Bayh And Nelson Vote Against Obama Budget Because It ‘Costs Too Much,’ But Support Costly Estate Tax Bill
Bayh And Nelson Vote Against Obama Budget Because It ‘Costs Too Much,’ But Support Costly Estate Tax Bill
Last night, the Senate passed President Obama’s budget in a 55-43 vote. While not a single Republican broke with their party to vote yes on the measure, two “moderate” Democrats — Sens. Evan Bayh (D-IN) and Ben Nelson (D-NE) — voted no. Nelson defended his vote in a prepared statement:
The administration inherited a lot of red ink in this budget, along with our ailing economy. But this budget still has trillion dollar-plus deficits in the next two years, and adds unsustainably to the debt. These are tough times, and the federal government needs to take a lesson from American families and cut down on the things we can do without.
I respect the Administration offering an honest budget…but it just costs too much.
Similarly, Bayh issued a statement saying he opposed the budget in an attempt to be the voice of “fiscal responsibility“:
[U]nder this budget, our national debt skyrockets from $11.1 trillion today to an estimated $17 trillion in 2014. As a percentage of our gross domestic product, it reaches a precarious 66.5 percent. The deficit remains larger than our projected economic growth, an unsustainable state of affairs. This budget will increase our borrowing from and dependence upon foreign nations. I cannot support such results. We can do better, and for the sake of our nation and our children’s future, we must.
But if Bayh and Nelson are really concerned about the cost of the budget, why then did they also vote yesterday in favor of a $250 billion tax cut for the rich? As the AP explains, Bayh and Nelson along with eight other “moderate” Democrats broke with Obama and voted to reduce estate taxes from which 99.7 percent of Americans were already exempt.
Further, as the Washington Post wrote yesterday, “Reducing the estate tax [will] harm charities because it eliminates some of the incentive for making charitable bequests — yet some of the very senators who back estate tax cuts were quick to denounce Obama administration tax proposals that they argued would hurt charitable giving.” Among those who opposed Obama’s proposal to reduce tax deductions for charitable giving: Bayh and Nelson.
For Bayh’s part, it’s unclear why he’s standing in the way of the agenda his constituents voted in support of last November. Yglesias suggests, “Bayh just made a decision of conscience and principle to stand with Mitch McConnell and Jim DeMint on the most important domestic policy vote of his career.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Frackin’ hypocrites.
They really think we’re stupid enough not to notice how they vote.
April 3rd, 2009 at 12:22 pmBayh’s recent turn to the right represents “a sharp break in his voting patterns.”
Or, as our Founding Fathers may have said, ‘he’s a turncoat’.
Do you recall what the Revolutionary Army did to turncoats?
Yup.
April 3rd, 2009 at 12:23 pmLemme get this straight — they support the amendment letting Paris Hilton keep more money, but vote against the budget containing that amendment?
Yeah — makes about as much sense as these guys fighting for earmarks to get included in a bill they’re going to vote down anyway. Or the Senator from Alaska supporting volcano monitoring funds in a stimulus bill she voted against.
April 3rd, 2009 at 12:23 pmThis is more class warfare. They don’t want the richest Americans to have to pay their fair share of taxes. They want to balance the budget on the backs of America’s working class while creating a new aristocracy who is largely exempt from taxation.
April 3rd, 2009 at 12:28 pmWe need to replace these Corporate whores next primary season. Enough is enough.
April 3rd, 2009 at 12:29 pmwhy then did they also vote yesterday in favor of a $250 billion tax cut for the rich?
Mebbe cuz they’re beneficiaries of the cuts? I dunno, but I do know nobody ever leaves Congress poorer than they were when they entered.
Bayh simply reveals himself to be the shameless opportunist that anyone with the cognitive capacity of a banana-slug probably already knew he was…
April 3rd, 2009 at 12:31 pmYes, those who inherit money are SO industrious and create SO many jobs.
April 3rd, 2009 at 12:31 pm.
Buh-Bayh, Evan.
.
April 3rd, 2009 at 12:31 pmWayne sez: We need to replace these Corporate whores next primary season. Enough is enough.
April 3rd, 2009 at 12:29 pm
If they were the LEAST BIT concerned about their vulnerability from the left, do you think they’d be sticking their shit-encrusted thumbs in our eyes?
April 3rd, 2009 at 12:32 pmThis is nothing new. Their just becoming more brazen in their sucking on the tit of the rich. They all do it in one form or another. Even with the stimulus package President Obama removed billions for education to appease the right, but managed to keep in about a billion for prisons. This country is finished.
April 3rd, 2009 at 12:36 pmI suggest everyone e-mail Senator Bayh at:
http://bayh.senate.gov/contact/email/
and let him know what you think about him. You will have to pretend to be a constituent to get by his filters, but he makes it easy for you by listing his street addresses of his state offices on the left side of the page. Just click on a city and the address will appear above the link.
April 3rd, 2009 at 12:41 pm“But this budget still has trillion dollar-plus deficits in the next two years, and adds unsustainably to the debt.”
WHAT?! Speak English. dolt.
And what doesn’t this guy get about the budget? It is spending money to make money, and it has to be borrowed. As we make more money we start paying the debt back. IDIOT!
And how the hell does giving MORE money to the wealthy help.
The rich got wildly richer (and increased in numbers) during the Bush years, and YET in the last two years we’ve descended into a major recession and significant unemployment—so how come the ‘even richer’ didn’t somehow prevent this mess?
April 3rd, 2009 at 12:45 pmSimple…it’s because the rich make each rich, the end.
correction: the rich make each other rich, the end.
April 3rd, 2009 at 12:47 pmBayh has been sold.
April 3rd, 2009 at 12:56 pmMoney for a vote and it doesn’t matter what Party you belong to. Greed has taken over the Branches of Govenment and anyone can be brought. What’s sad is our Law Makers handed Bush and Cheney 11 Trillion dollars with no questions asked as Americans were afraid to speak out against the Bush for fear of being arrested. These Law Makers helped created this Gobel Crisis and now there blaming each other and getting as much money as they can before their called out. Dodd took the thousands of dollars and now acts like he didn’t know it was wrong. Others are hopeing their secret pay to play doest become Public. Notice how Pelosi and Feinstein are keeping it low. The GOP doesn’t really care when the headlines read of their big checks for votes because we know that’s just the way they always do business.
April 3rd, 2009 at 12:57 pmI am calling of them. This is disgusting. Jesus is it so hard to do the right thing for once in congress? What a jerk. I was rooting for him for VP
April 3rd, 2009 at 1:01 pm“Reducing the estate tax [will] harm charities because it eliminates some of the incentive for making charitable bequests”
I like this one. Last I checked charitable donations are a deduction that lower taxes.
And, if these rich pantywaists weren’t glomming onto and hoarding so much of the wealth, the need for charitable donations would be diminished.
April 3rd, 2009 at 1:03 pmNO NO NO NO you silly little liberals!!
They are PROTECTING the farms and small businesses that hand-down estates of over $3,000,000. All 3,000 of them.
Don’t you read the Republican talking points ????
April 3rd, 2009 at 1:06 pmmk3872 Says:
NO NO NO NO you silly little liberals!!
They are PROTECTING the farms and small businesses that hand-down estates of over $3,000,000. All 3,000 of them.
What? At a 3 million worth level they can’t afford to buy their own protection? They want the government to protect them? Sounds suspiciously socialistic to me.
April 3rd, 2009 at 1:09 pm5th Estate Says:
And what doesn’t this guy get about the budget? It is spending money to make money, and it has to be borrowed. As we make more money we start paying the debt back. IDIOT!
And that is what all businesses do. They borrow money to expand their business and when they make more money they pay back what they borrowed.
The reason why I lost my job is because the non-profit I work for lost it’s ability to borrow money when they were short for payroll because the state had not paid, in a timely manner, what they owed to my employer. Thus, my employer was forced to lay off employees to a level where they were confident they could make payroll without having to borrow to offset the amount the state was not paying them. In the meantime the children this non-profit serve are going to suffer because of this.
April 3rd, 2009 at 1:20 pmBayh is another Joe Lieberman Democrat….one who places his career ahead of his conscience. He’s trying to make himself important by blackmailing Senate Democrats. It’s worked for Lieberman.
April 3rd, 2009 at 1:30 pmThe government just needs to go bankrupt and leave the people alone.
April 3rd, 2009 at 1:33 pmWhenever I see a Democrat take a sharp turn to the right, it makes me wonder what a man like Dick Cheney might have uncovered with 6 years of “legal” warrentless wiretapping and zero adult supervision.
The blackmail files he (and whatever cronies he chooses to share them with) has must be pretty thick these days.
April 3rd, 2009 at 1:43 pmmisscoleopteramolly Says:
Lemme get this straight — they support the amendment letting Paris Hilton keep more money, but vote against the budget containing that amendment?
Hmmm, yes, interesting – kind of smells bad doesn’t it?
April 3rd, 2009 at 1:47 pmFrom the Desk of the President of the United States:
Memo:
To: Evan Byah & Ben Nelson”
“You can bet that we’re keeping score, Brother!”
