From the office of U.S. Sen. Barbara Mikulski:
U.S. Senator Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.) took to the Senate floor to speak out in support of the Paying a Fair Share Act prior to casting a vote in favor of the tax fairness legislation this evening. This so-called ‘Buffett Rule’ will help ease the burden on middle class families by ensuring that millionaires and billionaires pay their fair share.
“I support the Buffett Rule because I do believe in fundamental fairness. That if you live in the United States of America, that you benefit from the United States of America, both its national security and its public institutions, that you need to pay your fair share,”Senator Mikulski said. “Let’s talk about what the Buffett Rule actually is. This would ensure that high-earning Americans who make more than $1 million a year pay at least 30 percent income tax on their effective rate on their second million. Let me repeat what this is. Your first million is kept at the same tax rate that it is this afternoon. What we’re talking about is changing the tax rate not on your first million, but on your second million. I think Buffett had a good idea. Let’s codify it. Let’s pass it in the Senate today.”
Senator Mikulski’s remarks, as delivered, follow:
“I support the Buffett Rule because I do believe in fundamental fairness. That if you live in the United States of America, that you benefit from the United States of America, both its national security and its public institutions, that you need to pay your fair share.
“This is what America is all about: fairness and that we’re all in it together.
“Now, let’s talk. I’ve heard all afternoon about this hardworking entrepreneur or this hardworking small business. But nobody gets to be that hardworking entrepreneur without the United States of America. They’ve gone to public schools. They’ve enjoyed public transportation, a variety of public institutions, safety and security, both in cyber security and wars that are fought by our military.
“We need to have a way of paying our bills. When we hear the great President John F. Kennedy quoted saying “Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country,” it’s called pay your fair share.
“Let’s talk about what the Buffett Rule actually is. This would ensure that high-earning Americans who make more than $1 million a year pay at least 30 percent income tax on their effective rate on their second million. Let me repeat what this is. Your first million is kept at the same tax rate that it is this afternoon. What we’re talking about is changing the tax rate not on your first million, but on your second million.
“Now, I don’t think that stifles entrepreneurship. I don’t think it breaks the neck of small businesses. What the small business needs is not more tax breaks, they need more customers which is about more jobs.
“I think this bill really talks about fairness. It would phase in additional tax liability for taxpayers earning between $1 million and $2 billion to avoid a tax cliff. They’re saying, ‘let us keep our money so we can give it to charity.’ This preserves the incentive for charitable giving.
“The highest-earning 400 Americans make about $270 million each. They’re the ones that paid an effective tax rate of 18 percent. Just think. You make $270 million: that’s not exactly the entrepreneur in a garage; that’s not exactly that small business person like a florist or like my grandmother running a Polish bakery or like my father with his little grocery store. They make $270 million each and pay 18 percent.
“What we’re saying is you can pay that 18 percent on your first million, but on that second million, you’ve got to get into the game and start to pay 30 percent. I think that this is a great idea.
“The Buffett Rule supports fairness in the tax code so executives don’t pay a lower rate than the people who work in the mailroom or in the FedEx trucks delivering their products. It does support prosperity and entrepreneurship. It doesn’t kick in until your second million, and even then it is phased in slowly.
“A lot has been said that ‘we don’t want these handouts from Maryland, from the Federal Government. It wrecks our entrepreneurship, our get up and go.’ I don’t believe that. I don’t believe that at all. Who gets the biggest handouts in our country, but that who get tax earmarks. We eliminated earmarks in the Appropriations Committee. Now we’re here to eliminate them in the tax code.
“Look how hard it was to get rid of the ethanol subsidy. When we wanted to get rid of the oil and gas subsidy, you would think that we were Darth Vader on the Senate floor. So every time we want to take away a lavish tax break that only helps a few get more, we’re stymied or stifled because, if they employed as many people in their businesses as they employ lobbyists in Washington, we would be able to lower the unemployment rate.
“The other party is willing to bring us often to the brink of default. Remember when we were dealing with the debt ceiling rather than with taxing billionaires. And here we are continuing now with that same fight.
