LEGISLATION

Blue Dogs Make a Stand On Tax Bill

Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
Thursday, December 6, 2007

As if House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) did not have enough problems, the House's conservative Blue Dog Democrats have decided to take a stand for fiscal discipline -- at a very difficult time.

Thirty-one Blue Dogs sent a letter to Pelosi and House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) this week, saying that they will not accept legislation to stave off the growth of the alternative minimum tax unless its cost to the Treasury is offset by tax increases or spending cuts. They demanded compliance with Congress's new "pay as you go" -- or "paygo" -- rules.

"We believe that waiving PAYGO, no matter the political pressure, is both fiscally reckless and an abdication of our duties," the Blue Dogs wrote. "Under no circumstance will we vote for any piece of legislation that does not meet the requirements of PAYGO, nor will we vote to waive the PAYGO rules to allow for such legislation."

Rock, meet hard place.

Officially, Hoyer says the Blue Dog stand strengthens Democratic hands as Reid pushes for a Senate vote this week on the House-passed AMT bill, which includes ways to compensate for the revenue loss. But it might not work that way.

Republican senators -- and a few Senate Democrats -- have made it clear that they will not allow an AMT bill to pass if tax increases are included. Without the increases, Pelosi would face a revolt in the House. In the balance are 23 million families, who are just weeks away from facing a tax that was aimed at a handful of millionaires when it was passed in 1969 but is now threatening to affect a large portion of the middle class.

-- Jonathan Weisman



© 2007 The Washington Post Company