America, You Asked For It!

Political News and Commentary from the Right

Why would Reuters pull this story?

Backdoor Taxes to Hit Middle Class

Earlier today, Reuters ran a story with the preceding headline. Then, suddenly, it was gone.

Poof!

Imagine that. A story that confirms yet another broken promise by President Barack Hussein Obama removed from public view.

Is this censorship? Did the propaganda ministry in the White House black list the story? No explanation from the news agency certainly leads the mind to wonder.

Fortunately, the folks at ShowbizGossips posted the story before the censors decided bad press for Obama isn’t allowed. We’ll repost it here in case they feel the Propaganda Ministry pinch too. Here’s the post Reuters (and the Obama administration?) didn’t want you to see!

The Obama administration’s plan to cut more than $1 trillion from the deficit over the next decade relies heavily on so-called backdoor tax increases that will result in a bigger tax bill for middle-class families.

In the 2010 budget tabled by President Barack Obama on Monday, the White House wants to let billions of dollars in tax breaks expire by the end of the year — effectively a tax hike by stealth.

While the administration is focusing its proposal on eliminating tax breaks for individuals who earn $250,000 a year or more, middle-class families will face a slew of these backdoor increases.

The targeted tax provisions were enacted under the Bush administration’s Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001. Among other things, the law lowered individual tax rates, slashed taxes on capital gains and dividends, and steadily scaled back the estate tax to zero in 2010.

If the provisions are allowed to expire on December 31, the top-tier personal income tax rate will rise to 39.6 percent from 35 percent. But lower-income families will pay more as well: the 25 percent tax bracket will revert back to 28 percent; the 28 percent bracket will increase to 31 percent; and the 33 percent bracket will increase to 36 percent. The special 10 percent bracket is eliminated.

Investors will pay more on their earnings next year as well, with the tax on dividends jumping to 39.6 percent from 15 percent and the capital-gains tax increasing to 20 percent from 15 percent. The estate tax is eliminated this year, but it will return in 2011 — though there has been talk about reinstating the death tax sooner.

Millions of middle-class households already may be facing higher taxes in 2010 because Congress has failed to extend tax breaks that expired on January 1, most notably a “patch” that limited the impact of the alternative minimum tax. The AMT, initially designed to prevent the very rich from avoiding income taxes, was never indexed for inflation. Now the tax is affecting millions of middle-income households, but lawmakers have been reluctant to repeal it because it has become a key source of revenue.

Without annual legislation to renew the patch this year, the AMT could affect an estimated 25 million taxpayers with incomes as low as $33,750 (or $45,000 for joint filers). Even if the patch is extended to last year’s levels,the tax will hit American families that can hardly be considered wealthy — the AMT exemption for 2009 was $46,700 for singles and $70,950 for married couples filing jointly.

Middle-class families also will find fewer tax breaks available to them in 2010 if other popular tax provisions are allowed to expire. Among them:

  • Taxpayers who itemize will lose the option to deduct state sales-tax payments instead of state and local income taxes;
  • The $250 teacher tax credit for classroom supplies;
  • The tax deduction for up to $4,000 of college tuition and expenses;
  • Individuals who don’t itemize will no longer be able to increase their standard deduction by up to $1,000 for property taxes paid;
  • The first $2,400 of unemployment benefits are taxable, in 2009 that amount was tax-free

February 2, 2010 Posted by | Obama, Taxes | , , , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments

Suddenly, Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) remembers her constituents

For the past year, Senator Lincoln has sucked up to President Obama and Harry Reid, voting for Obama’s $787 trillion “Porkulus” bill, his budget that set a record $1.4 trillion deficit (TRIPLING THE OLD RECORD!), and casting several yea votes in the dead of night and even on Christmas Eve to help the Senate pass Harry Reid’s version of Obamacare. Lincoln’s Arkansas constituents wanted none of these, and let the Senator know it.

She ignored them. Lincoln even went so far as to not answer phones on days when important votes were taking place. It took intense negative pressure for the Senator to agree to meet with constituents during the Senate’s August recess last year, and then she made every effort to meet with the few handpicked supporters of the health care legislation and leave out any who opposed her desire for the government run health care system.

By November, she had chosen to stand on the fence for a while to appear deliberative and responsive to the chorus of criticism being leveled from every corner of Arkansas. In the end, she proved that she had always had her mind made up to vote with Obama and Reid. In the face of uncountable calls, emails, and faxes from constituents demanding she vote against Reid’s version of Obamacare, Lincoln cast her vote with the tyrannical Democrats running the White House and Capitol instead of voting for those she supposedly represents.

Now that it’s an election year, she suddenly remembers that she represents folks back home, especially Arkansas’ farmers. Here’s the text of her latest mass email to constituents:

Earlier today, President Obama released his budget proposal for Fiscal Year 2011. As Chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, I am opposed to cuts to programs important to agriculture and rural communities.

Throughout my Senate career, I have been a strong, independent voice for Arkansas’s agricultural producers. Now, as Chair of the Senate Agriculture Committee, I am standing up for farmers and ranchers and all of rural America once again by opposing cuts that will harm the hard-working men and women who are the backbone of our rural economy.

Put simply, the President’s proposal picks winners and losers. By targeting policies that rural America relies upon, this proposal places a disproportionate burden on the backs of farmers and rural communities. While I too believe we must reduce the federal deficit, we must all share in this responsibility.

In 2008, I worked hard to pass a five-year farm bill that was fiscally responsible. This bill contained over $4 billion worth of cuts to farm programs, was completely paid for and did not contribute to the deficit. The Farm Bill is a contract with our farmers that they depend on to make business decisions. Changing the rules in the middle of the game would be detrimental to their operations and would cost us even more jobs in rural America.

I thank the President for his recommendations, but Congress writes the budget. I intend to support measures to reduce the deficit but fight many of the President’s proposed cuts that will harm farmers, ranchers and rural communities.

What Lincoln means is now that it’s an election year, I have to stand up for my constituents or I’m guaranteed to lose the election. She’s banking on the long-standing assumption of DC politicians that constituents have short memories. The Senator believes her constituents won’t remember her giving them the finger throughout 2009, if she strokes them behind the ears for the next 9 months.

She’s right the President’s budget picks winners and losers. Just like the “Porkulus” bill, his takeovers of private industry, and his last year’s budget that Lincoln voted for. Now that it’s an election year she can’t bring herself to support his obvious bias that benefits blue states and punishes red states.

Only because it’s an election year!

Don’t be fooled Arkansas. Senator Lincoln will try to appear to address your concerns from now until November. If she’s re-elected, she’ll be right back in the laps of Obama and Reid.

February 2, 2010 Posted by | Election 2010 | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment