According to the National Journal (citing Bloomberg News) Hillary Clinton said she does not want to get rid of the Bush tax cuts. Link to the article
here (subscription required).
But HRC "walked a delicate line between assailing Bush's economic policies and trying not to rattle" centrist, and business-minded voters. She "criticized the Bush tax cuts as favoring upper-income Americans" while refusing to say whether corporate taxes were too low. Clinton: on whether the pre-Bush tax rates restored: "I'm not sure that that's exactly what we should do, but I think the combination of fiscal responsibility and economic growth proves to be very positive for our country" (Litvan/Benjamin, Bloomberg News, 4/11)
There is what is wrong with the DLC wing of the Democratic party. The Bush tax cuts have plunged the nation into its largest ever deficit, yet some Democrats are still too chicken to call for their repeal. Anyone who thinks that ending massive handouts to the wealthiest Americans amid record deficits has no business being in politics.
"Sen. Hillary Clinton has also voiced doubts about repealing the Bush tax cuts. Before a speech on the economy in Chicago, she told Bloomberg that she wasn't sure whether she'd want to see pre-Bush tax rates "restored."
--From Hotline On Call
Now notice how Sen. Clinton phrased it. She's was noncommittal enough to where she can still back down if the reaction is too negative. This kind of finger in the wind politics is exactly what we don't need going into 2008. Mark Warner went even further than she did:
"In Iowa yesterday, ex-VA Gov. Mark Warner said his party had taken "the wrong approach" on the tax cuts, and singled out Sen. John Kerry's presidential campaign for ignoring the widespread appeal of a lower tax burden. Said Warner: "Even though the Bush tax cuts only applied to the top 2 percent of Americans, what I think the Kerry campaign missed was that the other 98 percent of Americans still aspired to get to the point in their life where they could qualify for the tax cuts.""
--Hotline on Call
D'oh!
When polled about Bush's tax cuts, people say in overwhelming numbers that they would be willing to repeal them in order to reduce the deficit and pay for the war. According to the Des Moines Register, Warner favors letting the tax cuts expire in 2011. If either Warner or Clinton is serious about restoring our government to a fiscally sound position, the Bush tax cuts have to go. Especially when you consider that the Clinton tax rates were not onerous. This whole "we can't alienate centrist pro-business voters" crap sounds like it's straight from the DLC.
I'd given up long ago on Hillary Clinton actually having the courage to do what is right for the country, but I'd been holding out hope for Mark Warner. Kerry was 100% correct about needing to repeal Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy and that position did not hurt him at all with voters. The fact that Warner would be so politically tone-deaf as to think that supporting Bush's tax cuts is a political winner raises serious issues about him as a presidential candidate. Now, I have a tremendous amount of respect for Warner for all the good he's done for the people of Virginia and the Virginia Democratic Party. But in good conscience, I can no longer say that I would view him as an acceptable presidential nominee if he is unwilling to repeal the Bush tax cuts.
The idea that any Democrat contemplating a presidential bid could be against repealing the Bush tax cuts is beyond unbelievable. Think about it. We're fighting two wars and have a massive deficit, yet Mark Warner and Hillary Clinton don't think we ought to get rid of completely unnecessary tax cuts that only benefit the most wealthy Americans. If they are serious about this, they are both setting themselves up to be failed presidents if either win. They both have indicated they would keep us in Iraq, meaning if they would not repeal the tax cuts, the nation would remain with massive deficits every year. Now to be fair, both seem to favor letting them expire in 2011, but there would not be enough time until their 2012 re-election to get the deficit under control. The large deficit would mean that they could do nothing on the domestic front regarding health care, education, or anything else. They would run for re-election after having presided over another 4 years of massive debt, an unwinnable war, and with no record of domestic accomplishment. So keep in mind, any presidential candidate who says they won't repeal the Bush tax cuts and won't commit to a timetable for getting out of Iraq is asking you to elect them to be a failed one-term president. So whoever you vote for, vote for a candidate who promises to completely undo the Bush agenda, and not someone who will balk at taking on the Republicans and set themselves and the party up for failure.