Tuesday, December 03, 2002
Having it both ways: Sen. John Kerry (Super-D - Mass.) kicks off his campaign for his party's 2004 presidential nomination by taking aim at the Bush tax cut.
"The largest cost of the Bush tax giveaway will not be borne by any of us here today -- it will be paid for by our children. We're borrowing from Social Security and Medicare to put money in our pockets today -- and sticking our children with the bill."
To focus tax relief on lower and middle income workers, Kerry proposed "a payroll tax holiday" on the first $10,000 of income, meaning no Social Security tax could be collected on that amount.
According to Kerry's logic, Bush is putting Social Security in danger with his tax cut that doesn't touch the tax that funds Social Security, while Kerry is proposing a "tax holiday" that directly affects the amount of money going into the sacred Social Security lockbox.
Let me say that I'm not ideologically opposed to Kerry's "tax holiday" idea -- I sure could use the extra money -- because Social Security is so broken, that the money "lost" by such a transaction is a pittance. However, there should be a rule against using the Social Security scare tactics that Democrats have come to know and love, while at the same time exacerbating the "problem" by cutting FICA taxes.
Choose one argument or the other, but not both.