Signed:
Barak Obama, President
April 3rd, 2009 at 1:48 pmbigtime patriot Says:
——————————————————————————–
Whenever I see a Democrat take a sharp turn to the right, it makes me wonder what a man like Dick Cheney might have uncovered with 6 years of “legal” warrentless wiretapping and zero adult supervision.
The blackmail files he (and whatever cronies he chooses to share them with) has must be pretty thick these days.
April 3rd, 2009 at 1:56 pm————————————————————–This needs to said again and again. I have also thought that this is what has happened to other people who may have stood up to the neocons.
No one has addressed the “charitable” giving aspect. If I have this right the wealthy will have to cut down or cut out giving to charities because they have to pay higher taxes. I believe “charitable” donations are an allowable deduction on taxes, so the money given is used as a reduction in taxes RATHER than a true humanitarian gesture.
Many Americans on much less income find a way to give to charities because they want to help. For them it is not a way to take an allowable deduction, it is a way to help their fellow man.
April 3rd, 2009 at 1:57 pmI guess Bayh and Nelson will be making ROUNDTABLE appearances on the fox network . .
First stop, HANNITY . .
Second stop, Bildo the Clown . .
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:04 pmThird stop, Beck…
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:16 pmYa know, I could support a system that exempts family farms from the estate tax. I would also add that there are other family businesses which perhaps should be included. But shouldn’t they have formed their business so that it isn’t a straight inherritance ?
Otherwise, I strongly note that the estate tax doesn’t even start cutting in till you reach around ? $600k ?. Even then, it doesn’t take everything about that amount – it just takes a tax percentage of the excess.
But how many of the beneficiaries of the current amendment have ever milked a cow ?
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:18 pmThe responses the two senators gave are telling.
Nelson’s response is BS. He is a US Senator and should know that the rules governing how one conducts ones personal finances are radically different from how a government should conduct theirs. My take is that he is too embarassed to tell us why he really voted against it, so he is giving us this namby pamby answer instead.
Bayh’s answer is informative. He calls it an “unsustainable state of affairs.” Of course it’s unsustainable! It includes lots of stimulus and emergency measures. What he is really saying is that he opposes the very idea of economic stimulus.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:32 pmMapleStreet Says:But how many of the beneficiaries of the current amendment have ever milked a cow ?
You mean a ‘real’ cow? They are all pretty good at milking a cash cow.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:40 pmMapleStreet Says:
I think it is currently 3.5 million
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:43 pmBayh and Nelson are both worthless.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:45 pm*
“cut down on the things we can do without”
“for the sake of our nation and our children’s future”
Oh, for god’s sake, spare me!
These clowns vote down the budget that brings help to average Americans, but vote to reduce tax on the wealthy heirs of America. Blue dogs – you are making me see red!
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:50 pmThis is class warfare benefiting the wealthy on the backs of the working class.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:52 pmJust how much more do they expect Americans to suffer while the jet-set continue to live like Gatsby.
Now would be an excellent time for TP to remind everyone who funds the Estate / Death Tax repeal movement –
We all feel for them, I’m sure, but . . .
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:18 pmThe families bankrolling this include “the candy magnate Mars family, Waltons of Wal-Mart fame, Kochs of Koch Industries and Dorrance family of the Campbell’s Soup Co.” Together, they are worth a total of $185.5 billion. The estate tax repeal would “collectively net them a windfall of $71.6 billion.”
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:30 pmThe amendment approving the regressive estate tax reforms include a “deficit-neutral” clause (see Senate Amendment 873 on THOMAS). Is this the same as being budget neutral?
What is our next step? The House and Senate versions now get reconciled, yes? There is still an opportunity to lobby having this amendment stricken from the final legislation, correct? If so then on whom should we be turning our lobbying attention?
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:48 pmto Bilbo Hussein Baggins
Thanks for the link to Bayh’s email. It made it easy to give him feedback from one of his constituents.
April 3rd, 2009 at 5:01 pmI just saw that — yes, thanks, Bilbo. I sent off my email just now.
April 3rd, 2009 at 5:18 pmIt’s not unclear to me. Bayh is a politician, and politicians are paid by corporations and lobbyists to protect the wealth individuals manage to accumulate by lies, bribery, corruption, and thievery.
Now that the public masses are finally beginning to wake up and begin voting the corrupt bastards out of office, the corporations and lobbyists are demanding that the milder members of the politician’s club begin falling on their swords by revealing their true colors.
April 3rd, 2009 at 6:13 pmI hope Bayh and the rest of his turncoat psuedodems get voted out during the next election. May their hypocrisy backfire on them.
