Connect with us

Congress

Senate Democratic moderates say they want to work with GOP on tax cuts

Published

on

A group of eleven moderate Senate Democrats say they want to work with Republicans on addressing the GOP’s expiring tax cuts and raising the debt ceiling.

In a new letter to Republicanleaders, they say they are willing to cut spending, protect family-oriented tax policies, have “competitive” rates on businesses — and that they can provide enough votes to allow Republicans to overcome a filibuster in the Senate without having to resort to so-called reconciliation.

The lawmakers say they’re otherwise worried Republicans will tack the $4 trillion cost of extending their tax cuts onto the deficit, which will increase interest rates for everyone, something nonpartisan budget forecasters have recently warned about.

“We understand that the Senate Republican conference is likely to use the budget reconciliation process to address these expirations,” said the letter, put together by Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto (Nev.) and Mark Warner (Va.), both of whom sit on the tax committee. “While we respect the majority’s right to do so under Senate rules, we believe a better outcome can be achieved by working in a bipartisan manner to reform the tax code and address our growing national debt through responsible spending reforms.”

“We believe a fully deficit-financed, partisan effort could risk raising costs for families, driving up interest rates for Americans looking to purchase a home, and increasing borrowing costs for American businesses and consumers.”

Republicans appear unlikely to take them up on the offer, though it presents a potential answer to many of the jams they now face.

The GOP is deeply divided over the cost of renewing their tax cuts, not to mention scads of individual provisions like the $10,000 limit on state and local tax deductions, and are sure to have a difficult time raising the debt limit. Some have never voted to increase the legal cap on government borrowing.

Republicans have struggled to even agree on scheduling, with weeks of debate over whether they should take up immigration first or combine it with their tax plans.

Tax debates are typically highly contentious, but there was a surprising outbreak of bipartisanship last year when House Ways and Means Committee Chair Jason Smith (R-Mo.) and then-Senate Finance Committee Chair Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) agreed on a plan to expand breaks for parents and businesses. It was overwhelmingly approved by the House before later dying in the Senate.

No Democrats voted for Republicans’ original 2017 tax cuts, much of which are now due to expire at the end of this year. Rolling them over is projected to cost some $400 billion per year, and the price tag has become a major issue given the government is already running $2 trillion deficits.

The prospect of a bipartisan tax plan would raise a whole different set of challenges though, with the two sides likely to clash over issues like how much to charge businesses and high earners. The moderates signing the letter would also likely take heat from fellow Democrats who are opposed to the tax cuts and would be happy to see them expire.

The lawmakers said they can work with Republicans on business-related provisions.

“Good faith negotiations can ensure the permanence of a competitive tax code for American businesses with reasonable effective tax rates and competitive treatment of capital and R&D expenses, as well as a rational international tax regime,” they wrote.

“While there will certainly be challenges to finding bipartisan agreement on certain issues, we believe addressing the growing deficit and reducing unnecessary spending can serve as a basis for good faith bipartisan negotiation.”

The letter was also signed by Sens. Raphael Warnock (Ga.), Tim Kaine (Va.), John Hickenlooper (Colo.), Mark Kelly (Ariz.), Gary Peters (Mich.), Jacky Rosen (Nev.), Ruben Gallego (Ariz.), Elissa Slotkin (Mich.) and Jon Ossoff (Ga.).

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Congress

Trump wavers on July 4 megabill deadline

Published

on

President Donald Trump appeared to leave room to extend his July 4 deadline for Congress to pass the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, as the Senate scrambles to push through the legislation amid Republican infighting.

“I’d love to do July 4th, but I think it’s very hard to do July 4th,” Trump told reporters on the South Lawn on Tuesday, before adding that the goal is “somewhere around there.”

The fate of the sweeping megabill remains up in the air, as Republican leaders struggle to secure enough votes to push the legislation through the Senate.

Trump has repeatedly sought to firm up GOP votes, blasting holdouts as “not good people” and not so subtly reminding Republicans not to go “too crazy,” because they “still have to get reelected.”

But even though the president and his allies have launched a pressure campaign to encourage movement from Republicans in the Senate, Trump began to waffle on the self-imposed July 4 ultimatum as it drew closer.

The president on Friday said the deadline was “not the end-all,” and that “it can go longer, but we’d like to get it done by that time if possible.”

Continue Reading

Congress

GOP clean-energy amendment won’t get a vote

Published

on

Sen. Joni Ernst said her closely watched amendment seeking to maintain wind and solar tax credits will not get a Senate vote before the anctipated passage of the GOP megabill.

“I don’t think they’re going to let us” offer the amendment, the Iowa Republican told reporters Tuesday morning as GOP leaders rushed to put finishing touches on the bill. “There’s a lot of stuff that went on overnight that kind of waylaid our plans.”

Ernst’s amendment would echo an earlier proposal to phase down the Inflation Reduction Act’s clean electricity production and investment tax credits for solar and wind generation projects by linking to when projects begin construction. It would also eliminate an excise tax proposed by Republicans that would penalize any wind and solar project placed into service after 2027 if it includes material assistance from China or other prohibited foreign entities.

Ernst was joined on the amendment by Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa).

It’s possible that the amendment or part of it could be included in a final “wraparound” amendment GOP leaders are expected to offer ahead of a final vote. Murkowski, considered a swing vote on the overall bill, was in intensive talks early Tuesday morning with Majority Leader John Thune and other Senate leaders.

Josh Siegel, Kelsey Tamborrino and James Bikales contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

Congress

Amendment targeting Medicaid expansion won’t get a Senate vote

Published

on

Senate conservatives are dropping their push for a vote on scaling back a key Medicaid funding mechanism, according to three people granted anonymity to discuss private deliberations.

Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) and allies were expected to get a vote on an amendment to scale back the federal share of Medicaid costs for those enrolled under the Affordable Care Act’s expansion of Medicaid starting in 2031. Senate leadership backed the proposal and were expected to help build support for it as part of a deal cut earlier this week to start debate on President Donald Trump’s domestic policy bill.

But Republicans were wary of enacting such a deep cut despite other provisions in the megabill that would decrease Medicaid funding by nearly $800 billion. Several GOP senators warned Monday they did not support making changes to the federal march for Medicaid enrollees.

A spokesperson for Scott did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

While the amendment is being withdrawn, Scott’s fight highlights how far Republicans have been willing to go to curb the Medicaid expansion, a cornerstone of the Affordable Care Act. Republicans argue the expansion enables able-bodied adults to get coverage at the expense of beneficiaries with disabilities and the elderly.

The federal government traditionally covers half of all Medicaid costs and the state picks up the rest. But the federal government covers 90 percent of costs for expansion enrollees. Under Scott’s proposal, that extra funding would shrink down to 50 percent after 2030. Anyone who was enrolled prior to that date would be grandfathered at the 90 percent payment rate.

While Trump himself has said he does not want to cut Medicaid benefits, an estimated 11.8 million people are expected to lose coverage if the megabill becomes law by 2034, according to estimates from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. The number would likely balloon if Scott’s amendment passed.

Continue Reading

Trending