, there really are never any adjustments. I have worked through 10 tax cuts and only one tax increase in my life. Am I the only person in the US who has noticed this little fact?

[ProSense]

2. They can still work to make it better

Pelosi is reportedly going to do that.

[Andy823]

7. Yes they can

And I am glad to see Pelosi trying to do that. I think way to many people are letting their anger, and the right wing trolls, blind them to the facts about the unemployed and middle class getting hurt if something isn't done! While many of the "get rid of Obama" crowd have also stated you CAN'T trust republicans, they won't do anything, also seem to think that the republicans will "BACK DOWN" if democrats stand their ground. They have not backed down in the last two years, so why would they now? They don't give a damn about the unemployed, and "THEIR" base doesn't either. If nothing is done now, then when they take control of the house they will put a bill on the floor to try and make tax cuts for the riche "PERMANENT" and then dare democrats to vote NO so they can then lay the whole blame for all the tax cuts expiring on the president and the democrats in congress. Sadly I think if it came to this, waiting till next year, many democrats would be scared to vote NO, and the republicans get their permanent cuts for the rich!

[GodlessBiker]

3. Hoyer is incorrect.

The Dems must not do any such thing.

[Dinger]

4. I Agree (nt)

[leveymg]

5. Hoyer is an ass. He was also wrong, again.

What does he think he is a Senator or President, or something?

[truebrit71]

9. +1000

So they hold a gun to the head and we call it negotiating?

FUCK THAT!

Let them expire and make the republicans explain why everyone's taxes went up, instead of just the rich motherfuckers that comprise their base...

Just for once I'd like to see the Dems call the gop's bluff.

Just once.

[BeyondGeography]

6. I'm more interested in what Pelosi has to say

[harun]

10. Hoyer is always full of it, got this in an email from Democracy for America:

Our pressure on Congress to reject the President's tax cut deal with the Republicans is working. From CNN only hours ago:

Defying President Obama, House Democrats voted Thursday not to bring up the tax package that he negotiated with Republicans in its current form.

"This message today is very simple: That in the form that it was negotiated, it is not acceptable to the House Democratic caucus. It's as simple as that," said Democratic Congressman Chris Van Hollen.

Following the non-binding vote of the Democratic Caucus, Reuters newswire just reported this breaking news:

U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi will not bring President Barack Obama's current proposed tax plan up for a vote in her chamber, an aide said on Thursday.

The aide said Pelosi would require changes be made to the measure that most of her fellow House Democrats formally opposed by approving a resolution of opposition to it. The aide said: "She (Pelosi) will honor the resolution."

It has never been more important for us to quickly back up Speaker Pelosi and the House Democratic Caucus than it is right now. Please sign our "Thank You and Stand Strong" statement and let them know you have their back.

[BeyondGeography]

18. Excellent...thanks/nt

[tomm2thumbs]

31. thanks for sharing that +!!!

[woo me with science]

28. It will go through anyway.

By staging this protest, Congressional Dems can deny responsibility in the next election.

They know it will go through. There is no way they are cutting off unemployment support to 2 million people.

[avaistheone1]

30. I am as well

[Rageneau]

8. Why would Dems get the blame for something the Pukes did?

I wish our leaders would get hold of the idea that it is not US who will deny unemployment insurance to the needy. We WANT to provide them! We're TRYING to!

It is the Republicans alone who want to screw the poor if they can't get richer.

And if there is no tax deal because of GOP hold-outs for the richest, I don't think there is any way in hell that the unemployed will blame the Democrats for what they can clearly see is GOP policy.

Let the breadlines come back. They are inevitable anyway so long as Republicans keep getting their way. Once the GOP forces the country back to Hoover days, maybe we'll finally wake up to adopt some FDR correctives.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

11. Let's get into a debate about who was responsible

AFTER the needy are safe and receiving the UI. Fighting over who was and who wasn't responsible isn't going to matter to the people whom are going to be substantively hurt by its extension in the meantime.

[Rageneau]

12. My point is, that everyone will blame the GOP if UI expires.

Remember, we're sending 5 million 99ers off on an ice flow as it is.

If we Democrats are willing to let THEIR (99ers) unemployment benefits expire (because the Pubs won't extend them), why are we not equally willing to let the 47-weekers expire?

The result is the same -- even WITH this tax deal, there are going to be millions of unemployed people with no benefits.

I say we let the Pubs have their way without giving them their way. THEY won't extend unemployment. Fine. But when the breadlines come, the people will know WHO is at fault .

