NY Times: Tax Cut Splits Democratic Field

[Karmadillo]

If you haven't had enough of this issue, the NY Times today has a fairly comprehensive summary of the differences and the various justifications. So far, if I understand things correctly, it's Dean and Gephardt versus the rest of the field. While I think one can make convincing policy arguments on both sides, it's hard for me to see how one can successfully make political arguments calling for a repeal of the middle/lower class cuts and credits. The Republicans would have a field day attacking the proposal and one would hardly expect the corporate media to disagree with them.

Tax Cuts Split the Democratic Presidential Field
By DAVID E. ROSENBAUM

WASHINGTON, Sept. 11 — At nearly every campaign stop, Howard Dean says most Americans would happily pay as much taxes as they paid under Bill Clinton if they could have the same economy they had in the Clinton years.

Dr. Dean, former governor of Vermont, advocates repealing all of President Bush's tax cuts and using the money for universal health insurance, domestic security and job creation.

"Most middle-class people never got a tax cut from George Bush," Dr. Dean asserted last week in a debate in New Mexico with the other Democratic presidential candidates. "I'm sure they'd rather have health insurance for everybody than the $100 they got from George Bush's tax cut."

Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts takes a different tack. He would repeal the Bush tax cuts enjoyed primarily by the wealthy but would retain and possibly expand those provisions that help taxpayers of modest means, for instance the new 10 percent tax bracket and more generous child credits for parents.

more...

[papau]

1. Dean's sound bite is not iffy - so that is good, but

he needs to add that lower 10% bracket will remain, as well as child credits and marriage adjustment.