Major Karl Rove Donor Ken Langone On Debt Negotiations: ‘I Should Pay More Taxes’

By Lee Fang/Think Progress




In Feb. 2010, Karl Rove and operatives from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce convened a meeting of mostly Wall Street titans to fund a set of Republican groups designed to run attacks on Democrats. Ken Langone, a wealthy Wall Street investor and controversial former head of the New York Stock Exchange, was one of the very first majordonors to the Rove campaign groups, which now include American Action Network, American Action Forum, American Crossroads, and American Crossroads GPS.

Yesterday on the Fox Business Network, Langone was asked by host Lou Dobbs about how to kickstart the economy. Langone repeatedly said high unemployment is the greatest problem, but conceded that corporations are doing better than ever. To get things going, Langone explained, everyone would have to feel “pain.” In a sharp contrast with his friend Karl Rove, Langone said wealthy guys like him “should pay more taxes”:

LANGONE: Well I say this as a devout Republican. I think in these negotiations, I think number one guys like me, I’ve said this before, there’s a caveat. I shouldn’t get Social Security. I should pay more taxes.

Watch it:

Langone says higher taxes on wealthy individuals like himself should go “entirely to paying down the debt.”

As President Obama and Democrats have pushed to include modest tax increases on the wealthy as part of the debt negotiations, as well as a repeal on tax subsidies to big oil companies (deemed a tax hike by some conservatives and those in the media), Rove’s front groups have hit back with nasty attack ads claiming any tax increase would hurt the economy. Perhaps Rove should listen more to his own wealthy donors.

CHART: Lower Taxes On The Rich Don’t Lead To Job Growth

By Pat Garofalo 

Congressional Republicans — during both last year’s debate over the pending expiration of the Bush tax cuts and the current negotiations regarding raising the nation’s debt ceiling — refused to consider tax increases on even the very richest Americans. In fact, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) blew up debt ceiling negotiations last week due to his insistence that those making more than $500,000 annually be shielded from any tax increase.

The GOP justification for its position — even with income inequality at its worst level since the 1920s — is that raising taxes on the rich will destroy jobs. “What some are suggesting is that we take this money from people who would invest in our economy and create jobs and give it to the government. The fact is you can’t tax the very people that we expect to invest in the economy and create jobs,” said Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH).

However, history doesn’t back up the GOP’s claim. In fact, as Center for American Progress Director of Tax and Budget Policy Michael Linden found, “in the past 60 years, job growth has actually been greater in years when the top income tax rate was much higher than it is now”:

For instance, in years when the top marginal rate was more than 90 percent, the average annual growth in total payroll employment was 2 percent. In years when the top marginal rate was 35 percent or less — which it is now — employment grew by an average of just 0.4 percent.

And there’s no cherry-picking here. Pick any threshold. When the marginal tax rate was 50 percent or above, annual employment growth averaged 2.3 percent, and when the rate was under 50, growth was half that.

In fact, if you ranked each year since 1950 by overall job growth, the top five years would all boast marginal tax rates at 70 percent or higher. The top 10 years would share marginal tax rates at 50 percent or higher. The two worst years, on the other hand, were 2008 and 2009, when the top marginal tax rate was 35 percent. In the 13 years that the top marginal tax rate has been at its current level or lower, only one year even cracks the top 20 in overall job creation.

Contrary to Republican claims, lower taxes on the rich don’t lead to higher economic growth either.

GOP Blew Up Debt Negotiations To Protect Tax Breaks For People Making $500,000 Or More

By Marie Diamond/Think Progress

Yesterday House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) and Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) may well have doomed negotiations to raise the nation’s debt limit when they walked out over a dispute with Democrats about raising revenues. Their theatrics bring the country closer to the brink of financial collapse, and observers have described the move as a “tamper tantrum” and “political grandstanding.” Today, more details emerged about exactly what Republicans are willing to threaten the global economy over to defend.

Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), a member of the bipartisan debt discussion group led by Vice President Joe Biden, said Republicans chose to “protect taxpayer subsidies for big oil companies, tax breaks for corporate jets, and tax breaks for millionaires”:

Democrats want to close tax loopholes that benefit oil companies, and eliminate a tax preference that gives corporate aircraft a friendlier depreciation schedule than commercial aircraft. Additionally, Van Hollen said,Democrats were proposing to phase out tax deductions and certain credits for people making more than $500,000 a year. These would be paired with a reduction in the tax burden on lower earners, by eliminating existing limitations on their deductions. [...]

