Deficit Reduction and Emergency War Spending Bill

[TeePee4Prez]

Clause 1.  Repeal of 2003 Federal Tax Cuts

Clause 2.  Military pay will be increased by 5 percent across the board.

     a.  Combat Zone personnel shall receive $3000 extra for every 3 months on active duty in such a dangerous zone.

Clause 3.  Any extra revenue from the increased military spending shall be used to pay down the federal budget deficit.



Come on we need this to get increased pay for our troops.  We also can't be servitude to foreign nations in our borrowing.

[TeePee4Prez]

I would like to echo the CJs sentiments. You have in fact contributed the sum total of 31 words to the debate on the Senate Powers Amendment - it would be good if Senators could get involved in this so that the process is expedited.

Allright already.  I would just like to get some bills passed ehre.

[TeePee4Prez]

Well, naturally you don't care about AMTRAK, StevenNick, for all intensive purposes it is a Boston-Washington thing, which makes up a lot of IrishDemocrat's District, so I can understand why he wouldn't want to cut funding for it.

I want to cut funding for it because it's a failure.  It has been mismanaged from its conception and it has never once yielded a profit.  AMTRAK may well win the prize for the most poorly executed government program in U.S. history and that's really saying something.

AMTRAK is vital to the economy of my Senate District.  There is no way in hell it would ever be shut down.  I will never cut education spending and the many other programs as well.  I would favor closing some corporate loopholes to finance some projects. 

When there is a time of war, taxes shall NEVER be decreased especially if they go largely towards the wealthier brackets. 

[TeePee4Prez]

This in its most basic terms will cut the deficit by $1.1 trillion over 10 years. Thats just too much too soon, however, if you just rollback the 2003 tax cut for just those making over $154,000 it will be just $525 billion over 10 years which is liveable.

Our deficit is about $7 trillion right now.  I recommend this proposal, but if it were jsut those making over $154,000, I could live with it if mroe would vote for it.

[TeePee4Prez]

This in its most basic terms will cut the deficit by $1.1 trillion over 10 years. Thats just too much too soon, however, if you just rollback the 2003 tax cut for just those making over $154,000 it will be just $525 billion over 10 years which is liveable.

Our deficit is about $7 trillion right now.  I recommend this proposal, but if it were jsut those making over $154,000, I could live with it if mroe would vote for it.

How do you get that number IrishDem? The highest numbers that I have seen are about 2 trillion USD.

Duh, the Howard Dean Democrat's Almanac

I'm a proud subscriber

[TeePee4Prez]

If we moved government funded programs like NASA, AMTRAK, and USPS into regulated private industries we could save a projected $0.98 trillion over the next decade with no need for a tax hike. Not to mention the fanfare these independment entities will gain on Wall Street.

Not a good idea at all...

NASA, AMTRAK, and USPS employees are also open to more unionization since their are members of independent corporations.

My father is a USPS worker.  There is NO WAY I would privatize them.

[TeePee4Prez]

As I have not yet said anything really official about this bill yet (my previous comments were not, technically speaking, part of the debate on this bill), I will reiterate my main points now.

This bill represents IrishDemocrat's best efforts to force a significant tax increase through the senate.  He has wrapped his tax increase in the aestheticly pleasing package of hawkishness and machisimo, but don't be fooled, folks, this bill isn't really about supporting our troops.  It's about stealing more money from the hard-working people of America as they struggle to make ends meet.  If IrishDemocrat would really like to give the troops a raise in pay, he could look into spending cuts to fund such increases in military benefits.

You mkae it sound so ahrsh.  No, I don't want Atlasia indebtted.  We are at war and need an increase in taxes. What is there to cut?  I am trying to cut welfare as we speak.It's only for people that make over $154,700 per year and I will add that:


Clause 1:  Repeal of 2003 tax cuts on income brackets over $154,700 per year.

[TeePee4Prez]

Back to the issue at hand.  I ask my fellow Senator from District 1 what provisions the bill has concerning small businesses.  Should we partially roll back the Bush tax cuts for the rich?  I believe we should.  However, small businesses must be considered in such a bill. After all, while we should be rolling back tax cuts for the richest Americans,  we should not in the process penalize the backbone of the American economy, small businesses.

The cuts will not affect small businesses.  Expenses such as salaries and wages are decuted from a 1040 Schedule C before you get taxable income.  <off the Atlasia record>...  I know Pres. Bush loves to make opposition to his tax cuts seem like that, but he is really full of it.  If you are hiring employees, your taxable income goes down anyway.  Anything taxed are the pure profits of the business.  One thing I am in favor of is separating retained earnings from "take home" income for tax purposes.  I would make retained earnings a flat tax of 15% for income over $100,000 on corporate returns and any dividends, etc. would be on the individual's marginal rate.  <on the record>....  Hmm, that maybe a new bill later I would consider!

[TeePee4Prez]

There are a full 400,000 small businesses that are taxed under the personal income tax code.  No matter how you spin it, those small businesses will be crippled by your tax increases.

These are less than Clinton Administration taxes.  Did they crush businesses?

[TeePee4Prez]

Let's put this to a vote.

[TeePee4Prez]

Aye