The way it is now, the Pubs will continue to blame everything on us.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

14. They didn't blame the Pubs for anything during the last election

Heck, a lot of people among the left don't even blame the Pubs anymore for stuff not getting done even though the Pubs whom have been the ones preventing almost anything and everything from coming up for a vote in the Senate. It's all been portrayed as Obama's fault for his lack of leadership.
I don't think that anybody's going to blame the Pubs when the breadlines come because a Republican isn't in the WH right now and the President is pretty much the only person in charge to most people. And even if the Pubs do somehow manage to get blamed, they'll just tell everybody that they had made a deal with the President but his party walked away from it. At least that's how I think it will play out. I honestly don't know that we'll end up being the inevitable "winners" in the ensuing debacle. :shrug:
Whatever gets worked out by the next Congress is IMHO going to be far worse than the deal that we're looking at right now. That is almost beyond a shred of doubt.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

15. Has Anybody Bothered To Look Who The Unemployed Are

Seventeen percent are African Americans

Thirteen percent are Hispanics

Five percent are whites with a college education,

Whose party's base is suffering the most?

Why would Repugs care abour the suffering of our base?

How do they benefit from helping them?

The worse it is for us the better it is for them.

[hay rick]

17. The problem with this argument

is that it ignores the much larger pool of people who will be hurt down the road by caving into the Republican demands. The revenue lost through the extended tax cuts for the rich will increase the long-term deficit and strengthen the arguments in favor of cutting back on entitlement benefits. The payroll tax holiday will provide minimal stimulus at the price of providing yet another hostage for the Republicans, who will paint the restoration of normal employee contributions as a tax hike. Failure to restore the funding will rapidly render the program insolvent and ripe for draconian cuts. And 13 months from now, a whole new set of people needing extended unemployment will face the same predicament because the Democrats failed to stand up to the blackmailers now.

Obama says he is only willing to pay the hostage-takers because otherwise they will harm the hostages. What he is not saying is that he is willing to pay over and over again because he is not getting the hostages back. Sometimes your only choice is between bad and worse. Accepting the Obama-McConnell plan is clearly worse.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

19. It's either the Obama-McConnell plan

or risk a worse Republican *deal* (or no deal at all) after January and during the next two years. :shrug: If there's anything more that can be done to enhance the Obama-McConnell plan, I'd be all for it but the better time to deal is now- before the Republicans officially take over in the House and have increased numbers in the Senate and while President Obama and the Democrats still have some more leverage. Don't forget about the slew of teabaggers joining us in January. They REALLY don't believe in compromise nor do they even care about the unemployed or anybody whom isn't one of their "corporate masters".

[hay rick]

20. No deal is better than the current offer.

And I don't think the Republicans will agree to a deal which is better than no deal.

I recognize the immediate hardship that will be caused by not extending unemployment benefits and the negative impact of modest tax increases on lower and middle income tax payers. But I believe that the longer-term hardship that this deal (or a slightly modified deal that the Republicans might agree to) will cause is going to be considerably greater.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

21. No deal

no unemployment, tax increases.

As for what the future holds for everybody....................:shrug:

[niceypoo]

22. Pelosi should send everybody home

Let the GOP take ownership of the mess.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

32. and abdicate our own responsibility to fix messes/take care of people?

I thought that that's what the Republicans do, not us?

[niceypoo]

33. Taking ownership of Bush economic policy will fix things?

Bush tax policy caused this mess. Two more years of Bush supply side guarentees that the economy will NOT recover for two additional years. Bush supply side CAUSED the whole mess.

The CBO report that came out in September states that ending all of the Bush tax cuts will balance the budget by 2014. It's a no brainer.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

34. It's not taking ownership of anything

It's ensuring that what people need is available to them when they need it.

BTW: This is off-topic, but I've always wondered, who is the person in your sig line? :shrug:

[niceypoo]

23. Two more years of supply side = two additional years of recovery

Supply side drives wages DOWN. Supply side does not stimulate. Tax cuts do not stimulate. Let it all die and let the GOP take ownership of it and piss off 90% of the country, which would cause them to capitulate.

[GSLevel9]

16. would have mad more sense...

to let the cuts expire and force the Pubs to push tax cuts for the wealthy when THEY are in charge.

[niceypoo]

26. Obama is taking ownership of supply side

This will fail and Obama will take full blame. Obama is a tool of the right.

[Deep13]

24. They could just hire the unemployed.

It's not like there is a shortage of public projects.

[Dr.Phool]

25. Hoyer must stick his head up his as and rotate.

He's half-way there now.

[kiranon]

27. Use the money for education credits and training. The unemployed

need jobs and the country needs to improve its infra structure not give the rich more tax cuts. Mistake number one was to set the amount at $250,000. If the upper limit were set at $500,000 or a million and no tax cuts for anyone above that, the argument about small businesses being hurt would have failed.

Obama could have gotten a whole lot more. Now the same issues about tax cuts will be part of the 2012 election cycle as it was in 2010. It's not two steps forward and one back, it's a giant leap backwards.

[golfguru]

29. Hoyer is correct

If the deal falls through the lowest bracket earners will have their
tax rates jump whopping 50% from 10 to 15%. Cruel & unusual punishment
during this economy.

[polichick]

35. That's not what he said on Hardball tonight. nt