“The message Republicans sent was…unless we accept their lopsided approach…they’re prepared to tank the economy,” Van Hollen said.

Cantor had been vague about the specifics, saying only that the disagreement had been a “tax issue.” His spokesman, Brad Dayspring, described the impasse as being over “Democrats’ push to raise taxes” on “individuals, small businesses, and employers,” which TPM notes is the language Republicans often use to make their position sound more palatable than “defending tax breaks for millionaires.”

Democratic aides also said Republicans’ refusal to consider defense spending cuts to alleviate painful cuts to domestic programs was “central” to the negotiation breakdown. As Democrats have repeatedly emphasized, it’s impossible to improve the country’s debt situation without raising revenues or by slashing discretionary spending alone.

There’s also evidence that Republicans planned the walk-out weeks in advance to pressure Democrats and improve Speaker John Boehner’s (R-OH) negotiating position. In short, at no point have Republicans been negotiating in good faith or honestly trying to broker a deal. They’re more interested in “striking a Tea Party pose” and using the massive debt they createdas an excuse to enact their radical political agenda.

As Richest Pay Lowest Taxes In A Generation, Bachmann Would End Income Tax For 23,000 Millionaires

By Zaid Jilani

As ThinkProgress Economy editor Pat Garofalo noted last week, GOP presidential hopeful Rep. Michelle Bachmann (MN) has assembled a tax plan that would involve a massive corporate tax cut and tax increase on the working poor. Meanwhile, Bachmann would continue to cut taxes on the richest income-earners among us.

But Bachmann’s plan would do even worse things than simply continuing to hand out tax cuts for the rich and corporations. As Dan Baneman of the Tax Policy Centerfound, Bachmann’s proposal to repeal taxes on capital gains would actually remove 23,000 millionaires from the tax rolls altogether. Meanwhile, the Tax Policy Center’s Howard Gleckman estimates that “this largess would add about $25 billion to the deficit in one year.”

This is particularly shocking in light of the fact that the richest Americans are currently paying the some of the lowest effective tax rates in American history. As this chart from from Wealth for the Common Good shows, the top 400 taxpayers — who have more wealth than half of all Americans combined — are paying lower taxes than they have in a generation, as their tax responsibilities have slowly collapsed since the New Deal era as working families have been asked to pay more and more:

Although it is impossible to surmise their exact intentions, it appears that Bachmann’s campaign is operating under the notion that the rich in America don’t have it good enough and that expanding the deficit is not a problem — as long as you’re continuing to cut taxes for the richest Americans.

Pawlenty’s Economic Plan Cuts Taxes For Millionaires By 41 Percent

By Pat Garofalo

2012 presidential hopeful Tim Pawlenty (R) yesterday laid out his economic “plan,” which is based around huge tax cuts that Pawlenty claims will spark a decade of 5 percent GDP growth, even though growth staying at that rate for that long has literally never occurred in America. As Michael Linden noted, Pawlenty’s tax plan would cost $7.8 trillion over ten years, triple the size of the Bush tax cuts.

During his speech introducing the plan, Pawlenty excoriated President Obama as “a champion practitioner of class warfare.” “I come from a working class background. I didn’t grow up with wealth. But I’ve never resented those who have it,” Pawlenty said. But as a new analysis from Citizens for Tax Justice shows, in addition to being outrageously expensive, Pawlenty’s tax plan is based on the Republican brand of class warfare — giving millionaires huge tax breaks:

– Taxpayers with incomes in excess of $1 million would enjoy an average cut in personal income taxes of $288,822, a 41.4 percent cut.

– Taxpayers with incomes in excess of $10 million would enjoy an average cut in personal income taxes of $2.4 million, a 46.3 percent cut.

– The cost of the personal income tax cuts just for taxpayers with incomes in excess of $1 million would be $141.8 billion.

And that’s just for Pawlenty’s income tax plan. He has also proposed eliminating the capital gains and estate taxes entirely, two moves which would overwhelmingly benefit the very richest Americans.

