House passes $146 billion stimulus
The first stage of stimulation-palooza in Congress is complete. It’s official.
The House, seizing a rare moment of bipartisanship to respond to the economy’s slump, overwhelmingly passed a $146 billion aid package Tuesday that would speed rebates of $600-$1,200 to most taxpayers.
The plan, approved by a yes-no margin after little debate, would send at least some rebate to anyone with at least $3,000 in income, with more going to families with children and less going to wealthier taxpayers.
It faced a murky future in the Senate, though, where Democrats and Republicans backed a larger package that adds billions of dollars for senior citizens and the unemployed, and shrinks the rebate to $500 for individuals and $1,000 for couples. That plan, written by Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, would deliver checks even to the richest taxpayers, who are disqualified under the House-passed measure.
Both versions would provide tax breaks to businesses to spur equipment and other purchases.
Baucus, D-Mont., planned a Wednesday vote in his committee, and Majority Leader Harry Reid has said he hopes to have it approved by week’s end. Congressional leaders are aiming to send the measure to President Bush by Feb. 15.
GOP whip Roy Blunt’s office sends along the following:
House Republican Whip Roy Blunt (Mo.) issued the following statement today after the House passed a temporary economic growth package that will help small businesses create new jobs and give relief to middle-income American families:
“Republicans in the House began this process with a clear sense of what was needed to grow our economy, and an even clearer sense of what was not. That’s why this package includes strong, broad-based tax relief for America’s small businesses, but doesn’t include billions in wasteful new spending or a massive expansion of unrelated government programs. Still, the plan is far from perfect – but I’m hopeful it’ll help pave the way to a broader agreement on a broader tax relief package in the future.
“Those principles guided the creation of, and ensured an overwhelming, bipartisan vote for, this growth package in the House. Our vote sent a strong signal to the Senate that this bi-partisan plan must stay sharply focused and unburdened by unrelated, unnecessary spending. Though the instinct to spend taxpayer money may be strong, our colleagues should remember that a bill forced to bear the load of a wish list would likely crash under its own weight.”
NOTE: The temporary economic growth plan that passed this afternoon includes rebates of $300 to $1,200 for 117 million American families, as well has $50 billion in tax relief for small businesses.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Politics, Subprime crisis
Sister Toldjah
» The anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall – and how the far left still hasn’t given upAmSpecBlog
» Carly Fiorina's Twitter OpponentPundit & Pundette
» Intelligence agencies knew Hasan was a traitorLegal Insurrection
» Will The Truth Be Hasan's Last Victim?The Powers That Be
» US Intel Knew Hasan Was Trying to Contact Al QaedaNewsBusters.org
» NYT's Krugman Quotes Song Proving ObamaCare Opponents' Point
Oh boy. My Funmeter is pegged.
Send mine to:
Walter Reed Army Medical Center
6900 Georgia Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20307
1 step closer to bankrupting the United States of America. Like to see the vote on this, I’m assuming there was a whole lot of pandering by the repubs and they wonder why they have no support? They the just can’t say no can they.
Bipartisanship: repubs give into dems.
Don’t they mean to say taxpayers who have high incomes and pay lots of income taxes?
I don’t see how this is anything more than wealth redistribution. Divide out the $1.46 billion by 300 million people and you get a “payout” of 487 dollar per person. And of course I’ll probably get nada since my income is too high (because I’m a “rich” taxpayer). Therefore I’m subsidizing these payments so people can buy socks, as was so famously demonstrated by Bush I when he went shopping to show people how to stimulate the economy. It’s all nuts. And I bet those socks Bush I bought weren’t made in the US either.
I’m on SSD, poverty level I won’t be receiving this handout since I don’t pay taxes…where’s my money? /sar.
Us who don’t pay taxes don’t deserve any of the money plain and simple.
Just great (total sarcasim here). My pockets are empty and now how much are they going to come at me for in order to pay for this bright stimulas package. I hope there are some senators who are smart enough to realise this is a generic bandage that will amount to nothing. Well thats not true it will amount to my bank account getting smaller.
From: My Family
To: 300 Million other Americans
Enjoy the new Playstation 3’s and LCD tvs. I am sure you will enjoy them more than we would have anyway. Your hard work and financial acumen have done you well. Keep on buying those interest only mortgages and maybe we’ll buy you all new cars next year.
P.S. – Maybe one of you would be gracious enough to invite me over for a game or two. I work Monday through Friday 7am to 6pm plus some weekends and attend church on Sunday. So Sunday from 2pm until about 4pm would work nicely.
Why is the only thing feeling stimulated is my wallet – it wants to run and hide.
Veto! Veto! Veto! Veto! Veto! Veto! Veto! Veto! Veto! Veto! Veto! Veto! Veto! Veto! Veto! Veto! Veto! Veto! Veto! Veto! Veto! Veto! Veto! Veto!
“A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed by a dictatorship.”
You don’t actually think any person will veto this? Got to get the votes and giving the taxpayers money away is the best way to do this to the ‘poor’ and under the thumb of our ‘horrible’ unfair government. The rich gotta give to the poor and underprivilaged.
I plan to get my heat transplant with my money. /
L
P.S. – Maybe one of you would be gracious enough to invite me over for a game or two.