“This legislation that we would pass is a modest down payment on reforming the tax code. We do have to make it fairer. This is a firm way to be able to do it. Sure we’ve got to look at the corporate tax code. We’ve got to look at how to bring expatriate money overseas and bring it home. Yes we have to look at rates and yes we have to reward entrepreneurship and acknowledge the special challenges of being a small and medium-sized business. But that’s long-range and under the arcane rules of the Senate, we are now stymied in bringing up this legislation.
“We could take one giant step forward to make our tax code fairer by passing the legislation called the Buffett Rule, named after Warren Buffett – a great American. A guy who really gives capitalism real meaning in our country. But he says, ‘let me pay and people like me pay the same rate of taxes as my administrative assistant in the front office.’ I think Buffett had a good idea. Let’s codify it. Let’s pass it in the Senate today.”
Audio of Senator Mikulski’s remarks is available – here.
Video of Senator Mikulski’s remarks is available – here.
Just full of it.
Mulkulski is just another liberal who is parroting Obama in his class warfare rhetoric, Obama has no record to run on so he is trying to divide the country even further. What ever happened to the American dream of coming here, working hard and becoming wealthy. Many have done it and provided us with the greatest innovations that we enjoy today.
How did that millionaire’s tax work out in Maryland? They didn’t get nearly the money projected, and it won’t happen this time either. Then O’Malley wanted to tax the people making $100,000 a year. They may start at the top, but it always filters down the chain. I, for one, object to the fact that nearly 50% of the people don’t pay any taxes at all. Everyone should pay something as we all have some skin in the game.
Our economy is in bad shape three years after a terrible recession. We are limping along, and we are worse off as far as debt. The Chinese own over one trillion dollars of our debt, yet money flows out of Washington like there is no end in sight. Think the GSA party. Well, there will be an end, and it won’t be pretty unless we can cut the horrible spending coming out of Washington. This election is going to be a deciding factor as to whether the citizens want to clean up Washington or keep going down the same old road heading toward disaster.
We need a new comprehensive tax code. People are paying
If this had passed, it would fund the government for 17 days. These people are out of their mind. She has jumped the shark!
Oh Babs, you just ain’t gettin’ it. Cathy – spot on!
Babs, I hope you read this because you ignore the messages I send to your office…
We don’t need the Buffet Rule or any other rule – WE NEED FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY!! Control spending FIRST, then look to make up the short fall. I swear the Democrats are absolutely stuck on stupid. We don’t need more taxes – we need less spending. Period.
The cuts are easy. If the federal government is spending money on an issue resereved to the states – cut it. Make the state governments work hard to generate business in their state, not siphon off others. This country has been comepletely derailed from its original design and with each new twist and turn from that original design we head toward ruin.
If Warren Buffet and any other person who has amassed a fortune of considerable size and feels guilty about doing so – do us a favor and just hand your fortune over to the government and keep the $54,000 for the year to live on like some of us do. Then shut your pie hole, quit looking to be the hero in the eyes of a public you are completely out of touch with, and go away.
Babs, you and your boy Marty Owe’Malley have proven that you are complete idiots when it comes to managing the public’s money and affairs. Do us a favor and just quietly go away, or at least stop talking and making a mockery of common sense.
What scares me the most right now is that things are only going to get worse. The latest CNN poll (for what it’s worth) shows Obama beating Romney in an election. You might ask yourself, how can the country really be this misguided, but come election day Obama will have used enough smoke and mirrors to make people forget the last four years. Both our state and federal government have absolutely failed the past 4+ years, and people still continue to sing the praises of O’Malley and Obama. My theory is that they simply can’t admit that they were swindled and bet on the wrong horse, and now that they’ve come this far they feel like they can’t turn back. The message from republicans needs to be that it’s ok you were fooled the first time, just don’t let it happen again.
Back up 8 years, change the names, and you have perfectly stated what every liberal was saying about Bush-Kerry.
And here we are again.
When are we going to really get down to the business of running the country again, rather than exchanging rhetoric like Christmas cards every 4 years?
Why didn’t the Dems pass this “fairness” bill when they controlled both houses? Why didn’t the Dems pass a budget bill when they controlled both houses? Why didn’t the Dems close the tax loopholes when they controlled both houses?….I know…it was Bush’s fault…..I get it.
Who gets to decide what “fair share” means? This time around it’s 30%. What will it be when you’re through pissing away that “revenue” and need more cash to feed the beast that is the Federal Gov’t?
