Will tea partiers protest the $858 billion tax deal?

During the election season, tea party activists declared deficit-reduction one of their primary goals. The nation is swimming in red ink, they noted, posing a huge burden for generations to come. So I’m waiting for those tea party activists to mount a huge protest over the tax deal between President Obama and Republicans. It is expected to cost $858 billion over ten years.

Where’s that tea party protest? Are they headed to Washington to denounce the deal, as they did repeatedly with the health care plan — which will lower the deficit over ten years?

Yes, there are other things in the deal besides tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. But extending the tax cuts for all Americans for two years cost $675.2 billion. Extending them for the richest Americans — along with generous cuts to the estate tax — will cost about $50 billion over two years. Are the tea partiers at all concerned about that?

Then were the ethanol subsidies, which most reasonable people agree are a spectacular waste of government resources — a giveaway to corn farmers. But farm state legislators wanted ethanol subsides included in the package, and they are there.
Any day now, I’m sure, tea partiers will gather on the Mall to protest this big addition to the national deficit. Any of you have your bags packed for the party?

272 comments Add your comment

granny godzilla

December 10th, 2010
9:59 am

YOU MEAN THE SWITCHBOARDS AT THE HILL AND THE WHOIEHOUSE WEREN’T SWAMPED YESTERDAY?

On my!

From TPM 12/9/10

In an email dispatched just minutes ago, the national office of Tea Party Patriots — the largest umbrella for grassroots tea party groups in the country — is calling on its millions of members to bombard Republicans on Capitol Hill with pleas to shut down the tax cut deal which House Democrats rejected earlier today

granny godzilla

December 10th, 2010
9:59 am

Darn make that WHITEHOUSE…..

Ragnar Danneskjöld

December 10th, 2010
10:08 am

Minor correction, the “cost” is only around $150 billion. The crazy higher number assumes that the largest tax increase in the history of the world had only a static effect on government revenues, which would fly in the face of all economic history.

The more accurate critique is to condemn the agreement for falsely elevating expectations. In December of 2008, the economy collapsed, in part due to anticipation of the “largest tax increase in the history of the world” two years hence. At risk of noting the obvious, that is where we stand today also – if the deal passes Congress. Any panacea will have to await the arrival of an economically literate Congress.

Road Scholar

December 10th, 2010
10:08 am

Granny, I’m just glad you didn’t misspell it with an “R”!

Oh, by the way, good morning!

granny godzilla

December 10th, 2010
10:10 am

Good Morning to you Road…

took me a minute of thinking on that “R”.

thanks for the grin.

Good Grief

December 10th, 2010
10:11 am

Wow, CT, it really galls you that people who earn money are being allowed to keep it, doesn’t it?

Road Scholar

December 10th, 2010
10:11 am

RD: And when will ” an economically literate Congress” occur? Many are waiting on the Repub dominated House to vote on SALT; I guess these newly elected officials have all sorts of experience and education on nuclear arms?!

Shawny

December 10th, 2010
10:13 am

No, they won’t protest. They know the bill is what is needed to keep businesses afloat until the economy stabilizes. Then, with GDP at a reasonable growth rate, tax revenues will begin to increase as well.

If they protest, then it should be about spending.

BTW, kudos to the prez for making an attempt to close loopholes in the tax code, simplifying it, and bringing in more revenue. It isn’t a flat tax, but it is better.

Ragnar Danneskjöld

December 10th, 2010
10:15 am

Dear Road @ 10:11, “when will ‘an economically literate Congress” occur?’” Not likely in our lifetimes. If you get past Dr. Coburn in the Senate, and maybe Congressmen Ryan and Paul in the house, I’m not certain there are any.

Richard

December 10th, 2010
10:19 am

Tea partiers will get around to it after their protest of TSA violating 4th Amendment rights.

Georgian

December 10th, 2010
10:22 am

The hit to the taxpayer and the economy would be far greater. The way to reduce the deficit is not to tax hard working Americans. Reduce spending and wasteful assistance programs.

Senior Citizen Kane

December 10th, 2010
10:23 am

Pardon me for being obtuse, but according to the Tea Party Patriots website, they ARE protesting the tax deal. Am I mistaken?

