Taegan Goddard has some fun with Reps. Terry Lee and Darrell Issa, who mocked President Obama?s (correct) statement, made during his meeting with the House GOP, that the tax burden now is lower than it was under President Ronald Reagan. Federal tax revenues as a percent of GDP averaged 18.2 percent under Reagan, and 14.9 percent under Obama. In fairness, Lee and Issa credit Obama with saying tax rates are lower than they were under Reagan, which is true insofar as the highest rate under the 1986 tax reforms was 33 percent (with an additional 28 percent bracket above that), to the current high of 35 percent. But for most of Reagan?s presidency, the top rate was 50 percent. Indeed, Reagan fought�for a 50 percent rate, as the top rate before he took office was 70 percent. So even if you look just at income tax brackets ? a very limited and highly misleading way of measuring the tax burden ? Obama is correct that rates were higher under Reagan.
More the point, Lee and Issa should be proud that the tax burden is this low. After all, the main reason it?s so low is that congressional Republicans successfully fought for the lowest rates under the Bush tax bill (rates lower than those in effect during Bush?s actual presidency, mind you) to be extended, and with a payroll tax cut added for good measure. It?s a testament to the legislative skill of Lee and Issa?s Senate colleagues that revenues have bottomed out. The right response to Obama?s claim, then, should have been a ?Damn straight!? not a ?Yeah, sure.?
Dylan Matthews is a student at Harvard and a researcher at the Washington Post.
Source: http://feeds.washingtonpost.com/click.phdo?i=055003e42272c38ae9d028aa95a9582f
The FA The far right Redrow Beach holidays Mexico Neal Ardley
No comments:
Post a Comment