this post was submitted on 10 Apr 2024
102 points (98.1% liked)

politics

19082 readers
3494 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A $78 billion package of tax breaks for families and businesses passed the House on an overwhelming bipartisan vote. But key GOP senators demand big changes — or else.

Senate Republicans are inching closer to burying a bipartisan bill to expand the child tax credit and provide breaks for businesses, issuing a series of demands that would most likely disrupt the coalition that enabled it to pass the House.

The $78 billion bill, negotiated by House Ways and Means Committee Chair Jason Smith, R-Mo., and Senate Finance Committee Chair Ron Wyden, D-Ore., passed the Republican-led House by a vote of 357-70 in January, a rare feat in a divided Congress that has struggled to function. But it has languished in the Senate, where key Republicans have said they’ll kill it unless it includes major revisions. Senate Democrats have 51 seats, and they need 60 votes to break a filibuster.

But with tax filing season close to finishing and election-year politics heating up, there’s no hint of a resolution in sight. Democratic leaders are eager to pass the legislation, which, according to one analysis, would benefit about 16 million children in low-income households. Some Republicans openly warn they may sink it.

top 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 54 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Go ahead and radicalize me some more. The child tax credit is the only reason I was able to replace my transmission in my car in December. Without it I'd have no vehicle right now and lose my job.

[–] foggy@lemmy.world 26 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It's the only thing that might make having kids a reasonable idea. Without it, I might as well get snipped.

[–] HeyJoe@lemmy.world 23 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Trust me, no it's not... now if we had some kind of plan to help parents eliminate most or all of daycare costs then that would absolutely help with the decision to have one. The child tax credit is nice, but it barely helps with anything.

[–] ampedwolfman@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago

Agreed. I spent nearly $12k last year and I might see 3 of it back. For clarification we pulled out youngest son out of daycare in August or September. Not all of the 12k was his costs but most of it was (probably around 10k-10.5k) it was near $1300 a month when we pulled him out after a large increase after the summer months.

[–] danc4498@lemmy.world 31 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Crapo told NBC News on Tuesday that he still has problems with “a number” of provisions. He said he wants to eliminate a “look-back” policy that would let a taxpayer use a previous year’s income if it yielded a larger child tax credit, arguing that the current language weakens the work requirement. Saying the bill would “create entitlement spending that would generate significantly higher deficits,” he called for spending cuts to fund the child tax credit expansion.

Republicans LOVE to talk about the deficit when a democrat is in power. Remember that tax bill Trump shoved through that had ZERO regard for the deficit? Pepperidge farms remembers.

“Those are just the start,” Crapo said, adding that he likes the business tax breaks. But about the individual tax provisions…

Yay business tax breaks… Boo individual! Think of all the bullshit schemes corporations can do to not pay taxes. But we gotta make sure to hammer down anything that might benefit the poor/middle class.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

It’s still 1984 isn't it.

[–] fluxion@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

Can't be letting that 1% of Americans who got a raise just above some threshold score an additional child tax exemption. But for the top 1% who make millions off of bogus exemptions we must do everything possible to destroy and defund the IRS so they cannot be questioned or audited.

[–] BigMacHole@lemm.ee 27 points 6 months ago

It's SOCIALISM to use TAX DOLLARS to help STARVING AMERICAN CHILDREN!

-Republicans who LOVE giving Tax Dollars to Billionaires!

[–] SoupBrick@yiffit.net 25 points 6 months ago (1 children)

You'd think the party of Breeding wouldn't go after a bill that would encourage the creation of more workers, but I guess Communism is more scary than losing profits.

[–] Captainvaqina@sh.itjust.works 8 points 6 months ago

They have their forced birth now, why would they do anything to make the lives of the slaves any better?

[–] Blackbeard@lemmy.world 14 points 6 months ago

Crapo told NBC News on Tuesday that he still has problems with “a number” of provisions. He said he wants to eliminate a “look-back” policy that would let a taxpayer use a previous year’s income if it yielded a larger child tax credit, arguing that the current language weakens the work requirement. Saying the bill would “create entitlement spending that would generate significantly higher deficits,” he called for spending cuts to fund the child tax credit expansion.

Oh, you mean the same Senator Crapo who voted for the Trump tax bill? You know, the one that added $1.9 trillion to our national debt?

Go fuck yourself, Mike.