Kerry for the middle class?

[dmadman43]

I agree with this WSJ opinion... If Kerry were to institute a MAXIMUM tax rate of 12.8% ( which was his effective tax rate last year), then I would vote for him.

Would anyone have a problem with not paying more than Kerry's effective tax rate?

 

[AllyandJack]

I'd vote for him if he made my tax rate 12.8%!!

I try to look on the bright side....if he wins, I'm quitting my job to avoid DH and I being taxed to death. I only make a fraction of what DH makes, but it'll definitely bump us into a lower bracket. Of course, we'll also up the contribution to our 401K (pre-tax). Mama T has her muni bonds and I also have my way of sheltering assets.

Maybe if Kerry led by example (i.e. paying the higher rate on his state income taxes) more people would take him seriously.

I still don't get it...."$200,000 a year" is not a tax bracket. So, what's he going to do....rework ALL the brackets?? I don't trust him. Never have. Never will.

 

[BuckNaked]

I still don't get it...."$200,000 a year" is not a tax bracket. So, what's he going to do....rework ALL the brackets??

I've wondered the same thing...my guess is that he doesn't mean $200,000 taxable, but rather $200,000 gross, which means that the people with less than $200,000 in taxable income will also see an increase.

And is talking about $200,000 for single filer or for married couples?

Too many unanswered questions.

But reading from the web site, it doesn't seem to be horrible.

The last paragraph seemed pretty horrible to me, as well as misleading.

 

[AllyandJack]

Originally posted by BuckNaked
I've wondered the same thing...my guess is that he doesn't mean $200,000 taxable, but rather $200,000 gross, which means that the people with less than $200,000 in taxable income will also see an increase.

And is talking about $200,000 for single filer or for married couples?

Too many unanswered questions.

There was a story on CBS or something - one of those shows that come on at 6:30 after the local news. They said exactly what I think will happen. The people who are affected are going to shelter assets. Mama T and her ilk will get the muni bonds. People such as myself will contribute to a pre-tax 401K or a move to a more expensive pre-tax health plan. Once it becomes clear that he's not getting the $$$ he thought he would to support all of his big "plans", he's going to be left raising taxes on people with lower incomes.

Besides, he's voted to raise the gas tax by .50. Whether you make $240,000 a year or $20,000 a year, that will effect you negatively. He voted against raising the tax credit for children and against marriage penalty relief. No matter your income, this will negatively effect you.

He's never met a tax increase he didn't like. So, once the people in the upper brackets don't give him the money he wants, he's coming after the people making $75,000, $50,000, $40,000 a year. Then he'll go for the gas tax and the child credits and the marriage penalty relief. Look at his voting record. The guy LOVES taxes. I don't care what he says right now, I'm looking at how he's voted and I don't like his record when it comes to this issue. I don't believe he's flip-flopped on this issue, I think he's straight-out lying about his intentions.

 

[mcnuss]

Stop believing the TV ads and do the research for yourself. From factcheck.org:

Stretching for 98

Bush has scaled back an earlier claim that Kerry voted 350 times for "higher taxes," a number we previously described as bogus . However, Bush is still using misleading numbers.

Of the 98 votes "for tax increases," 43 would not actually have increased taxes. They were for budget bills to set target levels for spending and taxes in the coming fiscal years.

To be sure, such votes did express Kerry's general approval for the higher tax levels they contained. But strictly speaking, separate legislation would be required to bring about an actual tax increase. In fact, budget resolutions are not even submitted to the President, much less made into law.

The Bush campaign also exploits the complexity of the parliamentary voting system to pad the number. Most of the 98 votes were on procedural measures, such as votes to end debate or votes on amendments, and not on passage of the measure itself. More than once, the 98-vote total counts half a dozen votes or more on on a single bill.

For example, the total includes:

Sixteen votes -- by the Bush campaign's own count -- on Clinton's 1993 deficit-reduction package, which raised taxes (almost exclusively on the highest-earning one or two percent of households) and cut spending. Only one of the 16 was on final passage of that measure, and the rest on various amendments and parliamentary maneuverings.
Six votes on Sen. John McCain's 1998 proposal to raise taxes on cigarettes by $1.10 a pack to deter youthful smoking. Four were votes for cloture (to end debate). One was a procedural vote to waive budget restrictions requiring 60 votes to approve the McCain bill. The sixth vote was against stripping the tax-increase provisions from a broader measure McCain was using as a vehicle for his proposal.
Seven votes that were cast on one budget resolution for the 1996 fiscal year, one of them a vote for a Democratic alternative to the Republican-proposed budget, increasing funding for Medicare, veterans' benefits, and education, financed by higher taxes on corporations and persons making over $140,000 a year. The other five were votes to increase spending on such things as student loans and health research, funded by closing tax "loopholes" or raising the tobacco tax.
Six votes on the 1997 budget resolution. Kerry voted variously for higher funding for education, Medicare, the National Park Service, the Environmental Protection Agency, and veterans benefits, financed by "closing corporate tax loopholes" and extending expired tax provisions.

Kerry supported middle class tax increases?

–Gasoline Tax: The ad claims that Kerry voted to "raise gas taxes on the middle class 10 times," which is false. As we've noted before, five of those votes were on the 1993 Clinton package, which resulted in a 4.3-cent per gallon increase in the federal gasoline tax. And five of the votes were not to raise the tax, as the ad falsely claims, but were against Republican attempts to cut the gasoline tax. Four were against repeal of Clinton's 4.3-cent tax after it had gone into effect. The last vote was against temporarily suspending the 18.4-cent federal gasoline tax entirely for 150 days during a period of spiking gasoline prices in 2000.

