Cigar
12-06-2012, 10:44 AM
THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION: Heritage, the go-to think tank for the Republican Party, argued that the tax increase would somehow lead to “higher deficits” and that it served as a “recipe for a recession.” The organization also predicted that the tax increase would “destroy jobs” and “undermine America’s international competitiveness.”
REPRESENTATIVE JOHN BOEHNER (R-OH): “The problem is not that we do not tax enough, it is that Government spends too much. The President has reverted to true form, that of a tax and spend, old-time Democrat. He has abandoned tens of millions of middle-class voters that trusted him. Raising taxes on the middle class is not patriotic, it is idiotic.” (From the Congressional Record on February 17th, 1993)
SENATOR ORRIN HATCH (R-UT): ”Mr. President, taxpayers will adjust to these new taxes by shifting investments into ones that generate fewer taxes by working less and by taking fewer risks. The consequences will punish far more than just the wealthy. Economic growth will slow and fewer jobs will be created.” (From the Congressional Record on August 6th, 1993)
SENATOR MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY): This package contains the largest tax increase in history, and promises deficit reduction. This package will not reduce the Federal debt, or even balance one annual budget for that matter. (From the Congressional Record on August 6th, 1993)
SENATOR CHUCK GRASSLEY (R-IA): Mr. President, I really do not think it takes a rocket scientist to know this bill will cost jobs. (From the Congressional Record on August 6th, 1993)
And there's many more: http://boldprogressives.org/flashback-republicans-predicted-clinton-tax-increase-on-rich-would-lead-to-a-recession/
As we now know, the Clinton tax hikes on the richest Americans did not result in a “recession.” They did not increase our deficits. Rather, the government was placed on a path to a surplus (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/09/05/the-three-best-charts-on-how-clintons-surpluses-became-bush-and-obamas-deficits/) and we had a strong economy that created 22.7 million jobs (http://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/2010/jul/25/sherrod-brown/sherrod-brown-touts-job-grown-during-clinton-presi/). Average weekly wages grew by 21 percent from the start of Clinton’s first term to the end of his second term. These wages only grew by 2 percent during George W. Bush’s two terms. This isn’t to say that tax increases on the rich necessarily create jobs, but the evidence shows that they do not harm the economy in the ways that Republicans are claiming.
Recall that every single Republican in both the House (http://clerk.house.gov/evs/1993/roll406.xml) and the Senate (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=103&session=1&vote=00247) voted against the Clinton tax increase on the rich. As Republicans circle the wagons to protect the rich, we should remember how they made outlandish predictions in the 1990′s, and how their dire words are no more true now.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHN BOEHNER (R-OH): “The problem is not that we do not tax enough, it is that Government spends too much. The President has reverted to true form, that of a tax and spend, old-time Democrat. He has abandoned tens of millions of middle-class voters that trusted him. Raising taxes on the middle class is not patriotic, it is idiotic.” (From the Congressional Record on February 17th, 1993)
SENATOR ORRIN HATCH (R-UT): ”Mr. President, taxpayers will adjust to these new taxes by shifting investments into ones that generate fewer taxes by working less and by taking fewer risks. The consequences will punish far more than just the wealthy. Economic growth will slow and fewer jobs will be created.” (From the Congressional Record on August 6th, 1993)
SENATOR MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY): This package contains the largest tax increase in history, and promises deficit reduction. This package will not reduce the Federal debt, or even balance one annual budget for that matter. (From the Congressional Record on August 6th, 1993)
SENATOR CHUCK GRASSLEY (R-IA): Mr. President, I really do not think it takes a rocket scientist to know this bill will cost jobs. (From the Congressional Record on August 6th, 1993)
And there's many more: http://boldprogressives.org/flashback-republicans-predicted-clinton-tax-increase-on-rich-would-lead-to-a-recession/
As we now know, the Clinton tax hikes on the richest Americans did not result in a “recession.” They did not increase our deficits. Rather, the government was placed on a path to a surplus (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/09/05/the-three-best-charts-on-how-clintons-surpluses-became-bush-and-obamas-deficits/) and we had a strong economy that created 22.7 million jobs (http://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/2010/jul/25/sherrod-brown/sherrod-brown-touts-job-grown-during-clinton-presi/). Average weekly wages grew by 21 percent from the start of Clinton’s first term to the end of his second term. These wages only grew by 2 percent during George W. Bush’s two terms. This isn’t to say that tax increases on the rich necessarily create jobs, but the evidence shows that they do not harm the economy in the ways that Republicans are claiming.
Recall that every single Republican in both the House (http://clerk.house.gov/evs/1993/roll406.xml) and the Senate (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=103&session=1&vote=00247) voted against the Clinton tax increase on the rich. As Republicans circle the wagons to protect the rich, we should remember how they made outlandish predictions in the 1990′s, and how their dire words are no more true now.