RYAN: And so they're willing to hold up all of the other tax breaks, all of the other tax rates on middle-class families, on small businesses, so they can get this smaller increase in the estate tax.
I don't want to get into the "who's a hostage-taker" discussion here, but what is the estate tax? It's a double tax on death. Economists will tell you that it's really not a tax that soaks the rich, but it's a tax on capital that deprives business investment and therefore job creation.
But more importantly, this current policy — we're at zero and then we're going to go to a 35 percent tax rate. That's not enough for Chris and other House Democrats and they're willing to scuttle the entire agreement, an agreement which has bipartisan support in the Senate, an agreement with the president of the United States to get this moving and prevent tax increases from hitting our economy, which would be very destabilizing, very volatile, in January.
I think if the president actually bows to this pressure and participates in scuttling this deal, then what does that speak to our ability to have competence and bipartisanship in this new era of divided government we're finding in (sic)? How well will we be able to reach agreements that will stick if people are angry in parts of the party and then they unravel these deals?
The Dems reportedly would like to amend the bill to include a top rate of 45%, and apply to estates of $3.5 million or more. There is talk of them voting on a separate bill just for that provision alone, before voting on the bill the Senate will pass.
REP. WEINER: Well, first of all, I wasn't leading any such chant. But, look, let me, let me just say this, that the president has to understand that critique that he gets from his base and his supporters who want him to succeed is fundamentally different from the one they get from Mitch McConnell. We're trying to help him be successful, and I kind of agree with him, this is like the public option. If he would have fought harder for that, we would have had it. You know, I think that we need—the president needs to understand that there's an enormous number of us who are just waiting to be called to kind of really have this competition of ideas. We really need to have this contest. And, you know, look, he made a deal. It doesn't necessarily mean it's a great one. We, in Congress, now have it. We're trying to improve upon it. But we're on his team. That's the fundamental difference he needs to understand. When he calls us sanctimonious and says this is like past debates, all—the only reason, the only reason that it's like past debates is we still want him to be the president that we elected. And we're going to help him do that. And if he digs in and he fights for these values, he's going to find the American people support it, and we, his supporters, are really going to rally to his side.MR. GREGORY: You know, Harold, the question was, was this a Sister Souljah moment, to go back to the Clinton era, for President Obama, standing up to the base?
REP. FORD: Look, I think it's a moment where he's standing up for America and standing up for jobs. Look, I like Anthony, respect him a lot, but to suggest that the president doesn't fight a lot, we had a fight, we had an outcome declared on November 2nd. Now, he has fought and fought and fought, and frankly, has given Democrats in the Congress the ball to run every time. Unfortunately, the American people, whether it's a communications problem, and I don't think it is. It's hard to communicate effectively when we have 9.8 percent unemployment, and have people rally around you. The reality is we've done that before. The president's move last week was an important move for the American people; and, at the end of the day, if unemployment begins to drop over the next quarter or two by a quarter point, every Democrat, including Anthony and others, will say, "This was the right thing to do. Now we have to look at the next step in reducing the debt and ensuring that we create jobs.