And, when will your need for “fairness” end up hitting the simple schmuck that needs to work for 20+ YEARS to make what a “millionaire” makes in 1 month? Oh, that’s right…..your buddy in Annapolis is already trying to get into those pockets here in the great state of Maryland……you’re disgusting.
What gets me is the ryan budget which did suggest lowering the tax rate also suggested closing loop holes for the rich. My only fault with it was it did not spell out or score which loop holes it left that up to Weighs and Means to figure out. I would be in favor of making a flat tax on people over 500,000 which is lower than the current rate but has NO credits or deductions!
Fair would be a flat, national sales tax.
Kharn another great call on the NST. I agree.
I am totally in favor of the Buffet rule on principle alone. I don’t really care how much they pay, or how little, whether it’s an election year or not. If we are going to have a scaled income tax, it’s obviously unfair for someone with more income to pay less than someone without, allowing for various tax breaks. To me, this is indefensible, and supporting it is a no-brainer.
Now, where the Democrats stick their foot in their mouth and completely and utterly destroy whatever “principled” stand they want to claim, is when the press release says this:
“This so-called ‘Buffett Rule’ will help ease the burden on middle class families by ensuring that millionaires and billionaires pay their fair share.”
Which is ridiculous. I don’t think there’s a taxpayer anywhere making less than $1M that’s going to feel that their “burden” has been “eased” by this law. That’s nonsense, and more importantly, it’s really not even true in any real sense.
Even when the idea is right, leave it to a politician to open their mouths and destroy any merit it might have.
Vote them ALL out.
How disturbing it is that so few people will call out an invalid argument when that argument is being used in defense of a position they believe in. Refreshing to see that objectivity isn’t dead. Kudos, Noble.
I’m sure someone out there is thinking don’t encourage him, but thanks anyway. Normally I spend some time merely highlighting the glaring idiocy released by Harris’ PR monkey intern, but Milkulski’s people have been doing this a while, are a little slicker, and you have to read it a little slower and read between the lines.
But party BS is party BS no matter who it comes from. What disturbs me is that many of these people have been doing it so long they don’t even know they’re doing it anymore.
Vote them all out.
I think part of the problem is that we have a debt problem and it needs to be solved. The solution is a two fold approach. Obviously we must reduce the deficiet to ever start paying down our debt. This requires a balanced budget with a surplus. To do this we need to reduce expenses. The two places most ripe for this is reduction in some discretionary spending which no one would like, entitlements which the dems would not like and defense which the republicans would not like. Still that would not balance the budget. Like it or not to fix the problem we must increase income and that will mean taxes MUST go up. Either we can raise the rates and keep all the deductions; or eliminate the deductions and keep the lower rates we now pay. But the end result is the government must increase the amount it brings in and than decrease the spending in an effort to eliminate the deficiet! No party has the answer alone we need a compromised approach!
CDEV,
I’d gladly pay more in taxes to relieve the public debt. Problem is – the people who spend the money won’t do that.
I remember when the budgets projected surpluses in the 90s ted Kennedy wanted to spend the surplus – not pay down the debt. As long as that mentality infests Congress – no hope. That’s why people like me want to see the budget trimmed to the lowest level BEFORE raising the taxes to fix the problem of debt. Otherwise, you’ll have more useless bridges and otehr types of programs that spend huge chunks of change for no reason and our kids get to pay it.
Agreed but it is not just Ted Kennedy remember the House was controled by the GOP and they didn’t want to do it either. The rhetoric being spouted currently does not indicate a willingness to pay the higher taxes to pay down the debt it seems to believe we can balance the budget by simply reducing spending. Currently the DOD can not even tell you where the money goes and they suck up about 30% of the federal budget!
I don’t recall that specifically, but it would be silly to argue the point.
I think this is where we really suffer not having a Daniel Webster and Henry Clay in Congress to iron out a great compromise. I believe it has to be balanced between spending cuts and higher taxes also. I think the GOP wants the focus on spending cuts exclusively because the Democrats show no desire to cut anything without correspondingly raising spending somewhere else. So the Democrats focus on generating revenue without cuts. I think there is compromise in there somewhere. I suspect the person who can bridge that gap with an agreement tasteful to both sides might just 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue home for 4-8 years. Just saying…
Great comments by both of you, thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Does everyone realize that Warren Buffet’s secretary makes $400K/year?