Independent J

December 10th, 2010
10:24 am

its not a tax cut!!!, the rates have been the same for over a decade. why do you keep calling it a tax cut? Is it so everyone (dems) thinks that the evil rich are making out like bandits. the rates just aren’t changing… and we’re still paying too much!!
I own a small recruiting firm (s-corp)and i make over 250k and im no where close to being rich…i have employees , expenses, and overhead….i make less than Cynthia!!!!
its funny how obama preaches fairness except if you did well in your career…i wish i was a career politician so i can take all your money and decide what to do with it…

Keep up the good fight!

December 10th, 2010
10:24 am

In December of 2008, the economy collapsed, in part due to anticipation of the “largest tax increase in the history of the world” two years hence.

Now there is some spin….I guess McCain suspended his presidential campaign AFTER he lost the election in November because of the economy…oh wait….something seems wrong in the timing of the spin.

Mr Right

December 10th, 2010
10:26 am

Shucks CT, I thought spending was what drove up the deficit ?

Keep up the good fight!

December 10th, 2010
10:27 am

Independent.. an extension of the law is a tax cut. Without the tax cut, rates will rise as per the Republican legislative paln.

And why exactly do you not think it fair that you share in the same tax cut on the 1st $250000 earned as every other american. Why to you want a bonus for additional income that most Americans don’t want. Does not seem very fair.

JimW

December 10th, 2010
10:27 am

There’s no reason to protest the extension of the current tax rates for two more years because that and lowering corporate tax rates helps to create a better climate for businesses. When the economy starts growing, then the revenue will also grow.

I’m also pleased the the President is at least discussing simplifying the tax code and closing loopholes while actually reducing the rates. Excellent idea, althoughI’m sure there will be major battles with both parties over it.

I agree that the ethanol subsidy (and the other “sweeteners” added by Harry Reid) are a waste. It’s really a shame that this pork has to be added to the bill to induce legislators to vote for it.

The sooner we reform the tax code and eliminate wasteful spending, the sooner this country will get back on track. Both parties are at fault for the current mess.

Avenger

December 10th, 2010
10:29 am

grief. Where have you been hiding. In this country (as in most), you pay taxes. You can argue about the percentage until the cows come home, but you pay to live in this country. You can say that you earned you money, but you are required to pay for government services just like you required to pay for the food that you get from kroger. The old cry that you are paying more than your fair share is meaningless compared to people who have given their lives for the betterment of this country.

Mr Right

December 10th, 2010
10:31 am

Why is CT so concerned about what the Tea Party thinks ?

Dave

December 10th, 2010
10:32 am

We’ll just sit back and watch the Democrat party implode even more over the “compromise”. It is kind of fun to watch, especially since they were urging compromise on the Republicans part after the election but are refusing themselves to cave, I mean, compromise. Who’s the party of no now?

Georgian

December 10th, 2010
10:33 am

Mr Right,

Tucker is just of the thought that if you begin to bring discord between the Republicans and Tea Party, it will have good results for the Dems.

Good Grief

December 10th, 2010
10:35 am

Avenger – I’m all for paying taxes for government to perform its basic duties as laid out by the Constitution. Unfortunately, the government has perverted itself into this bloated monstrosity that we now see. And now we have people like CT who act as though it is a complete travesty that people get to keep their own money. Like when Hillary said that she wanted to “take those profits” from companies. That was not, is not, will never be, her money to take, but too many liberals act as though the money belongs to the government and not the people, and it is the job of government to dole it out as the people need it. Sounds Marxist to me (to each according to his need, from each according to his ability).

By the way, nice argument on your part. If you ever disagree with someone on taxes, just state that they are paying nothing compared to those who fought and died for this country. You’ll never have to argue anything by doing that. (No offense intended to soldiers. I work in the defense industry with many former Marines, Naval Officers, and Army Officers, and I fully respect every sacrifice they’ve ever made.)

