You are browsing the archive for 1 percent.

The Road to Jobs and Economic Growth

2:03 pm in Uncategorized by Lee Saunders



One of the great lies of our time is that raising taxes on the wealthy hurts job creation and undermines economic growth. There is absolutely no evidence anywhere in the world that this claim is true. In fact, all the evidence points to the exact opposite being true: When the wealthy are taxed fairly, jobs are created and economic growth is encouraged. Back in the 1950s and 1960s, for example, when the economy boomed and the middle-class expanded, the top bracket for high-income earners was 90 percent. Today, the top bracket is at 35 percent, but the top 1 percent are paying an effective tax rate of less than 30 percent.

In 1993, when President Clinton proposed raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans, he was roundly criticized by the corporate-controlled politicians on Capitol Hill and the Wall Street barons who always oppose higher taxes on the rich. They claimed the economy would suffer and jobs would be lost. Yet, when President Clinton won that tax increase, just the opposite happened. The nay-sayers were wrong. Job creation skyrocketed and we ushered in nearly a decade of strong economic growth.

A dozen years ago, however, that growth came to a halt with Pres. George W. Bush’s program of tax cuts for the rich and the deregulation of Wall Street. Instead, we were left with the lowest job creation of any Presidency in modern times. There is a reason for this result: When the wealthy get massive tax cuts, they don’t spend the money. Neither do corporations. In fact, corporations are now sitting on more than $1 trillion in cash.

On the other hand, when working families get a tax break, they spend it – creating more demand for products and giving corporations an incentive to produce more and hire more people. That is why President Obama makes such a strong case for keeping taxes low on the working middle class while allowing the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy to expire. Yet the same, age-old arguments are made by the wealthy to keep their taxes low.

They’ve even got a corporate CEO-funded front group, called Fix the Debt, arguing that we need to cut programs that help the poor, seniors and the sick in order to finance more tax cuts for the richest people in the country. That kind of thinking won’t put America back to work. And it won’t finance the important investments in infrastructure and education that we need to remain competitive in the future. All it will do is give the rich a tax break that they don’t need.

That is one reason why the 2012 election was the most important one of our lifetime. Big issues were debated, including whether we would return to Bush-era policies or enact the kind of Clinton-era tax policies supported by President Obama. The voters sent a clear signal that they supported President Obama’s plan to move the country forward by raising taxes on the wealthy and protecting vitally important programs that the poor and middle-class rely upon, such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

Some on Capitol Hill – such as Sen. Lindsay Graham of South Carolina – say they will only accept a revenue increase if the President will agree to major cuts in Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid. But Congress and President Obama have already cut more than $1.5 trillion in government spending. Now, the focus must be on revenue.

More than 40 members of the House have indicated their opposition to any cuts in Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid. Sens. Jay Rockefeller and Tom Harkin underscored the opposition to unnecessary cuts in a letter they circulated earlier this week. They urged President Obama to “reject changes to Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security that would cut benefits, shift costs to states, alter the structure of these critical programs, or force vulnerable populations to bear the burden of deficit reduction.”

The taxes on the richest people in America have been too low for too long. Our economic recovery is being damaged by this fundamentally flawed policy. Just this week, billionaire Warren Buffet made this clear in an op-ed published in The New York Times. In his column, Buffet called on Congress to immediately “enact a minimum tax on high incomes.”

Buffet also suggests a 30 percent rate for income between $1 million and $10 million, and a 35 percent on amounts above that. “A plain and simple rule like that will block the efforts of lobbyists, lawyers and contribution-hungry legislators to keep the ultra-rich paying rates well below those incurred by people with income just a tiny fraction of ours,” Buffet wrote.

We need to mobilize and demand that the Congress raise taxes on the wealthy and protect vital programs. It is the only way to avoid a fiscal disaster while encouraging job creation and greater economic growth.
Read the rest of this entry →

Mitt Romney’s Say Anything Strategy

5:17 pm in Uncategorized by Lee Saunders

As we enter the final days of the 2012 presidential campaign, let’s take a moment to consider a quality that Americans have valued in our leaders since the birth of our great nation: Integrity.

President George Washington summed up the importance of integrity when he wrote that “the character of an honest man” is “the most enviable of all titles.”

Our greatest president, Abraham Lincoln, likewise drew strength from his honest character. “I have never tried to conceal my opinions, nor tried to deceive anyone in reference to them,” the Great Emancipator wrote. “I am glad of all the support I can get anywhere, if I can get it without practicing any deception to obtain it.”

Sadly, we have come a long way from the high standards of Washington and Lincoln.

In Mitt Romney, Americans have a candidate who refuses to tell the truth because it might get in the way of his ambition. Many politicians modify their views in the course of their careers. But what Mitt Romney does is far different.

In the course of the last month, for example, he changed his public stance on so many issues that attentive voters are right to question whether he is motivated by anything other than his relentless desire to sit in the Oval Office:

  • He once opposed “moving heaven and earth” to find Osama bin Laden. Now, he claims he always backed that goal.
  • He ran for the GOP nomination calling for tax cuts, even for the top 1 percent. Now, he says the rich won’t see a tax cut.
  • He claimed to support the Blount Amendment which eased women’s access to contraception. Now he says he opposes the whole idea.

Romney says he worked in a bipartisan way when he was governor of Massachusetts, but fails to mention that he vetoed more than 800 bills. He says he loves teachers, but just a month ago claimed that hiring more teachers was a mistake. He also claims he turned around the Salt Lake Olympics, but never mentions the $2.7 billion taxpayers paid to cover the deficit he left behind. He said he supported government help for the automobile industry while they went through the bankruptcy process, but at the time of the rescue, he said if President Obama’s plan went through “you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye.”

And then there is the now-infamous tape in which, behind closed doors, he disparages 47 percent of the country, including senior citizens, veterans and college students. Onstage now, in front of the network cameras, he says he is deeply concerned about all Americans.

Here’s the logical conclusion one draws from watching Mitt Romney run for President: He changes positions repeatedly and without shame. When confronted with past positions, he simply denies them. He seems constitutionally incapable of being honest about himself, his record and the proposals he supports.

That’s why voters should not be asked to take it on faith that he hasn’t cheated on his taxes or that he’s come up with a way to pay for his budget plan without slashing indispensable programs such as Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid. For Romney, this is the Big Con.

By contrast, America now has a President who believes we need to pull together to find real solutions for the challenges we face. President Obama took bold action to keep America from descending into a second Great Depression. He saved millions of jobs, enacted historic health care reform to protect America’s families from predatory insurance companies and won approval for the toughest Wall Street regulation since the 1930s. He ended the Iraq War and “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Even now, he is working to end our involvement in Afghanistan and use the savings to cut the deficit and create new jobs. He strongly supports rebuilding our infrastructure, investing in education and training, and protecting the middle class. He believes in America and trusts our people.

When asked earlier this year if he thought Romney was a liar, Newt Gingrich replied point blank: “Yes.” Gingrich said Romney was running for office as “a poll-driven, consultant-guided” candidate. Gingrich joins a long line of Republicans – from John McCain and Rudolph Giuliani, to Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee – who have gone on record questioning Romney’s character.

At this stage of the campaign, with mere days before Election Day, it no longer even makes sense to try judging Romney’s candidacy by his views. He has too many irreconcilable differences with the truth for that – and it’s those differences that disqualify him from holding the highest elected office in the land.