Go to HHH home page.
Smart Politics
 


Live Blog: Tax Policy at a Crossroads

Bookmark and Share

12:20 p.m. "Tax Policy at a Crossroads" is the 3rd panel today at the Humphrey Institute's series of forums entitled, America's Future: Conversations about Politics and Policy during the 2008 Republican National Convention. The discussion is moderated by Howard Gleckman (Senior Research Associate, Urban Institute). The panelists are:

* Leonard Burman (Director, Urban - Brookings Tax Policy Center)
* Austan Goolsbee (Robert P. Gwinn Professor of Economics, University of Chicago Graduate School of Business and Senior Policy Advisor to Senator Barack Obama)
* John Taylor (Professor of Economics at Stanford University, Economic Advisor to Senator John McCain)
* Joel Slemrod (Paul W. McCracken Collegiate Professor of Business Economics and Public Policy, Stephen M. Ross School of Business, University of Michigan and Director of the Office of Tax Policy Research)

12:29 p.m. Taylor states McCain does not want to raise taxes on anyone if elected president. McCain's tax play is 'focused on health care' and would provide a $5,000 tax credit to all Americans, including those who are not employed.

12:39 p.m. Goolsbee faults President Bush for trillions of dollars of unfunded tax cuts and thus increased budget deficits. Goolsbee links McCain's tax plan with the Bush plan - adding billions of dollars per year to the budget deficit. On Obama's side, he states Obama will reduce taxes for 95 percent of Americans.

12:44 p.m. Goolsbee says 2/3 of Obama's tax plan goes to people making less than $65,000 per year, and under McCain's plan it is just 6 percent and therefore "following the Bush playbook" and not benefiting "ordinary Americans."

12:45 p.m. Goolsbee is coming out much more on the attack against McCain than Taylor did against Obama.

12:48 p.m. Slemrod states both tax plans would retain most of the Bush tax cuts, but that McCain would collect about $100 billion less per year. McCain also emphasizes business tax cuts and on capital income. Obama would raise more revenues on high income individuals, as in the Clinton era. Obama would collect substantially less from middle-income taxpayers. Slemrod says there is no sign of fundamental tax reform under either plan.

12:52 p.m. Slemrod adds there is no sign either policy will address the long-term fiscal imbalance between the promises the U.S government has made in Social Security and Medicare.

12:54 p.m. Slemrod suggests one rough way to compare the McCain and Obama tax plans is to (imperfectly) compare the Clinton and Bush years.

12:57 p.m. Burman says a major change to the income tax system is going to come soon out of necessity in this country. Action will be forced due to, for example, all of President Bush's tax cuts will expire by 2010, in addition to the unprecented demands that will be placed on the federal government by the retirement of baby boomers.

1:01 p.m. Burman criticizes the two candidates for running health policy changes (e.g. credits) through the tax system. Burman says we need to 1) pay for government and end deficit spending, 2) not rely so heavily on the income tax for our tax system, and instead adopting, for example, value-added taxes, and 3) simply the tax system so it gains more support and does not seem so unfair by seeming to benefit the wealthy, who find loopholes.

1:13 p.m. After Taylor accused Obama of having a tax increases, Goolsbee vehemently disagreed and said Obama's plan has a 'net tax cut.' Taylor quipped that is a 'not tax cut.'

1:15 p.m. Goolsbee takes a shot at McCain's tax plan as a "trickle down" policy.

1:21 p.m. When asked how he would pay for the tax cuts, Goolsbee does not initially give specifics (he does not say from where cuts in spending would come). When pressed he lists: a responsible drawdown in the War in Iraq, ending direct subsidies to high-income farmers and student loan providers, reducing earmarks back to 1994 levels, and ending no-bid contracts.

1:26 p.m. For his part, Taylor relies on an increased revenue stream from economic growth and cutting the growth of spending, rather than listing particular budget cuts. He also wishes to end agricultural subsidies (like ethanol) and earmarks.