April 3rd, 2009 at 7:07 pmMethinks Bayh is jealous of Obama, and angry that Bayh didn’t get the VP nod, or an ambassadorship. Bayh either doesn’t know (or doesn’t care) that Obama won his home state.
Bayh is the new Lieberman (the original Lieberman is keeping his mouth shut and laying low).
As for Nelson, he doesn’t seem to remember the election either.
And voting to give Paris Hilton a tax cut and voting against a budget that gives middle class people a tax cut is worse than anything a Republican did. You would expect a Republican to vote against middle class tax relief and to vote for upper class tax relief.
Nice going, Bayh. Glad you want to help your state’s millionares.
April 3rd, 2009 at 9:22 pmTaxes make the world go round period.
When we are in a mess , everyone goes down with us.
April 4th, 2009 at 10:42 amWe (USA) are the flea market of the world. As the rich
got richer from the labor of the common worker . America
grew in form of taxes collected from every working man and woman and corporations All kinds of programs were made up
with this money that took care of mostly people who
either unwilling or unable to take care of themselves .
in addition to our heroic armed forces who are paid from the
same kitty as well as the politicians who line up for their chance to be elected to a job which pays well with a
set amount of funds (taxes) for traveling and future retirement (taxes) better than the average social security
check . Where do we now go since we are spending more than we are collecting . The rich and corps have tax havens overseas .
We can be happy that we NOT referring to Evan Bayh as Vice President Bayh.
April 4th, 2009 at 12:36 pmJust like Judd Gregg as Commerce Secretary would have been a mistake.
Bayh appears to want to standout with his opposition for his own political reasons.
Gregg just seems crazy.
It’s ridiculous when Gregg speaks nonsense about Obama’s plan as the “France-ification” of the United States and his mentioning of “Chicago style politics” is sooooo tiring.
The quetion is where are these peolpe in the last 8 years when Bush, with their help, took us from record surplus to record deficits due to reckless spending on an unnecessary war and no bid contracts. They did not form any caucus then, but went along with every measure to destroy our economy and damage our standing in the world. They could not even speak up about anything. All of a sudden, they are now conservatives?
I don’t mind principled opposition, but this is plain stupid. Now we have a president who is trying to engage in meaningful spending that will put put on the path of greatness should we see it through. Who in his right senses will want to oppose spending on infrastructure, energy, education and health care which are investments in our future? This beats my imagination. To think that Bayh was being considered for vice president. Thank GOD that did not happen!!!
April 4th, 2009 at 3:50 pmBayh is a cretin; a turncoat; a traitor. He sold his soul for whatever gain we don’t know about. In other words, he playing politics, instead of putting THE PEOPLE he’s supposed to represent first.
Want to write and tell him so? Here ya go.
____________________________________
(the not for much longer) Senator Evan Bayh—>
D.C. Phone: 202-224-5623
D.C. Fax: 202-228-1377
Email: http://bayh.senate.gov/contact/email/
April 5th, 2009 at 1:28 amThose people who have worked long hours and years developing a successful business deserve to invest their money after paying their fair share of profits, as they sacraficed greatly in the startup days, in anyway they want. It’s their money. That is the American Dream that so many people work hard to obtain.
I’ve never met a poor person who provides jobs. Only people that that earned money provide jobs. Right now, people who have money are holding on to their money and not investing in either jobs or stock market. How many people are now unemployed? Tax the rich above their fair share and the economy will continue to decline along with jobs.
As an owner of a business, we would like to hire additional employee in which to grow. However, why should we if we’re going to be taxed above our fair share and those that don’t even pay taxes are allowed to keep living off the backs of those that pay taxes and more importantly provide jobs? The economy is in a full blown circle jerk. How happens when the money runs out?
April 6th, 2009 at 7:39 pmOne thing that is a serious burden on the economy are entitlement programs. There is no way to properly budget for them. For instance how many people will be eligible and enrolled in unemployment in November of 2009? I defy anyone to offer an accurate number. By definition anyone who meets the criteria of the entitlement program is due its benefits. If there isn’t money to fund the the program, more money is found, destroying the budget.
If the program is over-budgeted and all of the funds are not used, the remainder is not returned. Rather there is rampant spending just to use up the allocation of funds so next years funding level is not reduced. Also, monies can not be carried from one year to the next by the agency. All must be consumed every budget period.
This just doesn’t make any sense. It fosters artificial growth of the programs while potentially hurting other programs which could utilize the budget overages from another.
April 7th, 2009 at 2:18 pmOK Pat obviously senile dementia has set in. Time to see the nice young men that will need to take care of you soon.burun estetigi rent a car arac kiralama
April 18th, 2009 at 6:00 amsac ekimi