Today in Washington D. C. - June 10, 2008
On The Floor: Senate reconvened and will begin the day with two cloture votes on motions to proceed to the Democrats’ energy bill (S. 3044) and their legislation to extend popular tax breaks (H.R. 6049). Calling the Senate Democrats’ legislation an “energy bill,” is a bit of a misnomer, though, considering nothing in the bill actually does anything about energy production. The Senate will vote on cloture on the motion to proceed to the bill. If the cloture vote fails, the Senate will then vote on cloture on the motion to proceed to the tax extenders bill If cloture fails on the tax bill, the Senate will then vote on the confirmation of three district judges.
From Senate & News Sources: The AP reports that the centerpiece of the bill is a “windfall profits tax” on oil companies, more accurately described by Roll Call today as “a measure to punish oil companies for making record profits.” As Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell said on the floor this morning, “If the idea had any merit at all, Republicans would consider it, but of course it doesn’t.” The idea has been tried before: According to the Congressional Research Service, President Carter’s windfall profits tax was a failure and resulted in reduced domestic production and increased reliance on foreign oil.
The other provisions in the Democrats’ bill include more backward-looking ideas: punishing alleged “price gouging,” attempting to sue OPEC, and raising other taxes on oil companies. Many of these proposals date back to the 1970s. Does that sound like change we can believe in? Imagine trying to sue OPEC - talk about "cutting off the hand that feeds you!"
The Wall Street Journal zeroes in on a highly touted provision in the Democrat bill: “an increase in margin requirements for those who wish to trade oil futures,” which is designed to reign in speculators. “This would of course make it more expensive to trade in U.S. futures markets, which in a world of computerized, instantaneous trading means that those trades would merely move to markets overseas.” Republicans oppose most of the measures in the bill outright but Democrats have refused to allow Republicans to offer the Republican energy plan as an amendment.
The other bill expected to come up for a vote today is referred to on the Hill as a “tax extender” bill, which would extend popular tax breaks for research and development and alternative energy and the sales tax deduction. Unfortunately, Democrats have decided that extending these tax breaks, which are part of existing law, should be paid for by permanently raising other taxes. Republicans disagree and also object to a provision in the bill giving preferential tax treatment to trial lawyers.
The Wall Street Journal editorial today highlights an ongoing issue that has received little attention: “What do the farm bill, the cap-and-trade global warming bill, the clean water bill, the housing bailout bill, and the school construction bill all have in common? Not much, except that in each one and countless others the Democratic majority in Congress has inserted ‘prevailing-wage’ requirements that amount to a super-minimum wage.” “Prevailing wage” requirements are often referred to in Washington as Davis-Bacon requirements, after a 1931 law. According to The Journal, “Today, its main impact is to require de facto union wages.” This all fits the Democrat pattern of paybacks to Big Labor going all the way back to last year’s card check bill.
Tags: capital gains taxes, energy bill, US Congress, US Senate, Washington D.C. To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
From Senate & News Sources: The AP reports that the centerpiece of the bill is a “windfall profits tax” on oil companies, more accurately described by Roll Call today as “a measure to punish oil companies for making record profits.” As Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell said on the floor this morning, “If the idea had any merit at all, Republicans would consider it, but of course it doesn’t.” The idea has been tried before: According to the Congressional Research Service, President Carter’s windfall profits tax was a failure and resulted in reduced domestic production and increased reliance on foreign oil.
The other provisions in the Democrats’ bill include more backward-looking ideas: punishing alleged “price gouging,” attempting to sue OPEC, and raising other taxes on oil companies. Many of these proposals date back to the 1970s. Does that sound like change we can believe in? Imagine trying to sue OPEC - talk about "cutting off the hand that feeds you!"
The Wall Street Journal zeroes in on a highly touted provision in the Democrat bill: “an increase in margin requirements for those who wish to trade oil futures,” which is designed to reign in speculators. “This would of course make it more expensive to trade in U.S. futures markets, which in a world of computerized, instantaneous trading means that those trades would merely move to markets overseas.” Republicans oppose most of the measures in the bill outright but Democrats have refused to allow Republicans to offer the Republican energy plan as an amendment.
The other bill expected to come up for a vote today is referred to on the Hill as a “tax extender” bill, which would extend popular tax breaks for research and development and alternative energy and the sales tax deduction. Unfortunately, Democrats have decided that extending these tax breaks, which are part of existing law, should be paid for by permanently raising other taxes. Republicans disagree and also object to a provision in the bill giving preferential tax treatment to trial lawyers.
The Wall Street Journal editorial today highlights an ongoing issue that has received little attention: “What do the farm bill, the cap-and-trade global warming bill, the clean water bill, the housing bailout bill, and the school construction bill all have in common? Not much, except that in each one and countless others the Democratic majority in Congress has inserted ‘prevailing-wage’ requirements that amount to a super-minimum wage.” “Prevailing wage” requirements are often referred to in Washington as Davis-Bacon requirements, after a 1931 law. According to The Journal, “Today, its main impact is to require de facto union wages.” This all fits the Democrat pattern of paybacks to Big Labor going all the way back to last year’s card check bill.
Tags: capital gains taxes, energy bill, US Congress, US Senate, Washington D.C. To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Posted by Bill Smith at 10:30 AM - Post Link
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home