Independent J

December 10th, 2010
10:38 am

Keep… cmon man!!! “the extension of the law is the tax cut” ..thats a reach, even for you …lol..you know thats a lame excuse..i read your stuff and that was weak….lets use that theory on all bills, laws and amendments…
Im still paying more than jo-schmo…how much is enough? i tell you the travesty..im putting people to work and if i make any money, you want more from me….
its not a tax cut..its a tax rate!!!
tell you what define what rich is? because 250k is not rich!!! and if it is, you will never get there with that attitude- thats from boortz

retired early

December 10th, 2010
10:39 am

Amen Cynthia

I have been expecting SOMETHING from SOMEBODY!!!
If this bill had passed with Dems only support…..THEN you would see outrage.

Jimmy62

December 10th, 2010
10:41 am

My issue is that they were supposed to deny the extension of unemployment benefits unless equal cuts in spending were found elsewhere, which I found to be very reasonable. But then they went ahead and extended without finding equal cuts elsewhere, and that ticks me off. Still, can’t really start protesting the newly elected until they take office, which makes this column of Cynthia’s rather silly. And shows her basic ignorance of.. Time?

Dave

December 10th, 2010
10:42 am

Excellent article by Charles Krauthammer in the Wash. Post:

“Barack Obama won the great tax-cut showdown of 2010 – and House Democrats don’t have a clue that he did. In the deal struck this week, the president negotiated the biggest stimulus in American history, larger than his $814 billion 2009 stimulus package. It will pump a trillion borrowed Chinese dollars into the U.S. economy over the next two years – which just happen to be the two years of the run-up to the next presidential election. This is a defeat?

If Obama had asked for a second stimulus directly, he would have been laughed out of town. Stimulus I was so reviled that the Democrats banished the word from their lexicon throughout the 2010 campaign. And yet, despite a very weak post-election hand, Obama got the Republicans to offer to increase spending and cut taxes by $990 billion over two years. Two-thirds of that is above and beyond extension of the Bush tax cuts but includes such urgent national necessities as windmill subsidies.

[snip]

No, cries the left: Obama violated a sacred principle. A 39.6 percent tax rate versus 35 percent is a principle? “This is the public option debate all over again,” said Obama at his Tuesday news conference. He is right. The left never understood that to nationalize health care there is no need for a public option because Obamacare turns the private insurers into public utilities, thus setting us inexorably on the road to the left’s Promised Land: a Canadian-style single-payer system. The left is similarly clueless on the tax-cut deal: In exchange for temporarily forgoing a small rise in upper-income rates, Obama pulled out of a hat a massive new stimulus – what the left has been begging for since the failure of Stimulus I but was heretofore politically unattainable.

Obama’s public exasperation with this infantile leftism is both perfectly understandable and politically adept. It is his way back to at least the appearance of centrist moderation. The only way he will get a second look from the independents who elected him in 2008 – and abandoned the Democrats in 2010 – is by changing the prevailing (and correct) perception that he is a man of the left.

Hence that news-conference attack on what the administration calls the “professional left” for its combination of sanctimony and myopia. It was Obama’s Sister Souljah moment. It had a prickly, irritated sincerity – their ideological stupidity and inability to see the “long game” really do get under Obama’s skin – but a decidedly calculated quality, too. Where, after all, does the left go? Stay home on Election Day 2012? Vote Republican?

No, says the current buzz, the left will instead challenge Obama for the Democratic nomination. Really now? For decades, African Americans have been this party’s most loyal constituency. They vote 9 to 1 Democratic through hell and high water, through impeachment and recession, through everything. After four centuries of enduring much, African Americans finally see one of their own achieve the presidency. And their own party is going to deny him a shot at his own reelection?

Not even Democrats are that stupid. The remaining question is whether they are just stupid enough to not understand – and therefore vote down – the swindle of the year just pulled off by their own president. “

Mike K.

December 10th, 2010
10:43 am

I think Cynthia is misrepresenting the core Tea Party belief which is that government is too big. While many Tea Partiers have criticized the government for its unsustainable deficits (which are a bad thing), they have done so to shed light on the fact that the government is spending far more than Americans want to pay.