Previous post: Live Blog: Convention Politics and the Fall Elections II
Next post: Live Blog: Moving Forward On Health Care Reform

4 Comments


  • McCain's economic plan has an air of Taft...During the Great Depression, President Taft was confident in the trickle down theory and said many of the same things that McCain continues to reiterate. It's a form of confidence that is dangerous for a president to believe. We should never elect a president who simply has faith that everything will work out fine...

  • Maybe a trickle down policy is what the country needs at this point in time. Since the financial debacle on Wall Street, people have been pointing fingers at the rich and the imbalanced welfare policy of the US. A lot has to be spent in the future on important sectors like health care.

  • I agree with "Tax Jobs" above. A lot is going to be needed for health care, as well as other important social protections.

  • I find it so very humorous seeing posts like these that were made before the election and how the Tax policies that were trumpeted on the election trail have actually already become moot and have morphed into something significantly different. I guess the only thing that we can really do is let the individuals wait until they e-file their tax returns and see just how much the government is going to take away! http://www.taxadvisr.com

  • Leave a comment


    Remains of the Data

    Is There a Presidential Drag On Gubernatorial Elections?

    Only five of the 20 presidents to serve since 1900 have seen their party win a majority of gubernatorial elections during their administrations, and only one since JFK.

    Political Crumbs

    Strike Three for Miller-Meeks

    Iowa Republicans had a banner day on November 4th, picking up both a U.S. Senate seat and one U.S. House seat, but Mariannette Miller-Meeks' defeat in her third attempt to oust Democrat Dave Loebsack in the 2nd CD means the GOP will not have a monopoly on the state's congressional delegation in the 114th Congress. The loss by Miller-Meeks (following up her defeats in 2008 and 2010) means major party nominees who lost their first two Iowa U.S. House races are now 0 for 10 the third time around in Iowa history. Miller-Meeks joins Democrat William Leffingwell (1858, 1868, 1870), Democrat Anthony Van Wagenen (1894, 1912 (special), 1912), Democrat James Murtagh (1906, 1914, 1916), Democrat Clair Williams (1944, 1946, 1952), Democrat Steven Carter (1948, 1950, 1956), Republican Don Mahon (1966, 1968, 1970), Republican Tom Riley (1968, 1974, 1976), Democrat Eric Tabor (1986, 1988, 1990), and Democrat Bill Gluba (1982, 1988, 2004) on the Hawkeye State's Three Strikes list.


    Larry Pressler Wins the Silver

    Larry Pressler may have fallen short in his long-shot, underfunded, and understaffed bid to return to the nation's upper legislative chamber, but he did end up notching the best showing for a non-major party South Dakota U.S. Senate candidate in more than 90 years. Pressler won 17.1 percent of the vote which is the best showing for an independent or third party U.S. Senate candidate in the state since 1920 when non-partisan candidate Tom Ayres won 24.1 percent in a race won by Republican Peter Norbeck. Overall, Pressler's 17.1 percent is good for the second best mark for a non-major party candidate across the 35 U.S. Senate contests in South Dakota history. Independent and third party candidates have appeared on the South Dakota U.S. Senate ballot just 25 times over the last century and only three have reached double digits: Pressler in 2014 and Ayres in 1920 and 1924 (12.1 percent). Pressler's defeat means he won't become the oldest candidate elected to the chamber in South Dakota history nor notch the record for the longest gap in service in the direct election era.


    more POLITICAL CRUMBS

    Humphrey School Sites
    CSPG
    Humphrey New Media Hub

    Issues />

<div id=
    Abortion
    Afghanistan
    Budget and taxes
    Campaign finances
    Crime and punishment
    Economy and jobs
    Education
    Energy
    Environment
    Foreign affairs
    Gender
    Health
    Housing
    Ideology
    Immigration
    Iraq
    Media
    Military
    Partisanship
    Race and ethnicity
    Reapportionment
    Redistricting
    Religion
    Sexuality
    Sports
    Terrorism
    Third parties
    Transportation
    Voting