13
Rep. Congressman Dave Camp on tax cuts and unemployment
Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI) participates in a House Rules Committee meeting on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC.
To view this content, Javascript must be enabled and Adobe Flash Player must be installed.
TEXT OF INTERVIEW
JEREMY HOBSON: The House of Representatives will vote today on whether to extend the Bush tax cuts for people making less than $250,000 a year.
But one powerful Republican congressman, Dave Camp of Michigan, is already calling that vote a political stunt. And he joins us live. Congressman, welcome back to Marketplace.
DAVE CAMP: Well, good morning Jeremy. Good to be with you.
HOBSON: Great to have you. Well, first of all, why do you think it's a stunt?
CAMP: First of all, this real is a debate about raising taxes. And in this economy we really need to do everything we can to ensure job creation. And raising taxes at this time, over 100 economists including Nobel Laureates said that would be a bad idea. This vote today is one they could have had for months frankly. And we know it's not going anywhere in the Senate. The reason there wasn't a vote before the election is because they knew this Senate wouldn't do it. And it's a very restricted vote. If we could actually have a vote on not raising taxes on any American, I think that bill out pass without bi-partisan support.
HOBSON: Alright, you're one of the lead negotiators on the tax cut issue with the White House. What do you think it's going to take to get both democrats who have been pushing for this -- just an extension of the tax cuts for people making lesw than $250,000 -- to get them on board, and republicans on board who want the tax cuts to be extended for everyone.
CAMP: As I said, we really can't raise taxes on any America. And when you get over an income level of $250,000, you have half of that income reported by small businesses, and small businesses are going to lead us out of this recession. We've had more than 9.5 percent unemployment for 15 months, certainly the economic policies have not worked to date, and as I said, many people across America believe that it would be the wrong idea to raise taxes, particularly one those we expect to create jobs, to hire people, to buy equipment, which will really get our economy going again.
HOBSON: OK Congressman, Earlier this week, republicans blocked a measure that would have extended federal jobless benefits for the long-term unemployed. We've been talking to a number of economists about that this week and every one of them has said they think it's counterproductive to end unemployment benefits for people even if it adds to the deficit. What was the calculation that you made on this issue?
CAMP: Well first, Republicans in the House can't block anything. Democrats control the rules and they structured it in such a way that it required a super majority.
HOBSON: But Republicans did vote against that, right.
CAMP: Yes, because we weren't allowed to offer any amendments to pay for the bill. I support the extension of unemployment benefits. But I want to do it in a responsible way, and I want to pay for it. And if we could have a vote on whether we do it, unpaid for or paid for, let's line them up, let's vote on both of them. I can tell you that the one that pays for the unemployment benefits will pass. That's why they're so afraid of it, that's why they won't let it come to the floor. So it actually did pass the House, but didn't pass the House be a super majority because of the way they structured the vote, and I think that's why I call more a charade on this issue.
HOBSON: OK Republican Dave Camp of Michigan, thanks so much for your time this morning.
CAMP: Alright, thanks a lot Jeremy.
Pages
I can't believe the statements that the congressman said, "I support the extension of unemployment benefits. But I want to do it in a responsible way, and I want to pay for it" and then went on to say, "I can tell you that the one (Bill)that pays for the unemployment benefits will pass. That's why they're so afraid of it, that's why they won't let it come to the floor". I guess the people we have in charge of our future obviously have no clue what its like to have no money in savings, no medical, a single parent of 2 children that they can barely take care of while being 1 month away from having no home, or even a car to live in. If they did they wouldn't sit around "discussing" what would be the best way or responsible way to vote on it. If it was their family or their life, they would sit in that room and not go home if necessary until they could figure it out. After all why should they mind going in for one meeting after another for weeks and weeks? They have a constant income with medical insurance and they can go home to their nice warm homes where they can actually turn the heat on past 55-60 degrees. Also, do they not understand that if there is no additional extensions for us that have been out of work for 19 months or more, they need to think of the fact that without the money we won't be able to put into our community, there will be even more companies losing business and laying off even more people. Then all that's going to cause more unemployment, governmental cost from needy families and homelessness. Come on, I understand that being in charge of peoples lives and having them upset with you is not easy and is stressful but try to imagine that when we see a family sleeping under a bridge or in their car if they have one, we think about how that could honestly be us in less that 2 months. But don't worry, I'm sure they will think of us when they break for their family time during the holidays and sit around their nice warm fireplaces.