I would have preferred a tax deal that was “paid for” with spending cuts, but preventing a tax hike is entirely consistent with the principle of limited government which the Tea Partiers universally endorse.

Keep up the good fight!

December 10th, 2010
10:45 am

Independent…again reality is that tax rates are scheduled to go up by law as passed by the Republicans. That means that if you earn $200000 AGI this year and next, you will pay MORE next year. A NEW law is needed to cut the tax rates and thereby the amount paid. Now you can rant all you want but please do try to be accurate.

I never said $250,000 made you “rich” but it is, I believe, more than 95% of Americans earn. Does not make you a millionaire or a billionaire. I would even support a tax cut up to say, $1 million in income. But you are whining because you pay more than “joe schmo” because you “earn” more than joe schmo. Also if you have a small business there are tax credits available for your business which the average worker does NOT get.

Fletch

December 10th, 2010
10:46 am

Again, no surprises here. It’s politics as usual. No candidate will ever get elected by telling the population the truth. If that were the case, the candidate that stood up and said that all americans are going to have to share in the pain if they ever hope to reduce our debt. Among those sacrifices will be an increase in taxes for everyone, as well as a reduction in popular social programs, would receive thunderous applause. Instead, the applause goes to the candidate that rides the tax reduction wave all the way to winners circle.

I have to admit, that it’s somewhat comical to see the DEMS out in full force AFTER Obama finally makes what I consider to be a wise move. Before that, they basically let the GOP use him for target practice without uttering a word.

Is the deal perfect? No. However, at least in this instance, we got to see a politician actually take the country into consideration and not just party lines. I hope that we will see more of the same over the next 2 years.

How to Stimulate the Economy

December 10th, 2010
10:47 am

A tax credit for housekeeping services would do two things to stimulate the economy. First, it would provide good jobs to people who have no other marketable skill, specifically housekeeping. Second, it would provide an incentive for highly educated workers to return to the workforce. Many highly educated women choose to be stay at home moms in part because the math indicates it is more profitable to do so, considering the cost of day care, housekeeping services, commuting expenses, and taxes on the additional income. By allowing a tax credit of up to $2,500 per family, we can tip the scales somewhat in favor of the mom returning to the workforce. There are many job openings for the highly educated, from physician to engineer to mathematician, and these jobs tend to create other jobs for the less skilled. So for the price of a small tax credit we get a double jobs stimulus.

Georgian

December 10th, 2010
10:53 am

This is See How You Can Make This Look Good For Obama and Democrats

StJ

December 10th, 2010
10:56 am

“the health care plan — which will lower the deficit over ten years”

Ummm, ok…keep smoking that stuff you advocate legalizing. :roll: (Does the AJC drug-test its employees?)

As far as the TEA Party goes, most of the people they helped elect aren’t even in office yet. The incumbents they supported are probably getting email-bombed right about now.

Keep up the good fight!

December 10th, 2010
10:57 am

Among Georgia legislators, the records showed both Sen. Saxby Chambliss and Sen. Johnny Isakson hiked pay for their congressional staff and each handed out nearly $3 million total. Among representatives, David Scott, Lynn Westmoreland, John Lewis, Phil Gingrey and Tom Price each raised their overall staff pay by tens of thousands of dollars last year, according to the records. Only Rep. Hank Johnson kept his expenses even.

You gave them the keys back because they learned what?

Kamchak

December 10th, 2010
10:57 am

Excellent article by Charles Krauthammer…

Couldn’t you have just copy and pasted from HotAir, or RedState instead?

Geez….

Scout

December 10th, 2010
11:00 am

Cynthia:

……… and why do you care?

P.S. What does this have to do with “Don’t Assk, Don’t Tail” ?

retired early

December 10th, 2010
11:02 am

Dave, save us the purist bs on this planet. All one has to do is look back to this past election to see that the stimulus spending, whether good or bad was used very effectively to hammer the Democratic party. Even though it all began under Bush.With this new stimulus package, the Right wing spin machine would surely bury what is left of the Democratic party in 2012.

Keep up the good fight!

