Sometimes, the political circus amazes me. From a New York Times article which reports on the Senate passing a version of the minimum wage bill which includes a few tax breaks funded by the closing of some tax loopholes:
Aides to some House leaders say they would be willing to allow some of the tax breaks. But others, including Representative Charles B. Rangel, Democrat of New York and the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, are insisting that they will not concede any tax cuts.
House Democrats say that by forcing a vote on a clean bill they would force Senate Republicans to put themselves on record as opposing a wage increase, which was a popular campaign issue in the midterm elections.
So much for collaborative bipartisanship.
Oh well. No one expected the post-election honeymoon to last very long, did they?
It would be one thing if the tax breaks were “offensive” ones. However, this doesn’t sound so bad (especially since it’s allegedly tax neutral when balanced with closing a few loopholes):
Among the tax breaks would be a five-year extension of the credit provided to employers who hire people who have traditionally had trouble finding jobs, as well as a tax credit for hiring veterans disabled in Afghanistan and Iraq after the 9/11 attacks; an extension through March 31, 2008, of a provision that allows businesses to deduct the cost of improvements to leased properties more quickly; and a permanent change to the tax code allowing small businesses to use the cash method of accounting.