Payroll Tax Cut Details

So, I get the hinge.  The Democrats in the Senate won a vote to extend the payroll tax cut for 2 months.  The House GOP doesn’t like that bill and wants to vote on one of their own.  They want the tax cut to be longer than 2 months, more like a year:

The fourth-ranking House Republican argued Tuesday that a two-month extension of the payroll tax cut “would do more harm than good.”

Now, in so far as we can reduce the tax burden for a s long as we can, I resonate with the good Mr. Hensarling, Rep from Texas.  What I don’t understand however, is why even such a relatively short extension of a year is thought to be THAT much better.  If you’re gonna end the tax, end the tax.  A temporary reduction is just as random and unpredictable if it’s 2 months or 12.

I’m a little disappointed in both parties over this one.

6 responses to “Payroll Tax Cut Details

  1. The goal of both parties was for a year extension. The House passed a partisan one, the Senate was going to pass a partisan Democratic one. However, the Senate at the request of Speaker Boehner reached a compromise after negotiations that got bi-partisan support and Boehner’s agreement. It extended the cut for two months, gaining more time to get the full year deal done.

    Boehner took that deal to his party and they rejected it. Boehner’s leadership skills seem weak, he was forced to renege on a deal he made, and reject a bi-partisan Senate agreement that had most Republicans voting yes. This is a political gift to the Democrats.

    • The goal of both parties was for a year extension. The House passed a partisan one, the Senate was going to pass a partisan Democratic one.

      Yeah, I don’t know what to make of it. Clearly the House’s version last week wasn’t gonna fly the Senate. And Reid knew he wouldn’t get his bill unless he negotiated. You would think that McConnell would be talking to Boehner in the background.

      It extended the cut for two months, gaining more time to get the full year deal done.

      Even that frustrates me. All doing a 2 month gig accomplished was to make sure we go through this again.

      Boehner took that deal to his party and they rejected it.

      Good on ’em. Unless the House had given permission to the Senate leaders to negotiate on their behalf, I’m down with fiscal conservatives nixing this 2 month deal.

      Boehner’s leadership skills seem weak

      He is a much less effective Speaker. While Pelosi ruled with an iron fist, Boehner is less so.

      This is a political gift to the Democrats.

      I can’t understand how we’re in a position of Democrats arguing FOR a tax cut while the Republicans are arguing AGAINST it.

      • Which is why the Democrats are gleeful right now. The Senate GOP would have granted the House GOP cover IF Boehner had not indicated he could get the two month extension passed. A lot of Senate Republicans are on record criticizing House Republicans. This is the kind of train wreck the GOP has to avoid if it wants to keep its House majority. They can still recover, but its a self-inflicted wound.

      • This is the kind of train wreck the GOP has to avoid if it wants to keep its House majority.

        I think that you’re probably right. This didn’t work out well for the House. Boehner should have a better pulse of his members and be able to understand if a 2 month extension would fly or not.

  2. As for ending the tax entirely, the tax funds social security so getting rid of it would be the end of social security. Given that we’re trying to find ways to make social security more solvent, I don’t think a permanent cut to the payroll tax is particularly helpful, but a temporary cut (for another year, for example) makes sense as we continue to dig out of a recession.

    • As for ending the tax entirely, the tax funds social security so getting rid of it would be the end of social security.

      You say that like it’s a bug 😉

      but a temporary cut (for another year, for example) makes sense as we continue to dig out of a recession.

      I wholeheartedly agree.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *