Today Maryland Congressman Chris Van Hollen issued the following statement on the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010:
"After much deliberation, I have voted against this legislation. To me, this has never been about the wisdom or necessity of compromise. Like most of my colleagues, I understand the need for compromise, and I fully appreciate the predicament the President found himself in.
"While Democrats have been fighting to ensure tax rates do not go up on 98 percent of Americans, Senate Republicans have made it abundantly clear they are willing to raise taxes on every American this January unless they get a bonus tax break for the wealthiest in our society -- and provide a tax-cut bonanza to a handful of super-rich estates.
"In order to break the stalemate, the President concluded he needed a deal -- a deal that had to balance two of our nation's very real but competing imperatives: the need to accelerate economic growth and the need to reduce our national debt.
"Some elements of today's legislation strike the right balance. In particular, the middle class tax cuts, unemployment benefits, and Recovery Act credits for working families are both economically justifiable and likely to achieve their intended effect. Unfortunately, other provisions significantly miss the mark. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the $89 billion spent extending tax breaks for upper income earners is unlikely to create jobs. Moreover, I have significant concerns about the structure and long term consequences of the payroll tax holiday.
"But the tipping point in this package is the estate tax. As part of this legislation, we are spending $23 billion to provide a windfall for the wealthiest 6,600 estates a year. It is simply a bridge too far.
"Many of my Republican colleagues supporting today's legislation profess a commitment to fiscal discipline and balanced budgets, but turn a blind eye to deficit spending so long as it arises from tax cuts. This is not a coincidence. The rationale for the inconsistency has been succinctly explained by conservative activist Grover Norquist, who once proclaimed: "I don't want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub.' After starving government, these same Republicans will undoubtedly be back in the 112th Congress demanding debilitating and draconian cuts in priority investments like education, clean energy, and biomedical research. This playbook is as predictable as it is misguided.
"We simply cannot afford to borrow billions of dollars to perpetuate wasteful and unwarranted tax breaks for our wealthiest citizens at a time of unprecedented and unsustainable national debt -- tax breaks that do little for job creation and even less for the economy. I accept the need for a deal. But for our children and our grandchildren, I firmly believe there is a better deal to be had. With that mind, I voted to oppose this legislation."