Pawlenty likes to point to his middle-class background while giving his economic pitch, but his tax plan implies either a huge tax shift, requiring the middle-class to pay for his massive tax cuts for the wealthy, or sky-high deficits in perpetuity. As part of the plan he introduced yesterday, Pawlenty also endorsed a spending cap that would require deeper cuts than the radical House Republican budget, as well as a cockamamie “Google test” that, if taken literally, implies that Pawlenty would be okay with eliminating the Pentagon.

Bedlam Erupts At Town Hall In Orlando As GOP Rep. Defends Ending Medicare, Tax Breaks For Rich

By Scott Keyes

During a town hall in Orlando earlier today, Rep. Daniel Webster (R-FL) faced a barrage of questions from outraged constituents about the Republican budget. The Orlando Sentinel accurately described the scene as “bedlam.”

For nearly an hour, Webster was peppered with one question after another about his support for ending Medicare, his desire to see tax breaks for the wealthy extended, and his vote to repeal health care reform, including its protections for people with preexisting conditions. For his part, Webster didn’t just avoid the questions by resorting to talking points, as most politicians commonly do. On numerous occasions, Webster simply declined to give an answer to contentious questions altogether, moving on to take a new question instead.

Questions critical of the Ryan budget were met by applause from nearly the entire audience. Watch highlights from the town hall:

Webster is the latest congressman to face a town hall backlash after his vote in favor of Rep. Paul Ryan’s (R-WI) budget plan. Provisions of the Republican budget, whichends Medicare, slashes Medicaid, and extends tax breaks for the wealthy, is opposed by strong majorities of Americans, including over 7 in 10 Republican voters as well.

Last week, ThinkProgress reported from a town hall in Milton, Wisconsin, where Rep. Ryan’s plan to extend tax breaks for the wealthy earned the congressman a loud chorus of boos from his own constituents. Similar backlash among voters to the Republican budget has played out for other congressmen across the country, includingReps. Patrick Meehan (R-PA), Charlie Bass (R-NH), Chris Gibson (R-NY), Robert Dold (R-IL), and Sean Duffy (R-WI).

Following today’s Orlando town hall, ThinkProgress spoke with some of the attendees to get their reaction. One constituent, Tamecka Pierce, asked Webster about what would happen to people like her with major preexisting conditions under the Republican budget. Pierce had to undergo months of chemotherapy to deal with systemic lupus and the resulting kidney damage. Pierce expressed disappointment in Webster. “I don’t think I really got a response,” she told ThinkProgress in an interview. She expressed major concern about the Republican budget, noting that “had it not been for Medicaid, I would be dead.” Watch it:

UPDATEIf you record video of your representative’s town hall that you think we would be interested in, please email it to us.

UPDATEOrlando Sentinel posted additional video of the "bedlam." See it here.

Michigan Town Hall Attendees Demand ‘Higher Business Tax’ Instead of Snyder’s Education Cuts

By Alex Seitz-Wald 

Angry residents confronted Republican state Sen. Tom Casperson at a town hall last week over his support for Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder’s (R) proposed budget, which — like those of many other GOP governors — would slash funding for education while cutting corporate taxes. Snyder’s budget would cut spending on education by $471 per student and reduce teachers’ pay and benefits. Yet while students and teachers are asked to sacrifice, Snyder’s budget would give huge tax breaks to businesses in the form of a flat 6 percent corporate tax rate.

At Casperson’s town hall in Marquette, Ishpeming school board member Mike Flynn joined numerous other constituents in speaking out against the cuts. Flynn said his district is already struggling to make ends meet, having shut down its middle school, laid off teachers and staff, and privatized its bus and custodial services. Flynn asked those in attendance to stand if the oppose education cuts. “Nearly everyone in the room jumped to their feet while cheering and clapping,” the Maquette Mining Journal reported.

Casperson responded that he was trying to minimize the impact on education, but that cuts are necessary. “What about a higher business tax?” one constituent shouted, met with cries of “yes!” from other attendees and a chorus of applause. Watch a video of the event shot by the Mining Journal and edited by ThinkProgress for length (full video here):

Several other attendees spoke passionately against Snyder’s budget, with one constitutes receiving applause for speaking out against cuts to services for “the most vulnerable” while the top “one percent” are given tax breaks. “This trickle down theory, we’ve tried it before — it doesn’t work,” she said. Meghan McLeod, a special education teacher, said that Snyder’s cuts may force her to move back in with her parents on her 25th birthday.