The disingenousness of blaming the Democrats for failing to pass an extension of unemployment benefits is nothing but a bare-faced lie. Holding the rest of the country hostage for the sake of tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans is practically treasonous.
The top 2% of wealthy Americans have been waging class warfare against the rest of us for decades. It is time for the rest of us to rise up and fight back. I say anyone in the top quarter percent who is unwilling to pay their fair share if taxes should be killed and we can see if their heirs have a different opinion. Who's with me!
Why are we having this conversation? Keeping the tax obligation of those making over $250,000.00 at its current levels will not help the economy. Has having it at those levels helped it so far? Is that in fact what help to get us here? I am sure there is empirical data (not hunches) that makes a case either way. Isn't it the duty of the 'Free Press' to make those facts known? How else would we have know about Bernard Madoff? Do the public a service and show us the facts. Why are they (the Republicans) so determined to keep the status quo for the rich? Is it because, that is where their contributors are? It did not work up to this point and it will not again.
Mary Studt - You, and the actions of like minded people, have created this Nation's meltdown! We are ALL paying too much in taxes so our country can give it to other nations or lying politicians can line their pockets! Killing the "job creators" is not the way out of this mess. Smaller government and less entitlements is! Mary, Its time to WAKE up and get real!
Typical Moneymarket-where's-Wall-Street glib, shallow BS passed off as some from of journalism. I am a long-time NPR contributor I'd like to know if any of my money goes to support this ridiculous program? Where does it get its income and financial support?
Yes John Boyer! I too was mad that Jeremy Hobson didn't point out Camp's statement that "half of that income reported by small businesses" is misleading when only 2% of small business will be affected. Also, kudos to Peter Collins also for pointing out that Camp insists on paying for unemployment benefits but not for the fat cat tax.
Cut off unemployment benefits for millions of unemployed, who lost their jobs because of reckless Wall Street fat cats. Give huge tax breaks to these Wall Street fat cats, and all the other millionaires and billionaires.
This must be the Golden Rule: them that got the Gold, Rule. They sure seem to rule the Republican Party. Heaven help the rest, they sure won’t.
Congressman Camp acknowledges that "the economic policies have not worked to date". Yes, I agree. The unpaid for tax cuts to the wealthy have not worked, and it is time for a rational adjustment in tax policy to shore up our economic outlook. The Congressman is concerned about paying for any extension of unemployment benefits but has no problem extending failed tax giveaways that were not paid for eight years ago and are not paid for today. There is no debate among economists about whether money spent on unemployment benefits will be injected directly into our struggling economy, while there is considerable debate regarding the efficacy of tax breaks to wealthiest among us. If we are going to pursue an unpaid for handout to a small percentage of Americans, the choice between these two options is very transparent. Marketplace failed to highlight the outright duplicity in Congressman Camp's tired argument: Giveaways to the poor must be paid for; giveaways to the wealthy are necessary.
Perhaps Hobson was not prepared for the interview, but it would have been great to find out more about these economists. My best guess is that it was the Daily Beast's 100 economists (including Nobel Laureates) who called for *more stimulus* and *tax credits* — the exact opposite things that Camp and the Republicans are pushing. How can Hobson let Camp get away without a challenge. The lack of personal integrity on Camp's part is reprehensible.
We need a bit more journalistic fervor from Marketplace when arguments are made that tax cuts for those earning more than $250,000 would be disastrous for a large number of small businesses, the very claim Cong Dave Camp made to Jeremy Hobson this morning. It would harm "more than half", he said, with no comment from Jeremy. Yet Polifact has checked such claims and found barely 2 per cent of small businesses would be affected. Their analysis is here:
http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/nov/17/michele-bachm...
and here:
http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/aug/04/randy-neugeba...
This is a very serious issue which needs much greater clarification than you have given it thus far and is critical to public understanding of what the best course of action is. I suggest you devote a 2 or 3 part series to the issue to help citizens separate fact from spin - which is your job to do.
Pages
