Now, the Republican leadership says that their tax cut is for the middle class, but that is clearly not true. The House-passed version of the bill passed here, passed this branch 2 weeks ago, and in that version the 6 million highest income taxpayers, which represent about 5 percent of all taxpayers in this country, with incomes of over $125,000 a year, would get 61 percent, more than three-fifths of the total tax reduction, while the other 120 million taxpayers in this country, 95 percent of all the taxpayers, they would get only 39 percent of the total tax reduction that is involved. Now, I do not think that many people would consider that a middle class tax cut. In fact, it is designed to make the already rich a very great deal richer, while the broad middle class of people in this country, the families that are living on an income of between $20,000 to, say, $80,000 a year, are only going to see a tax cut that is worth one or two cups of coffee a day for those families.
John W. Olver: “Now, the Republican leadership says that their tax cut is for the middle class, but that is clearly not true. The…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of the proposed $800 billion tax cut during a House floor debate.
Share
More from John W. Olver
Reclaiming my time, at my age, I can't remember what happened several days ago, and that is quite some time ago. But, you know, it will slowly come back. Eventually, it slowly comes back. I yield back the balance of my time. The Acting…
Reclaiming my time, we have no idea whether the Supreme Court will take this case. In the meantime, until such time it is taken and they do it, and we can't assume that, then the actions of HUD are proper in reaching a disparate impact…
I oppose this amendment strongly, but not because I like a VMT, particularly, and not that I do not understand that in rural areas this can be very burdensome. However, we have to have additional revenue. The reason our infrastructure is…
Reclaiming my time, the language of the amendment, as I have it before me, says none of the funds made available by this Act may be used for high-speed rail in the State of California, or for the California High-Speed Rail Authority.





