Democrats would reverse some tax cuts to fund infrastructure

[DonViejo]

Source: Associated Press




By LISA MASCARO
1 hour ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — For Senate Democrats, voting against the Republican tax cuts that President Donald Trump signed into law wasn’t opposition enough. Now they have a plan to reverse some of the tax breaks for corporations and the wealthiest Americans and put the money instead toward a $1 trillion infrastructure package.

The proposal, being unveiled Wednesday, is more campaign theme than actual legislative agenda, since Republicans hold the majority in Congress. But it stands as an alternative to Trump’s approach to both taxes and spending as his infrastructure blueprint has stalled on Capitol Hill.

“The bottom line is very simple,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., told The Associated Press. “The vast majority of Americans would much prefer new, 21st century infrastructure than tax breaks for the wealthiest of people.”

Republicans are counting on the new tax law to boost their standing with voters ahead of what is expected to be a grueling midterm election that could threaten their hold on the majority.

Read more: https://apnews.com/b073a8df39ee4eafbc6fc556e9f4414b/Democrats-would-reverse-some-tax-cuts-to-fund-infrastructure

[NewJeffCT]

1. How about reversing the entire tax scam?

Democrats should run on that - REVERSE The TRUMP/RYAN TAX SCAM, save Medicare and Social Security for our children and grandchildren.

[pangaia]

7. YES I agree 100%%%%----- BUT Dems MUST make it clear WHY the tax cuts are a scam.

And exactly WHY and WHAT they propose. They should be very, very clear in in their messaging-- 'everyday human being language,' and not the language of the inside the belt-wayers, if you get my meaning...
Language that, hopefully, even the lowest info, out of the looper can see...

And it must be repeated and repeated and repeated and repeated and repeated and repeated and repeated and repeated and repeated,,,,ad nauseum.... including TV ads, social media blasts..

And say it even again----





ONCE MORE------------

[ehrnst]

8. If you have an idea on how to without having a majority in the House and Senate

please share.

[joshdawg]

2. Yeah, those riiiiiiich folks.

How ever do they manage to make a living on a mere 25 (or more)million a year?

[DeminPennswoods]

3. This will be a winning message given the amount

of populist sentiment in the US right now.

[SWBTATTReg]

4. Yes, make the 1% pay for infrastructure...they are ...

obviously benefiting the most aren't they, since they are gathering so much of this country's economic gains vs. the rest of us. Since they own the majority of businesses and gather the most of the profits/economic gains, put a 5% wealth tax on their worldwide estates for a duration of lets say, 5 to 10 years, until most of infrastructure is built. This 5% is purely for infrastructure and nothing else. And why not? These persons are gathering the most benefit because their trucks are using American infrastructure, such as our roads, our airports, our highways, our ports, our canals, and so forth, to generate income.

Especially since costs are going up all of the time for all of us (even in low inflation times, my costs are always going up), why shouldn't we as the owner of these properties get revenue from these limited sources? Also, if a company wants to sell here in America, then they must pay an annual federal licensing fee, that must always be paid (fee is exempt from bankruptcies so businesses can't get around this mandatory fee).

What I am trying to do here is ensure that companies can not get out of paying these fees, it seems like they will try all kinds of tricks to avoid payment, e.g., incorporate overseas, change over into a non-profit, become a sole prop. type of company, become a trust, etc., etc., etc. Too many tricks and I'm getting tired of hearing about them (as I'm sure all of you are too).

[vi5]

5. Some? Some?

Here we go again. 10 steps backward under a Republican and only 5 steps forward under Democrats.

[ProfessorGAC]

9. Sales Approach

I know for many americans the tax cut isn't much, but from the POV of selling the idea to the people, withdrawing the modest middle class tax cut is a poor idea.

The "some" is taking back the cuts from people making 7 figures per year or more. (Maybe high 6 figures)

That way you're not withdrawing all the cuts, just the ones that effect the people who can afford it the most.

In the OP, that's what Schumer actually says. People would prefer 21st century infrastructure to tax cuts for the wealthiest. The rest of us get to keep the modest cuts. (And yeah, i'd give back mine, because it really isn't big enough to matter that much for someone with no house payment.)

[ehrnst]

11. How about those that primarily benefit the middle and lower classes?

Like the childcare tax benefit, the mortgage interest deduction, the 504 plans for education, the Medical flex dedutions....

Not all tax cuts are bad.

Not that these are all canceled out in the drumpf tax plan, but the whole republican notion of "broadening the base" of those who pay taxes involved taxing the middle and lower class more.

[american_ideals]

6. Some????

[Mc Mike]

10. Good proposal.

How about an Omnibus bill entitled 'The Reverse Everthing Twitler Did, Instantly' Act. All his appointees instantly dismissed, all his policy reversals instantly reversed, etc.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

12. This makes sooooo much sense, ...

... that Ryan and McConnell will never let it get to the floor for a vote. And, if both houses turn Dem in 2018, it'll never make it past the Senate's 40-vote Republican filibuster.

And if by some miracle, it made it out of Congress, Trump would veto.

But, it's a good idea. A good start.