You right wing nuts are the ones that are misguided. The wealthy are paying a smaller percentage of the tax burden (in comparison to their income) than they have for MANY years (thanks to the Bush tax cuts!). That being said, why don’t we return to the federal income tax rates that became effective under your “hero” Ronald Reagan? Hell, Reagan would be considered a “liberal” and be un-electable in todays extreme Republican / Tea-Bagger party. The middle class is going to re-elect President Obama in overwhelming numbers, and the country will prosper as a result! It takes more than 4 years to turn around the mess left by (yes, I’ll say it again) George W. Bush! But rest assured, we are moving in the “correct” direction, and President Obama will have things mostly straightened out by the end of say…..2016! After that, President O’Malley will repair the remaining problems! HA!!!!
After reading this, I don’t know whether to cry or puke.
How about continue to “whine”, since crying would be an over-reaction and puking would be just plain messy.
It is easy in the land of liberal make believe, to overlook the fact that the top ten percent pay 30 percent of the federal income taxes, and the top 30 pay 70 percent of a federal income taxes. Try getting a job and earning what you get instead of stealing from someone else for your benefit.
What percentage of income do those top 10% and top 30% of earners make? If you take 2 people, one making $50k and one making $1 million and tax them both at say 20%, then the one making $1 million contributes a significantly higher percentage to the total tax revenue than the the on making $50k. The total tax revenue is $210,000. The higher earner contributed 95% of the tax revenue, but that doesn’t mean they paid an unfair amount…they make 20x what the lower earner makes so they should also pay 20x the taxes.
That’s a better stat to use than what percentage of federal income taxes those groups pay, but I don’t think I’ve actually seen those numbers any where.
I’ve said it for years, but the fairest tax would be a straight flat income tax of all income over the poverty line. No deductions, no tax credits, just everyone pays 20% tax (or whatever) on all income over the poverty line (which I think is somewhere around $25k for a family of four.) Currently our country wastes tens of billions of dollars a year trying to adhere to the absolutely ridiculous tax code. The IRS would still be needed, but it would be a fraction of the size it currently is and your average taxpayer wouldn’t need to spend hours and hours doing their taxes (or pay someone to do them.)
“B”, You are just plain factually incorrect.
Don’t you understand that everyone pays a 15$ long term capital gains tax rate? And all those gains from stocks have been taxed before the proceeds are distributed from the company to shareholders making it double taxation.
why is raising the tax rate on the rich the only fair thing to do? why not lower tax rates for the middle class? would that not also be fair?
Washington has a spending problem, not a revehue problem. Rep. Connie Mack from FL introduced a plan to balance the budget, run a surplus, and pay down the debt. Simply, level fund the budget, then reduce spending by 1% across the board every year and in less than 10 years the budget is running a surplus.
Once the debt gets paid off, or at least paid down considerably, we can eliminate the personal income tax altogether and install a national sales tax. Everyone would have more money in their paychecks. And the richest would pay the most taxes because they spend the most. Make SS and Medicare opt-in programs, create individual accounts for SS, let the states handle Medicare/Aid, welfare, unemployment, etc., Decentralize federal agencies, if not being eliminated altogether. The more decentralized an organization is, the more effectively it can manage its own budget, personnel, etc.,
There is absolutely no reason to increase taxes on anyone. If the government thinks they need more revenue, it’s because the tax base is too small, not the tax rates. If government would get out of the way and stop trying to regulate everything, businesses would prosper and expand and hire more people. More people working = more people paying taxes. Funny how that works.
The “Buffett Rule” was nothing more than class warfare spun by liberals do decieve the everyman and hide the miserable economic failure that is Obama’s legacy. Recent surveys indicate that nearly 3/4 of Americans think the country is heading in the wrong direction, but nearly half will still vote for a guy who has no interest in changing course.
Jeff
Idealogically, I agree with you. And ultimately, yes, I advocate a fairer tax code that doesn’t tilt the game toward anyone with the money or smarts to take advantage of it. So cutting taxes at other levels is a fine idea.