The Bush ad also recycles once again the statement that Kerry "supported a 50 cent a gallon gas tax increase," which (as we've noted before) hasn't been true for a decade. Kerry once told newspaper interviewers that he deserved credit as a deficit hawk for supporting such an increase, but the fact is he had passed up a chance to cosponsor a Senate bill that would have done that, never voted for such an increase, and says he opposes such an increase now.

–Child Tax Credit: The ad further claims that Kerry voted 18 times for "higher taxes on middle class parents." All these were votes against Republican proposals for granting tax credits for families with children, going back to 1994, and many were votes against broad Republican tax packages that included expanded child credits as one element. Strictly speaking, those weren't votes to raise taxes as the ad implies, but votes to keep taxes unchanged. Now, Kerry says he'd preserve the child tax credits currently on the books.

–Social Security: It's true as the ad states that Kerry voted to increase taxes on Social Security benefits, an increase included in the 1993 deficit-cutting package. That increased tax goes to help pay for Medicare, and is paid only by those making $144,000 a year or more for a married couple, falling on roughly the highest-earning 18% of Social Security recipients.

–Middle Class:Generally this ad attempts to discredit Kerry's promise not to raise taxes on the "middle class," but in fact many of the votes cited by the Bush campaign are votes to do pretty much what he promises to do if elected: raise taxes on upper-income taxpayers. The votes on the fiscal '96 budget are a good example, as the increases would have fallen on those making over $140,000 a year.Currently, Kerry promises to repeal the Bush cuts only for those making over $200,000 a year.

Picking Through 6,000 Votes

By our tally, Kerry has cast more than 6,000 recorded votes over his nearly 20-year Senate career. It's fair game for the Bush campaign to pick through those looking for votes that are contrary to Kerry's stated positions. But as this ad demonstrates, voters have reason to be skeptical of such exercises. Bush's claim that 98 of those 6,000 votes were to "raise taxes" is still misleading.


Sources



Bush-Cheney '04, "Ad Facts: 'Taxing Our Economy'," news release 23 Aug 2004.

Kerry-Edwards '04, "Bush-Cheney Ad Factcheck 'Taxing Our Economy'" news release 23 August 2004.

Factsheet supplied by Republican National Committee, "Sen. Kerry Has Voted 98 Times For At Least $2.3 Trillion in Tax Increases," 23 August 2004.

 

[AllyandJack]

In 1998, Kerry Voted Against Eliminating Marriage Penalty Relief For Married Taxpayers With Combined Incomes Less Than $50,000 Per Year, Saving Taxpayers $46 Billion Over 10 Years. (S. 1415, CQ Vote #154: Rejected 48-50: R 5-49; D 43-1, 6/10/98, Kerry Voted Yea).

December 2002: NBC’s TIM RUSSERT: “Senator . . . should we freeze or roll back the Bush tax cut?” KERRY: “Well, I wouldn’t take away from people who’ve already been given their tax cut … What I would not do is give any new Bush tax cuts.” … RUSSERT: “So the tax cut that’s scheduled to be implemented in the coming years …” KERRY: “No new tax cut under the Bush plan. . . . It doesn’t make economic sense.” … RUSSERT: “Now, this is a change …” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 12/1/02)

In 1994, Kerry Backed Half-Dollar Increase In Gas Tax. “Kerry said [the Concord Coalition’s scorecard] did not accurately reflect individual lawmakers’ efforts to cut the deficit. ‘It doesn’t reflect my $43 billion package of cuts or my support for a 50-cent increase in the gas tax,’ Kerry said.” (Jill Zuckman, “Deficit-Watch Group Gives High Marks To 7 N.E. Lawmakers,” The Boston Globe, 3/1/94)


How can he repeal the tax cuts, but not take it away from people who already got it? He can't. Now he says he WILL repeal the cut for people making over $200,000 a year. Guess he misspoke when he said he wouldn't take it away.

http://commrnc.grassroots.com/resources/KerryVotesForHigherTaxes.pdf

Those are his votes. You can interpret them any way you would like. To me, any vote against a tax cut or a tax credit is a vote in favor of a tax. Maybe some people see it differently. I'm sure I'll get the old stand-by that it's a slanted website, but the votes are the votes, no matter what website you get them from. Every time a tax cut was proposed, he was against it. Every time an increase was proposed or a repeal of a cut was proposed, he was for it. The guy loves taxes. There is no getting around it. I don't care if you make $200,000 a year or $30,000 a year, his taxes will hurt the middle class. He proposed the gas tax as recent as 1994 (see the quote above). We all buy gas, no matter where we are income-wise. See his vote on May 22, 2001. He voted in favor of an amendment against the tax cuts for the expanded 10% bracket, against the child tax credit, against elimination of the marriage penalty.

All of this wouldn't be such a big deal if he led by example. He has never once voluntarily paid at the higher MA income tax rate. His wife shields her assets in muni bonds and pays less than 13% on her millions. His Do As I Say, Not As I Do mentality is what turns people like me off.

I will not vote for someone who will raise my taxes while shielding his wife's assets and not raising his own when given the opportunity.

If Kerry is your guy, you can have him and vote for him and love him if he wins. I don't like him, I don't trust him and I won't vote for him.