Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
Tue Jan 1, 2013, 10:11 AM Jan 2013

On second thought: This bill includes no spending cuts.

That's right. The bill doesn't offset any of the provisions.

Rick Ungar

Here's The Deal On The Fiscal Cliff Deal

<...>

However, not all taxpayers earning less than $450,000 come away unscathed by the deal as the agreement returns to the Clinton era limits on personal exemptions and itemized deductions for couples earning more than $250,000 and single filers earning in excess of $200,000.

As for estate taxes, the rates will rise from 35 percent to 40 percent for estates valued at over $5 million dollars, however the Republicans did succeed in building in a provision which allows the amount of the exemption (currently five million dollars) to be indexed to the rate of inflation.

But it isn’t all just about taxes as the Senate bill addresses a number of additional and parallel issues that fed into the fiscal cliff fiasco—including passage of a nine month extension of the farm bill, temporarily removing the threat of a radical rise in the price of milk.

Here’s a roundup—

  • Unemployment benefits are extended for an additional year benefiting approximately 2 million out of work Americans.

  • Tax credits for college tuition, created by the 2009 stimulus package, are extended for five year, benefiting some 25 million low income families.

  • The “doctor fix” is included meaning that Medicare providers will not face a serious cut in pay.

  • The Alternative Minimum Tax problem is permanently fixed removing a potential tax danger for middle class families.

  • A number of existing business tax benefits will remain in place for another year, including renewable energy tax credit which is extended for an additional year.

  • The $900 per year salary raise recently signed into existence by President Obama for members of Congress is revoked.
Not included in the agreement is an extension of the payroll cut meaning that payroll taxes will rise by for 2 percent for all American wage earners.

- more -

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2013/01/01/heres-the-deal-on-the-fiscal-cliff-deal/

Those are some damn good provisions, and Congress' pay raise is revoked. If the debt ceiling fight goes well (and it could since the deal is 1:1 taxes to spending), this is a damn good deal. The President can ask for more tax revenue if Republicans want spending cuts, which must also include defense cuts.

Roll call: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=112&session=2&vote=00251

15 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)
2. Some good stuffs. I'm glad the Congressional pay raise was revoked, but it was $900 a month not
Tue Jan 1, 2013, 10:36 AM
Jan 2013

$900 a year. A month.

 

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)
4. In that case it's just a gesture but it is a nice one.
Tue Jan 1, 2013, 10:44 AM
Jan 2013

The optics matter. Anyone talking about debt and cuts to others should not take a dime in pay raises.
My own Representative, Peter DeFazio, does not take his raises anyway, he puts the money into a scholarship fund for Oregonians in need of career training.
I will say the $900 I'd not begrudge anyone, even by the month, if they were not crying poor so loudly.

bemildred

(90,061 posts)
5. Yes, they kicked all that spending stuff down the road.
Tue Jan 1, 2013, 10:47 AM
Jan 2013

I expect the new Congress may have some ideas of its own too.

Honeycombe8

(37,648 posts)
6. CSPAN just said the $900/yr raise is not revoked.
Tue Jan 1, 2013, 10:50 AM
Jan 2013

They took the $ from something else to pay for it, so that it's not an added cost.

Liberal1975

(87 posts)
9. I Really Believe
Tue Jan 1, 2013, 12:42 PM
Jan 2013

This had more to do with avoiding a recession than anything else. Once again, Republican politicians have no problem putting a gun to the country's head so they can protect the plutocracy.

A recession would be bad. For everyone. So even though this deal is not the best from a progressive perspective, it is better than taking the risk of another economic meltdown.

As a liberal the Democratic Party really irritates me. To think if the Democrats would have demonstrated half the resolve to prevent a disastrous invasion/war in 2003 that the Republicans are showing to protect the wealthy I would have a lot more respect for my party.

CakeGrrl

(10,611 posts)
11. POTUS explained yesterday in his presser that this would be done in increments
Tue Jan 1, 2013, 12:54 PM
Jan 2013

because the current Congress wasn't functioning well enough to get a comprehensive deal done.

This first part was a clear focus on tax rates. Work on additional spending cuts is to be addressed later.

pasto76

(1,589 posts)
12. hey can we stop talking about "defense/military cuts" and start getting specific?
Tue Jan 1, 2013, 01:05 PM
Jan 2013

I know that most of you calling for "defense cuts" have really almost no idea what to cut. Just like when republicans call for "cuts" and then they can only think of defunding PBS. We've all seen the pie chart where DOD spending is 40% of the budget.

the problem is leaving it vague, leaves it wide open. And what I am seeing now in my battalion and brigade is loss of funding for soldiers to go to school, which basically means stalled wages since without schools, there is no promotion. They are also making things harder to get in, and have a HUGE discentive in the Guard right now - if you re-enlist after your IRR is satisfied, you enlist at a reduced rank. Keep in mind that for the MAJORITY of guard and reserve, this is also a second source of income. we're kinda getting beat up and nobody is noticing.

_defense contracting_ needs to be put through the ringer. Like the F35. yes there are jobs involved in producing them, but not killing that program is part of what is hurting our troops under contract right now. which btw is 0.02% of the population.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»On second thought: This b...