|
Snowe's Fiscal
Sense
By: Editorial
Having set up cuts worth billions of dollars in
social programs - foster care, Medicaid, food
stamps, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families -
Congress now begins debate on tax breaks for the
rich. The program cuts, Republican leaders claim,
were needed to help balance the budget, though over
time they will make it worse. Several of the tax
cuts, however, will worsen it immediately, are
largely unnecessary to extend now and ensure the
poor and elderly will be at a greater disadvantage
over time.
Currently, the one Republican who stands between
this agenda and fiscal sanity is Olympia Snowe, on
the Senate Finance Committee and the key vote on a
$70 billion tax-cut reconciliation package. Sen.
Snowe has a pressing agenda of her own: money for
heating fuel for the poor. This creates what some
mistakenly see as an opportunity to bargain.
Several of the tax cuts under consideration would
pass by an overwhelming number of senators. These
include breaks for college tuition, research and
development and an exemption to the alternative
minimum tax, all of which would expire this year
unless extended. But two other cuts - for capital
gains and dividends, which don't start expiring
until 2008 - would cost $50 billion over five years,
with more than half the cut going to households with
annual incomes of more than $1 million.
The chairman of the Senate Finance Committee,
Charles Grassley of Iowa, wants his committee to
prepare a bill for the full Senate this week.
Committee Democrats oppose the capital gains and
dividends cuts; Republicans support them, with the
exception of Sen. Snowe, thereby creating a
deadlock. Considering the damage Congress may do in
conference over the spending package, a tax cut
aimed at the wealthy now seems like salt in the
wounds of the poor, besides worsening the deficit
when much more money is needed for the wars in Iraq
and Afghanistan and for Katrina relief.
For the last couple of months, both Sens. Snowe and
Susan Collins have been trying to bargain for
additional funding for the Low Income Home Energy
Assistance Program - the subsidy to help pay heating
bills. The program is seen in Congress as Northeast
welfare and is regularly underfunded or rejected.
This year, of course, is especially difficult but so
far both houses have blocked re-peated attempts to
increase funding.
Sen. Snowe's latest try is a $500 home-energy tax
credit for families with incomes less than $100,000.
The relatively high qualifying income might broaden
the tax's appeal, but it would not help those who
pay little or no taxes even in the unlikely
occurrence that it survived the House-Senate
conference. Activists fear the senator would trade a
vote on the tax-cut bill for support of her energy
tax credit. She has proved herself to be a better
negotiator than that, however.
The capital gains and dividend tax cuts expand the
deficit, which must worry the financial markets,
without doing much for the economy. Extending them
while at the same time cutting programs to the poor
-indeed leaving less revenue in the future for
programs -is not just unaffordable but unacceptable.
The outcome of whether the cuts are extended now
rests with Sen. Snowe because they will pass if they
make it out of committee. She has been standing firm
for fiscal sense despite intense pressure so far.
It's a posture she should hold.
|