Meanwhile, as TPM’s Evan McMorris-Santoro reports, Michigan state Sen. Bruce Caswell (R) has suggested allowing children who receive public assistance to spend their meager $80 per year only at thrift stores, even though Caswell acknowledged his plan wouldn’t save the state “a dime.”

As one man at the Casperson town hall said, “I don’t recall you or most of the other people who are Republicans running on anything like what is being foisted upon our state right now.” His comment was met with boisterous applause.

M.C.L Comments:It's going to be fun watching the smug look getting rubbed off the faces of Nolan Finley and his right wing ilk next year. The Republicans thought they could get away with their attempt to kill the labor movement it failed look at Wisconsin and the only reason I believe the Rick Snyder recall might come up short is this if Ricky Snyder is recalled look who's taking over for him.  




Snyder might be gone but his even further right Lt. Governor takes over and giving an young right winger that much power is like giving an 3 year old an AK-47 with boatload of ammo it's both dangerous and stupid. I say we fight the Repugs on the legal stage and get rid of their majority at the voting booths next year.

Paul Ryan Booed At Town Hall For Defending Tax Breaks For The Wealthy

By Scott Keyes

Earlier this week, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) embarked on a series of town halls across his southern Wisconsin congressional district. Ryan has gained notoriety in recent weeks as the architect of the Republican budget which extends tax breaks for the wealthy and phases out Medicare. House Republicans voted 235-4 in favor of the plan.

During a town hall meeting in Milton, a constituent who described himself as a “lifelong conservative” asked Ryan about the effects of growing income inequality in our nation. The constituent noted that huge income disparities contributed to the Great Depression and the Great Recession, and thus wanted to know why the congressman was “fighting to not let the tax breaks for the wealthy expire.”

Ryan argued against “redistribut[ing]” in this manner. After the constituent noted that “there’s nothing wrong with taxing the top because it does not trickle down,” Ryan argued that “we do tax the top.” This response earned a chorus of boos from constituents:

CONSTITUENT: The middle class is disappearing right now. During this time of prosperity, the top 1 percent was taking about 10 percent of the total annual income, but yet today we are fighting to not let the tax breaks for the wealthy expire? And we’re fighting to not raise the Social Security cap from $87,000? I think we’re wrong.

RYAN: A couple things. I don’t disagree with the premise of what you’re saying. The question is what’s the best way to do this. Is it to redistribute… (Crosstalk)

CONSTITUENT: You have to lower spending. But it’s a matter of there’s nothing wrong with taxing the top because it does not trickle down.

RYAN: We do tax the top. (Audience boos). Let’s remember, most of our jobs come from successful small businesses. Two-thirds of our jobs do. You got to remember, businesses pay taxes individually. So when you raise their tax rates to 44.8 percent, which is what the president is proposing, I would just fundamentally disagree. That is going to hurt job creation.

Watch it:

Ryan’s constituent is correct to point out that income inequality is accelerating in the United States and tax cuts aimed at the wealthy are exacerbating the problem. Between 1980 and 2005, “more than 80 percent of total increase in Americans’ incomewent to the top 1 percent.” Indeed, as Ezra Klein points out, the extension of the Bush tax cuts plays a major role in our projected federal deficit. Ryan, who advocatespermanently extending the Bush tax cuts, uses the resulting federal deficit as justification for phasing out Medicare and slashing the social safety net.

Still, Ryan’s outraged constituents are representative of the country as a whole. A new Washington Post-ABC News poll found that 72 percent of Americans wanted Congress to raise taxes on wealthy Americans making more than $250,000 per year.

UPDATEFor more on income inequality, check out Slate's 10-part series The United States of Inequality.

REPORT: Three States Propose Massive Tax Cuts For Millionaires, Tax Hikes for Middle Class

Kevin Donohoe

Last week, ThinkProgress documented conservative efforts in twelve states to shift the tax burden onto the middle class even while cutting taxes for corporations and the wealthy. In three states, conservatives are going even further, proposing massive estate tax cuts for millionaires even asincome inequality is at its worse since the 1920s. Here are the details:

MAINE: Tea Party Gov. Paul LePage’s (I) tax reform package would raise the state’s estate tax exemption from $1 million to $2 million — allowing four hundred of the state’s wealthiest estates to escape taxation. At the same time, the tax plan would raise property taxes on middle class Mainers while freezing health care funding for working parents, cutting money for schools, and raising the retirement age for public workers. Republican legislators want to go even further, and are currently consideringeliminating the estate tax altogether.