#10, keep going. Quote the “phases” that go from bondage, back to bondage. It’s chilling to read, that’s for sure…
#13 nods – I read this initially on these very pages.
“The average age of the worlds greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:
From Bondage to spiritual faith;
From spiritual faith to great courage;
From courage to liberty;
From liberty to abundance;
From abundance to complacency;
From complacency to apathy;
From apathy to dependence;
From dependence back into bondage.”
#3 On January 29th, 2008 at 3:39 pm, rightisright said:
“Bipartisanship: repubs give into dems.”
Yep.
As the saying goes:
What’s yours is mine;
what’s mine is negotiable.
#4 On January 29th, 2008 at 3:40 pm, DelosWorld said:
‘would deliver checks even to the richest taxpayers’
“Don’t they mean to say taxpayers who
have high incomes and pay lots of income taxes?
I don’t see how this is anything more than wealth redistribution. … And of course I’ll probably get nada since my income is too high (because I’m a “rich” taxpayer). Therefore I’m subsidizing these payments so people can buy socks,….
Yep. Exaxctly.
That’s all it is – income redistribution.
“Phasing out” the “rebate” at higher income levels is nothing more than a sneaky, weasely way to increase the percent of taxation at upper income tax brackets; i.e., making the income tax even more progressive than it already is.
And – gee, what a surprise – the politicians don’t have the b*lls to say honestly, “We want to screw you even worse, and raise your taxes.”
Apparently penned in 1787 by Scottish history professor Alexander Tyler regarding ‘The Fall of The Athenian Republic’ about 2,000 years earlier.
#15 You’re worried now? The top income bracket (fed) is currently ~35%. Back in the eighties that was 70%, then Reagan dropped it to 50% and it went down from there. That tax act expires in 2012, and the rate then defaults back up to 50% in that top bracket (or maybe it’s 70%). Just thought you should be aware. Currently the federal tax is pretty much the lowest it’s ever been for those high income brackets. People tend to forget that.
I’ll just deduct that refund amount on the taxes I’ll have to pay for 2007 on my dividends/interest income.
I won’t get a check either, yet they get MY money and give it to those that pay nada.
Makes sense to me in this utopian country.
Where is your patriotism? Buy an XBOX 360!!
I want mine today. I’m in day labor and I’m used to getting paid daily. I wanna invest in China.
Stimulicious!
Nyc123me…very good. Glad you posted that. Very true. Now, that I will probably get this “so called” rebate, I wonder how much it will cost me…in the end? Everything has a cost, how much will this cost be?
#17 On January 29th, 2008 at 4:45 pm, nyc123me said:
“#15 You’re worried now? The top income bracket (fed) is currently ~35%. Back in the eighties that was 70%, then Reagan dropped it to 50% and it went down from there. That tax act expires in 2012, and the rate then defaults back up to 50% in that top bracket (or maybe it’s 70%). Just thought you should be aware. Currently the federal tax is pretty much the lowest it’s ever been for those high income brackets. People tend to forget that.”
During WWII, it was at 90%!
Nope, didn’t forget.
I remember when it was 70%, when it was dropped to 50%, and when it was dropped to 35% (supposedly to 28%-but, again, with the “phasing out” of certain goodies, effectively put up to 35%. May even effectively be at 39-40& now.)
The “indexing” for inflation – I also remember that from the 80s – is effectively a drop saved from the ocean of taxes owed.
People also tend to forget the erosion of purchasing power because of inflation.
My purchasing power now is easily less than that of my two folks 35-55 years ago.
And yet, my tax bracket is astronomically higher than theirs.
So, I have forgotten nothing.
I just think that the level of taxation is still too high.
I do not think the fedral government should be able to confiscate such a high percentage of taxpayers’ incomes – pure and simple.
Umm…35-40% now; sorry…
“(because I’m a “rich” taxpayer)” Yup, zip, nada, nothing, zero is coming my way also. Well not exactly, the government will steal the money from us to give to others.
I got into an ineffective argument with a liberal on another blog. He could just not understand that because I make a lot of money he was not entitled to it. I work from 6 AM to 9 PM, and for my labor I am penalized for it. Makes no sense. I’m ready to push the “reset” button.
nyc123me
Don’t forget the 15.3% above that taken out for the Ponzi scheme unsocial insecurity and FICA etc…
I’m lost in the math. $146 billion cost divided by 111 million people = $1,315 average per taxpayer. I’m just guessing the average should be somewhere between the max and min so I’ll peg that at $900. If the average payout is $900 but the average cost is $1,315, we’re looking at somewhere around 50% for administrative fees and interest. That does not sound like a very good deal to me, but then again, I’m paying my own mortgage too so what do I know.
Azygos, you realize the American dream. Politicians and candidates want us to believe that we are victims and cannot have that dream. Therefore, we must punish you for achieving it. It shows how sick our society has become. I work hard too, and like my work. I pay my taxes, budget my money, have a savings/checking account, and “want” for really nothing. People who achieve this state, must have done it at the expense of others; therefore, we need to be punished. It’s the way of socialism.
Yet another wealth redistribution scheme.
Ron Paul said it best- the only thing both parties agree on is spending money