Clinton's Policies Didn’t Fix Income Inequality—Why Repeat Them?

Reader Comments

Back to blog

Nick of FL

obuma let it leak he thought about doing something.

I would have sent a plane or drone and blown up the downed drown.

What do I know. Our President leaked HE THOUGHT ABOUT doing SOMETHING. That helped ??? obuma also said he would cut in 1/2 our debt. WAITING...

Bill Hedges of MO 7:44PM December 11, 2011

I don't care how we fix the Economy, But we need someone in there, that more experience then oboma, and fix the problems that he created? We should be the world leader. Ask the Rest the world and see what they think of the united states? We have too turn this country around again, Bring us back, too our equal footing in the world. We should be the world leader again, Not the Laughing stock of the world. I want too know more about the Cia drone, and what the president could of done too stop them for getting it. ??? Like Rick Perry said last night, He had 3 choices, What where they??

Nick of FL 4:28PM December 11, 2011

The middle class's decent into poverty slowed under clinton which is more then any president since Ford can say.

If we want real growth we need to moderate our trade deficet which will put Americans back to work and we need to enact a better tax plan that will shift money back to where it belongs, main street.

Eron of PA 3:29PM December 11, 2011

You folks wanting Bill C. tax rates forget NEWT lowered them and got better results. Bush lowered them more and got better results.

JFK lowered rates and got better results:

April 21, 2011 12:00 A.M.

"Taxing the Rich Won’t Increase Revenues"

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/265278/taxing-rich-won-t-increase-revenues-michael-barone

"The Historical Lessons of Lower Tax Rates"

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2003/08/the-historical-lessons-of-lower-tax-rates

Bill Hedges of MO 2:46PM December 11, 2011

Agreed. Maybe the only way to fix inequality is to return to 1950's during the REPUBLICAN Eisenhower Administration when the top marginal tax rate was 90%!

RealityBites of NH 10:44AM December 11, 2011

The problem with the Clinton rates were that they were not high enough. Why not implement the rates that existed from the 1950's to the end of the 1970's? Those rates would take a bite out of the inequality problem.

Newt of AL 8:11AM December 11, 2011

It pays to shop around for a mortgage refinance. Mortgage rates have gone down like anything. My brother in law just got a 30-year fixed loan at 3.76% He told me search online for 123 Refinance for the lowest rate.

henryjonese of TX 12:19AM December 11, 2011

brucetee

You say I "rant". Ok. Then I answered and disproved your rant point by point. You don't dispute anything. Just say "does not disprove what i stated". Well it does. You previously wrote "the country was on sound economic footing when bill clinton turned over the reins to george bush". I proved it was a TIME BOMB WAITING TO HAPPEN because of Bill C and lawyer obama and Acorn bad home program to unqualified home buyers that caused recession. Bush warned...

Yes Scott, “President Clinton famously got his wish on increasing taxes on the wealthy”. You forgot to say NEWT __REDUCED__. RESULTS WERE BETER. Can't think of a time THAT WASN'T TRUE. Maybe some liberal would tell me ? Like brucetee. Bush tax cut was flying as usually until Bill C. housing disaster caused recessin. Bush warned !!! Good ole B. Frank saying NO PROBLEM.

Brucetee and HIS IDEA. I guess if obama loaning $$$ trillions to foreign banks causes recession under a Republican President, brucetee will blame us. Liberal LOGIC:

1. “promptly squandered the surplus”

Surplus was NEWT. None before NEWT. No balanced budget BEFORE NEWT. Surpluses are not carried over to NEXT ADMINISTRATION.

2. “cut taxes”

To rich DOES NOT reduce government revenue but INCREASES government revenue:

“According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the Bush tax cuts actually shifted the total tax burden farther toward the rich so that in 2000-2004, total income tax paid by the top 40% of income-earners grew by 4.6% to 99.1% of the total.”

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/03/lying_about_bushs_tax_cuts.html

3. “two wars ( unfunded)”

brucetee loves to say this. JFK said best way to pay for war was reduce taxes on rich. Bush tax cuts for rich INCREASED REVENUE. Too bad Bill C., lawyer obama and Acorn housing plan for unqualified home buyer caused recession. Bush warned constantly:

Never let facts interfere with personal opinion...

“Pelosi Caught In Major Lie- Says Bush Didn't Warn Congress About Financial Crisis… Records Show He Warned Congress 17 Times in 2008 Alone”

“Speaker Nancy Pelosi held a news conference last week and told reporters this:”

“During her weekly press conference on April 15, a reporter asked Pelosi a seemingly innocuous question about taxes. Pelosi prefaced her response with a fairly standard litany: explaining the dire state of the U.S. economy inherited by President Obama and setting the blame at the foot of the Bush administration. But she also added this: “When [then-Senator Obama] accepted the nomination in Colorado, the [Bush] Administration had kept from the public the idea that, in a matter of weeks, the financial community would be in crisis, and we would need to pass the TARP legislation.”

“The state-run media is trying to make something of this latest Pelosi fabrication today.”

But, what Speaker Pelosi failed to mention was that President Bush warned the Democratic Congress 17 times in 2008 alone about the systemic consequences of financial turmoil at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties.”

“Unfortunately, these warnings went unheeded, as the President’s repeated attempts to reform the supervision of these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who emphatically denied there were problems. “

"The White House released this list of attempts by President Bush to reform Freddie Mae and Freddie Mac since he took office in 2001.”

“Unfortunately, Congress did not act on the president’s warnings:”

** 2001

“April: The Administration’s FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is “a potential problem,” because “financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity.”