OHIO: In January, House Speaker William Batchelder (R) called Gov. John Kasich’s (R) proposal to completely eliminate the estate tax one of the Republican-controlled legislature’s “top priorities.” But already, the bill has garnered strong opposition from local governments, who depend on estate tax revenue and are already concerned state spending cuts. Even while finding room for estate tax reductions, Kasich’s proposed budget cuts 25 percent of funding for local schools, $427 million for nursing homes, $1 million for food banks, $12 million from children’s hospitals, and $15.9 million from an adoption program for children with special needs.

NEW JERSEY: In his 2011 budget proposal, Gov. Chris Christie called for raising the state’s estate tax exemption from $675,000 to $1 million even while proposing cuts to the state’s Earned Income Tax Credit and homestead rebates for working poor families. And last year Christie vetoed a bill passed by the Legislature that would have raised taxes on the state’s millionaires to help fund property tax relief for Main Street.

Last December, the federal government set the precedent for estate tax cuts when the bi-partisan tax deal signed by President Obama cut the estate tax rate to its second lowest level since 1931.

CHART: Taxing Millionaires Would Save Billions More Than Cutting Education And Programs For Main Street

By Zaid Jilan

All around the country, right-wing legislators are asking Main Street Americans to pay for budget deficits caused mainly by a recession caused by Wall Street by attacking collective bargaining, and cutting necessary services and investments like college tuition aid and health care for the poor.

As these conservatives are cutting these services for hard-working middle class Americans, they are claiming they are acting out of need for “shared sacrifice.” Yet at the same time, the right continues to advocate for massive tax cuts for the wealthiest among us.

Rep. Jan Schakowksy (D-IL), along with a number of her progressive congressional colleagues, has introduced a plan that demands real “shared sacrifice.” Her plan, The Fairness in Taxation Act, calls for creating new tax brackets for the richest Americans, starting at a 45 percent rate for people whose income is $1 million. Her bracket would impose the highest rate — 49 percent — on billionaires.

A chart provided by her congressional office demonstrates that asking the wealthiest among us to pay a little more would actually save more money than all of the House Republicans’ cuts to domestic spending combined. House Resolution 1, which gutted funding on Pell Grants, low-income housing aid, community health centers, and other important programs for Main Street Americans, cut a total of $61 billion. Meanwhile, Schakowsky’s plan saves $78.9 billion, considerably more:

In an interview with ThinkProgress, Schakowsky said that she is “hoping” to build enough momentum within Congress to make her proposal the main alternative to the conservative slash-and-burn budget effort, saying that it is a “winner” for Democrats, both politically and on policy grounds. She said that the House Progressive Caucus is planning to do a road show in the summer to campaign on tax justice and endorsed the Main Street Movement that is defending the middle class across America:

THINKPROGRESS: You’ve mentioned a few times the grassroots movement that’s going on…that’s something that we here at ThinkProgress have dubbed the Main Street Movement, all around this country we’re seeing working families rise up. [...] I wonder if you’ve and your colleagues on the Progressive Caucus have thought about similar kinds of tactics [to the Tea Party], a road show, holding rallies, trying to engender grassroots momentum around your proposals.

SCHAKOWSKY: Well, the Progressive Caucus is planning a road show this summer. This will be a central theme of that. [...] But I think this needs to be bigger than that. [...] I like the idea of branding, I like the idea of the Main Street Movement, and I think it is beginning to seriously come together. I think all of the pieces are out there to put this together right now. This is a moment. I want to capture it right now by introducing this legislation that clearly states an alternative that is very popular.

Listen to it:

Indeed, taxing the super-wealthy is quite popular. A March 2 NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll found that 81 percent of Americans prefer taxing the wealthiest Americans more as their top choice for deficit reduction, while less than a third of Americans endorsed policy options like cutting funding to education and health care.

UPDATEThinkProgress commenter Jay Kimball used IRS data to put together thefollowing graph showing how the richest 1 percent of Americans is nearly earning more money than they ever have while they are paying the lowest taxes in decades: