In an NYT Op-Ed, Ramesh Ponnuru observes that none of the current presidential candidates are discussing expanding the current Child Tax credit, a move that would help middle income American families:
What would be a serious middle-class tax cut? One answer is to expand the tax credit for children. But none of the candidates is proposing to do so, or any other big tax relief for regular folks.
Why indeed, are candidates from both parties not pushing this?
Comments (6)
Why aren't the candidates pushing for the tax credit? The Democrats want to increase taxes, not give the Middle Class a break.
September 21, 2007 4:40 PM | Comment Permalink
Possibly because the national debt is at a record, and increasing rapidly? Because there are two occupations to attend to which - regardless of your position on the wars - are extremally expensive to maintain?
Money goes into government, and money goes out. Letting those numbers get too far apart is a very bad idea. Currently its only working because the federal government is running on credit.
If you want to cut taxes, you need to either reduce government spending or increase taxes elsewhere.
September 23, 2007 1:25 PM | Comment Permalink
Cut government spending. We have too many give away vote buying programs to suit me.
September 25, 2007 12:42 PM | Comment Permalink
Easier said than done. There are plenty of government programs to consider scaling down, but there is usually a legitimate argument for keeping them. Overnight change just isn't practical. A few 'bridge to nowhere' projects can go, but most of the spending is more important.
Fiscal conservatism seems to be dead, displaced by the rise of social conservatives who claim they wish to decrease spending but are too focused on social issues to do anything about it - and very eager to spend money on programs that advance their own social agenda. Hence the 'faith based initiatives,' basicly giving money to religious organisations without requiring they provide any documentation or prove that their plans for the money are effective.
The greatest reduction in spending will be when the Iraq occupation can be scaled back. Iraq's own government is, very slowly, growing in power. Eventually it will be able to keep the peace (Such as it is with almost daily terrorist attacks) without needing so many coalition troops. Until then though, its just going to keep sucking in the billions of dollars.
September 26, 2007 2:48 AM | Comment Permalink
Since when are government grants accountable? Faith based organizations are audited and required to send donors their audited financial statements.
September 27, 2007 1:59 PM | Comment Permalink
"Since when are government grants accountable? Faith based organizations are audited and required to send donors their audited financial statements."
In theory, yes. In practice, the law is rarely enforced.
September 28, 2007 2:32 PM | Comment Permalink