However, during downturns governments inherently begin to have revenue problems, which can cause or exacerbate spending problems. Obviously, in my opinion, we are currently having both. Smart, selective, and targeted policies to raise revenues and reduce taxes will hold the most stable course for a recovery. You are right, the government should get out of the way, but there is a fundamental ability of the government to set the table and let private industry throw the banquet.
And it’s just super naive to think that just cutting 10% straight across the budget makes any sense. Might it be the only way forward for our dysfunctional and inept leadership? Yeah maybe, but there are portions of the federal budget that should be axed by tens of percents, while others should probably get more funding, or at least hold even. Obviously people will disagree on the fine points, but across the board cuts are just politically convenient 12th century medical butchery.
And something like 85% of Americans think Congress is doing a bad job, but every year something like 75% of us keep voting them back in.
For all of our talk about what it takes to get the country going in the right direction, almost nobody ever really does anything about it.
The only service one pays for that is based on income is government services. If you buy a car, they do not charge you more because you make more money. Just because I make more than my unemployed neighbor, why should I be charged many times as much for the identical government services to which he has access?
A flat tax, charging everyone the identical rate, no deductions, is the only fair tax. That is where we need to be heading, not in the opposite direction. Class warfare is all this administration has left given the utter failure of their policies. Pathetic.
Noble;
Try for a shot of accuracy when tossing numbers around. The latest poll, within the last month, has Congress approval rating at 9%! That means that 91% disapprove. I think that also indicates that 9% of the people didn’t understand the question.
George Bush said ok to illegal immigrants due to his Texas buddies wanting to make money and pay slave wages.
Stephanie Rawlings Blake wants to raise bottle taxes and other taxes – saying its for public good – all the while she is taking more out of the hides of the people she says she is helping – the poor who are trapped and can’t leave.
Buffet rule – bull crap, won’t pay for squat. As for getting rid of subsidies – who will pay for the loss in profits – the consumer – idot politicians. Should have never started subsidies but now that they are in place a double edge sword created.
There is enough garbage being spewed by libs and cons. Big business trickle down morons on one side and arrogant, know it all enslavers on the other.
I saw a sign for a candidate that mentioned the word Revolution. Never thought I would see in my lifetime people in this country storming their government buildings with torches and ropes as in days of old, but keep walking these paths of eventual destruction and people of all races and classes – especially in the middle will get fed up.
Everyone has their price and Everyone has their breaking point.
Bel Air Fed,
You don’t have to storm the government’s doors with torches and rope to hold a revolution. You simply have to have a ground swell of support to remove the people from power who presently hold it. Until that happens – more of the same.
I entertain thoughts of peaceful revolution because I am disgusted at what our government has become. I am disgusted that peoples’ greed causes them to behave in the most uncivilized manner when it comes to financial gain. I am disgusted that injustice saps the spirit from people to reach their full potential.
In no way is government the remedy to any of those problems. When the ground swell rises and civilized discourse becomes conventional wisdom our hope will return. Real prosperity wasn’t located in the tax cuts pushed by President Bush, was not hope from Hope, Arkansas; and was not embodied in one person proclaiming hope and change. Prosperity will exist when everyone senses ownership of this great land, doing what they can with the tools given, and acknowledging when everyone can win – everyone will win.
Noble,
You said “And something like 85% of Americans think Congress is doing a bad job, but every year something like 75% of us keep voting them back in.” If we would all stop and just think about that for a moment I shudder to think the conclusions that we might draw.
As for me, I have given up all hope for a reasoned approach by our elected and appointed leaders to getting out of this mess of profligate government overspending coupled with a tax code that has so many deductions, exceptions and loopholes that anyone with some sense can take advantage of it. The law of unintended consequences has never been more evident. Our elected leaders take “bribes” in the form of campaign contributions from those that want their favor. In turn they “bribe” those that might vote for them with tax deductions, pork barrel projects, set asides, programs for everyone and everything. And the cycle goes on. And those of us in the middle get squeezed harder and harder and our children are stuck with an ever increasing bill for it all as the debt skyrockets.
Indeed, they all have to go. Every last one of them. And Mikulski, in many respects, is the poster child for the worst of the worst. But the ALL have to go.