Wealthy's Tax Break Costly

Op-Ed

Over the last two years, we witnessed a groundswell of anger regarding the size of the federal deficit. This angst reached a fevered pitch in the weeks leading up to the November election as voters demanded that Washington rein in the deficit and make responsible choices about the economic future of our nation.

As we continue working to get America's economy back on track, the Congress is considering a number of alternatives to create jobs, spur investment and strengthen the economy, including possibly extending some or all of the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts. Earlier this month, I voted to extend these tax cuts for all Americans making less than $250,000, and the bill passed the House despite the near unanimous opposition from congressional Republicans. Unfortunately, this bill died at the hands of the Republicans in the Senate.

I want to be 100 percent clear that I support extending the tax cuts for the 98 percent of New Mexicans who make less than $250,000 a year. What's at issue is whether to extend the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans.

There are several reasons that we must allow the cuts on millionaires and billionaires to expire, but chief among them is the simple reason that we can't afford it. If we pass this unfunded tax cut for the very wealthy we'll have to borrow another $900 billion, most of it from China, only to be redistributed to America's millionaires and billionaires. We shouldn't saddle our kids with billions in debt just to provide tax cuts for the very rich.

Just months after the Recovery Act became law, congressional Republicans immediately began their campaign to frame it as a failure or wasted stimulus. Where were the results, they cried. These tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires have been in place for the better part of the last decade. Where are the results? If tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires were in fact the silver bullet to our economic woes, we would not have just gone through the worst recession since the Great Depression because these tax cuts have been the law of the land since 2003.

Beyond possible extension of tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires, I have great concern about some other pieces of the proposed tax compromise. First, the estate tax provision as currently outlined would exempt estates valued at less than $5 million and set the maximum rate at 35 percent. This would add $25 billion to the deficit over two years and only benefit 6,600 estates across the nation.

Additionally, it's estimated that the proposed cuts to Social Security would decrease the amount used to fund the system by approximately one third. Estimates suggest this would require the government to borrow an additional $112 billion to shore up the Social Security trust fund. Opening up Social Security or Medicare to even greater budgetary uncertainty should be avoided at all costs.

Finally, any tax cut package should include an extension of the renewable energy credits that have a proven track record of job creation.

In the months and years to come, we'll surely have some tough choices to make -- but this isn't one of them. Securing the future of the middle class without unnecessarily adding to the deficit to benefit the very rich is the right thing to do.

Source