Analysis: Obama’s Components Of Tax Deal Help 150 Million More People Than GOP’s Components
Posted in Main Blog (All Posts) on December 8th, 2010 5:39 am by HL
Analysis: Obama’s Components Of Tax Deal Help 150 Million More People Than GOP’s Components
Yesterday, the White House agreed with Congressional Republicans on a “framework” for extending the soon-to-expire Bush tax cuts. In exchange for a two-year extension of all the tax cuts — including those for households making more than $250,000 per year — the deal includes a 13 month extension of unemployment benefits, a two percent cut […]
Yesterday, the White House agreed with Congressional Republicans on a “framework” for extending the soon-to-expire Bush tax cuts. In exchange for a two-year extension of all the tax cuts — including those for households making more than $250,000 per year — the deal includes a 13 month extension of unemployment benefits, a two percent cut in the employee side of the payroll tax for one year, and a retention of the some expanded tax credits included in the 2009 Recovery Act. To get Republicans on board, Obama also agreed to a two-year cut in the estate tax.
For comparison’s sake, The Wonk Room has a chart detailing both the number of people (in millions) who benefit from each side’s priorities, as well as the total cost (in billions). Obama’s components of the tax deal (extended unemployment benefits, the payroll tax cut, and the extended credits) will cost $214 billion to aid 156 million people. The Republicans priorities (extending the Bush tax cuts for the rich and cutting the estate tax), meanwhile, will cost $133 billion, but only benefit roughly 4.8 million people.
So, in order to get desperately needed help for the long-term unemployed and to provide the middle-class with tax relief in a weak economy, Obama agreed to tax cuts for a small, wealthy portion of the population that the Republicans were willing to go to the mat for, even if it meant that everyone’s taxes went up if the Bush tax cuts expired. Excluded from this analysis is extension of the broad-based Bush tax cuts, on which everyone agreed. The total package will cost about $900 billion over the next two years, entirely financed through deficit spending.
Read more about the tax deal in today’s Progress Report, “Tough Pill To Swallow.”
Lieberman: ?I Don?t Understand? Why The Department Of Justice Hasn?t Charged Australian Assange With Treason
This past weekend, the whistleblower website WikiLeaks began leaking hundreds of diplomatic cables sent by U.S. embassies and diplomatic staff across the world. The cables contain all sorts of information, from gossip from embassy staff poking fun at world leaders to details of high-level meetings between world leaders to revelations of sensitive national security sites. […]
This past weekend, the whistleblower website WikiLeaks began leaking hundreds of diplomatic cables sent by U.S. embassies and diplomatic staff across the world. The cables contain all sorts of information, from gossip from embassy staff poking fun at world leaders to details of high-level meetings between world leaders to revelations of sensitive national security sites.
Since the release of the cables, numerous pundits and politicians have called for the prosecution of WikiLeaks and related media outlets for publishing the leaked cables. Conservative commentator Bill Kristol even called for assassinating WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.
This afternoon, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) appeared on Fox News to discuss WikiLeaks and other political topics of the day. At one point, the Fox News anchor asked Lieberman what he thinks “of the Justice Department’s actions so far not to charge Julian Assange with treason.” Lieberman responded by saying he doesn’t “understand why that hasn’t happened yet”:
ANCHOR: What do you think of the Justice Department’s actions so far to not charge Julian Assange with treason?
LIEBERMAN: I don’t understand why that hasn’t happened yet. We can go back to the earlier dump of classified documents mostly related to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that occured in July, and to me that was a violation of espionage as well.
Watch it:
While the Justice Department and other government agencies are apparently searching for ways to bring criminal charges against WikiLeaks and those who leaked information to them, it is easy to understand why they have not brought charges of treason against Assange. For one, he isn’t American. The doctrine of treason within U.S. law applies to people who have allegiance to the U.S. government, meaning U.S. citizens — they can be charged with treason for betraying their country. Julian Assange currently holds citizenship with the government of Australia and has never even been a U.S. resident, meaning that he cannot be charged with treason against the U.S. government.
Although there have been numerous calls from public officials for prosecuting WikiLeaks, it has also earned praise from a handful of policymakers. Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) said that the leaks help us “draw some important conclusions” about U.S. foreign policy, earning him the label “Al Qaeda’s Favorite Member of Congress” from a Redstate blogger. And Rep. Connie Mack (R-FL) said that it “doesn’t make sense” to try to criminalize WikiLeaks or other whistleblowing organizations.
On Fox, Lieberman also said that the New York Times “has committed at least an act of, at best, bad citizenship, but whether they have committed a crime is a matter of discussion for the Justice Department.”
