White House Dismisses Fed Figures on Bush Tax Cuts

The White House yesterday stepped up its longstanding effort to generate support for repeal of the Bush tax cuts on the highest American wage-earners.  At the regular briefing for reporters at the White House yesterday, Press Secretary Jay Carney again denounced what he called “historically large tax cuts that were unpaid for and have contributed mightily to the debt that we have now.”

But the President’s top spokesman also went a step further.  When HUMAN EVENTS cited figures from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) showing that the Bush tax cuts in 2004-06 produced the highest two-year tax revenue increase in the preceding 40 years, Carney dismissed the OMB statistics as “a very convenient slice of a figure.”

According to the Office of Management and Budget, Historical Tables, Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2007 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2006, pp. 25-26, Table 1.3, Jan. 16, 2007), with final 2006 revenue figures added in, there was an inflation-adjusted 20% tax revenue increase between 2004 and ’06, and this represents the largest two-year revenue surge since 1965-67.

Following his characterization of OMB’s statistics as “a very convenient slice of a figure,” Carney told HUMAN EVENTS that what is known about the period during which these tax cuts were instituted, “is it was the slowest period of economic expansion in modern time, that middle-class incomes stagnated or declined, that the wealthiest Americans got substantially wealthier, and that overall in that eight-year period there was substantial—there was rather anemic job creation.”

“You take issue with the analysis of OMB?” HUMAN EVENTS asked.

“I would take issue of taking that slice,” replied Carney, “and suggesting that somehow … the massive tax cuts did not contribute to our deficit, because they unequivocally did, and that those tax cuts created or were responsible for what, by any measure, was an anemic period of economic growth.”

Carney did not elaborate further on his view of the impact of the tax cuts on the deficit and the OMB’s analysis of the issue, which would seem to contradict his view. 

Clearly, there is a lot more to be heard on the issue of what the Bush tax cuts did to the deficit—and, almost surely, on Carney’s opinion of the OMB’s figures on the subject.

Sign Up
  • uberengineer

    You are aware “Letusponder” that the numbers you are referring to are REPORTED income AFTER (legal and illegal  deductions), and completely ignores all the money that is not reported and/or hidden through various sneaky means, and that the Republicans have actually REDUCED the IRS’s budget for collections despite knowing this would reduce the collection of unpaid taxes.  Your numbers completely ignore the vast wealth that is accumulated by corporations who spend it on “expenses” like 100 story buildings, gold plated bathroom fixtures, and “entertainment”.  Not to even mention all the money these corporations hide from the government using their hundreds of offshore subsidies, which for some “odd” reason, charges them 300% market rate for all their parts and supplies, resulting in virtually no “profit” to report to Uncle Sam.

  • uberengineer

    Therein lies the problem!! “Reward hard work and determination” is a great mantra, but unfortunately in our society HALF of our people are not paid enough wages that they can even AFFORD to pay taxes.  Despite all the blatant bias on this site against poor people, I don’t think any of you can make a real case that HALF OF OUR CITIZENS ARE LAZY AND/OR NOT DETERMINED!  If we want to “broaden the tax base”, then we need to start paying ALL of our working citizens enough $$$ that they can actually afford to contribute to the common pool without having to sacrifice the health of their children to do it!