December 10th, 2010
11:05 am

Scout…you may want to start posting your PS at all those Baptist and Christian churches where the pedophiles seem to be in charge.

james

December 10th, 2010
11:08 am

the tea partiers are joint venturing with wiki leaks. i check under my bed every evening for a tea partier- they are fricking everywhere and they are evil, armed, and dangerous. lock up your wife and children

Good Grief

December 10th, 2010
11:12 am

Kamchak @ 10:57 -
Because MediaMatters and the Huffington Post are such better sources of information, right?

Keep Up @ 11:05 -
What? Was it really necessary to single out the Baptists? I mean, we get that you don’t like the Christians, but was that realyl necessary?

james @ 11:08 -
Wanting less spending, lower taxes, and a stronger national defense is scary?

Halftrack

December 10th, 2010
11:14 am

CT, You and Dems keep thinking that extending the Bush tax cuts are the Governments money. In reality if the tax rates stay the same there is no additional money added to the deficit. This is an imaginary number because the way the government thinks is that without extension it would receive more money which is a tax rate increase for the citizen. If they are not extended, poor people will have to start paying taxes which they don’t at present. A tax increase in a recession is a double digit depression, which could be around the corner. Look a reality instead of imaginary numbers that the government puts out. Basic economics and basic math.

Kamchak

December 10th, 2010
11:15 am

Kamchak @ 10:57 -
Because MediaMatters and the Huffington Post are such better sources of information, right?

Please show me where I have ever posted anything from MediaMatters Or the Huffington Post.

Thanks in advance.

james

December 10th, 2010
11:18 am

it doesn’t matter if the news comes from a biased left or right source- as long as there are kernels of truths in the spin. it doesn’t matter if the President is left or right- he or she simply needs to be a strong leader.

Good Grief

December 10th, 2010
11:19 am

Jeez, Kamchak, I’m sorry. I forgot that you require source information anyitme someone says something against you. I was making reference to your support of CT whenever she uses MediaMatters, or any of the other bloggers on here who use HuffPo or any other liberal-leaning site. But the moment someone quotes Boortz, or the Blaze, or American Thinker, they are lambasted as using erroneous sources.

Back Seater

December 10th, 2010
11:19 am

Kammy,
Stop your bitch$ng, you and your cronies do the same with your “selected” websites. How childish of you to make such comments. Just goes to show……………. sport
Another opportunity to show your mid town attitude.
Now come back with one of your cutie one liners, we all now you will

Keep up the good fight!

December 10th, 2010
11:20 am

Sorry Grief….Eddie Long runs a baptist church and I was being accurate…but if you want to make it more generic, I have no objection. Of course, I dont see the same sensitivity directed at Scout’s unrelated post…did you tell him that it was unnecessary, childish, unrelated…..

Independent J

December 10th, 2010
11:20 am

Keep..i never wanted to be the “average worker” , thats why i worked more that 40hrs and and im not whining about my tax rate, but i pay enough. Im the guy that got the ” jo schmos” their job…can you say that? I would probably listen to you if in “reality” you tried to walk in a small business owners shoes…i have been on both sides. hell you probably make more than me too. I would agree with you however on changing the 250k income to a wealthy persons income…im completely hung up on the 250k is considered rich…wth!!!that number is coming from a career politician too….what do they really know?

Kamchak

December 10th, 2010
11:22 am

I was making reference to your support of CT whenever she uses MediaMatters, or any of the other bloggers on here who use HuffPo or any other liberal-leaning site.

Again—please show me where I have ever supported CT or any other blogger, “who use HuffPo or any other liberal-leaning site.”

I’m not gonna defend a position that I did not take.

Good Grief

December 10th, 2010
11:24 am

Keep Up- Good point about Scout. The unfortunate thing is that both sides of the aisle have people who refuse to even attempt reasonable, rational debate. Just throw out something outlandish, try to stun your opponent, and sit back and watch. As Lewis Black once said, “These people should be forced, for twenty years, to sit next to someone who is crocheting something that isn’t there.”

Back Seater

December 10th, 2010
11:24 am

Tic, Tic, Tic

Independent J

December 10th, 2010
11:25 am

Merry Christmas!!!!!…even you Keep…