Is Bush Considering Raising Taxes in Exchange for Social Security Reform?
That is a D.C. rumor floating around via Washington Times:
The Bush administration has sent signals since last month’s elections that the president is prepared to accept some tax increases on upper-income families, worrying congressional Republicans and fiscal conservative watchdogs who say he will compromise with Democrats to win a legacy accomplishment.
These moves come even as Democrats have pledged to rein in earmarks, winning praise from the same conservative groups that are criticizing Mr. Bush.
The watchdog groups have been demanding that the president repeat his earlier pledges not to raise taxes in order to reform Social Security. But the White House has refused, with officials saying everything is on the table, including tax increases.
“So far, no one in the administration has simply stood up and said, ‘We will not raise payroll taxes in any way, shape or form,’ ” said Pete Sepp, a vice president for the National Taxpayers Union, which led a coalition of several dozen groups to write a letter asking for such an assurance.
Meanwhile, the House’s top Republican on tax cuts, outgoing Ways and Means Committee Chairman Bill Thomas, warned last week that the White House has hinted that it will accept a tax increase on higher-income families in order to win accommodations from Democrats.
“I wish I were a bit more comfortable in listening to some of the noises that are currently being made,” Mr. Thomas, California Republican, told the American Enterprise Institute, saying he is seeing signs that the administration may be “moving away from hard-fought policies to salvage what you thought you weren’t going to get.”
This has Professor Bainbridge rethinking his position on the question of whether Bush is a worse president than Jimmy Carter. The Ace at Polipundit thinks that Bush may be hell-bent on destroying the Republican Party. I think both of these are a bit of an overreaction.
Greg Tinti suggests calming down:
But assuming that the Democrats will only work with Bush on Social Security if a tax increase on upper-income families occurs, heres’s an interesting question for conservatives: What would you rather have? A compromise solution to Social Security that fully solves the current problems and ensures the program’s viability with the mentioned tax increase or the status quo–an entitlement program that will eventually go bankrupt and lower taxes, probably only in the short-term?
I don’t think the Democrats would even show an interest in reforming the social security program to any significance just because Bush caves in to them on taxes under the name of bi-partisanship. They’ll take what he gives them, and then hang him out to dry. If he wants to salvage his legacy he needs to find his spine again, stand on his principles firmly, and abandon the idea that Democrats are interested in bi-partisanship any further than it will achieve their own goals. Their idea of bi-partisanship is for Conservatives to come to them, not in meeting half way on anything.
Scrappleface has a better idea on how Bush can write his legacy.
Email This
Posted by Jay on December 19, 2006 1:39 pm
» Filed Under Uncategorized
Trackback URL:
Comments
2 Responses to “Is Bush Considering Raising Taxes in Exchange for Social Security Reform?”
-
-
-
Affiliations
The Giants
Advertise
-
-
Our Store
- Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
-
- More blogs about the ACLU
Syndicate Me
That’s not so crazy. It’s comparatively easy to reduce taxes. How many opportunities will we get for meaningful social security reform? It’ll all depend on the details, but I’m listening.
States can opt out of the Social Security system and reform it themselves. If Republicans like Bush’s plan then they should do it for their own state. The federal government is violating the U.S. Constitution anyways as they are only granted a limited jurisdiction by the U.S. Constitution and Social Security is not part of it.