** 2002

“May: The President calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in his 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02) “

** 2003

“January: Freddie Mac announces it has to restate financial results for the previous three years. “

“February: The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that “although investors perceive an implicit Federal guarantee of [GSE] obligations,” “the government has provided no explicit legal backing for them.” As a consequence, unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market. (“Systemic Risk: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Role of OFHEO,” OFHEO Report, 2/4/03)”

“September: Fannie Mae discloses SEC investigation and acknowledges OFHEO’s review found earnings manipulations.”

“September: Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact “legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises” and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy requirements.”

“October: Fannie Mae discloses $1.2 billion accounting error.”

“November: Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw explains that any “legislation to reform GSE regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and credibility to reduce systemic risk.” To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have “broad authority to set both risk-based and minimum capital standards” and “receivership powers necessary to wind down the affairs of a troubled GSE.” (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)”

** 2004

“February: The President’s FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital, and called for creation of a new, world-class regulator: “The Administration has determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore…should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator.” (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)”

“February: CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress to “not take [the financial market's] strength for granted.” Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by “ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator.” (N. Gregory Mankiw, Op-Ed, “Keeping Fannie And Freddie’s House In Order,” Financial Times, 2/24/04)”

“June: Deputy Secretary of Treasury Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and called for reform, saying “We do not have a world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term vitality of that system. Therefore, the Administration has called for a new, first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System.” (Samuel Bodman, House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony, 6/16/04)”

** 2005

“April: Treasury Secretary John Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying “Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America… Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system.” (Secretary John W. Snow, “Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee,” 4/13/05)”

** 2007

“July: Two Bear Stearns hedge funds invested in mortgage securities collapse.”

“August: President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying “first things first when it comes to those two institutions. Congress needs to get them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider other options.” (President George W. Bush, Press Conference, The White House, 8/9/07)”

“September: RealtyTrac announces foreclosure filings up 243,000 in August – up 115 percent from the year before.”

“September: Single-family existing home sales decreases 7.5 percent from the previous month – the lowest level in nine years. Median sale price of existing homes fell six percent from the year before.”

“December: President Bush again warns Congress of the need to pass legislation reforming GSEs, saying “These institutions provide liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is vital they operate safely and operate soundly. So I’ve called on Congress to pass legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs – and ensures they focus on their important housing mission. The GSE reform bill passed by the House earlier this year is a good start. But the Senate has not acted. And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation soon.” (President George W. Bush, Discusses Housing, The White House, 12/6/07)”

** 2008

“January: Bank of America announces it will buy Countrywide.”

“January: Citigroup announces mortgage portfolio lost $18.1 billion in value.”

“February: Assistant Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms, says “A new regulatory structure for the housing GSEs is essential if these entities are to continue to perform their public mission successfully.” (David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, 2/7/08)”

“March: Bear Stearns announces it will sell itself to JPMorgan Chase.”

“March: President Bush calls on Congress to take action and “move forward with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They need to continue to modernize the FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages.” (President George W. Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New York, NY, 3/14/08)”

“April: President Bush urges Congress to pass the much needed legislation

and “modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. [There are] constructive things Congress can do that will encourage the housing market to correct quickly by … helping people stay in their homes.” (President George W. Bush, Meeting With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08)”

“May: President Bush issues several pleas to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the situation deteriorates further.”

“Americans are concerned about making their mortgage payments and keeping their homes. Yet Congress has failed to pass legislation I have repeatedly requested to modernize the Federal Housing Administration that will help more families stay in their homes, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance sub-prime loans.” (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/3/08)”

“[T]he government ought to be helping creditworthy people stay in their homes. And one way we can do that – and Congress is making progress on this – is the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That reform will come with a strong, independent regulator.” (President George W. Bush, Meeting With The Secretary Of The Treasury, the White House, 5/19/08)”

“Congress needs to pass legislation to modernize the Federal Housing Administration, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance subprime loans.” (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/31/08)”

“June: As foreclosure rates continued to rise in the first quarter, the President once again asks Congress to take the necessary measures to address this challenge, saying “we need to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.” (President George W. Bush, Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08)”

“July: Congress heeds the President’s call for action and passes reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as it becomes clear that the institutions are failing.”

“In 2005– Senator John McCain partnered with three other Senate Republicans to reform the government’s involvement in lending.

Democrats blocked this reform, too.”

“More… Not only did democrats not act on these warnings but Barack Obama put one of the major Sub-Prime Slime players on his campaign as finance chairperson.”

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2010/05/pelosi-caught-in-major-lie-says-bush-didnt-warn-congress-about-financial-crisis-records-show-he-warned-congress-17-in-2008-alone/

5. “unprecedented spending binge”

GOOD LORD !!! obuma beat Bush in a little over 2 years !!!

6. “while all this was taking place the upper income people's situation drastically improved,while lower and middle income peoples situation became stagnate,or in many cases people lost economic ground.”

Rich paid lower tax rates but PAID MORE TAX. Simple math says impossible. But as JFK said rich invest and take their money and pay more in taxes. That's JOBS.

Some non-rich get better jobs and go up the latter. Some don't. Bill Gates was MIDDLE CLASS. FOR SOME, welfare is a family tradition.

Generally SPEAKING, people with money who wisely invest are going to get richer. Upward mobility is more than THEIR WORK, is their money too. NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT. Even the lower end in America is in the top 1 % in the WORLD...

Bill Hedges of MO 10:19PM December 10, 2011

You may be right that raising taxes to Clinton era rates won't change the inequality equation much, in which case, why not do it. In fact, let's go further. Let's go back to another decade of economic boom, the 1950's, when we saw a decade of low unemployment and higher wages, personal income increased by 45 percent. President Eisenhower, a Republican, expanded Social Security, increased the minimum wage, and created the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. He also supported government construction of low-income housing, and improvements to the nation's infrastructure. All the while, working to maintain balanced budgets. The top marginal tax rate? 91%! Such an incredibly high tax rate seems to defy the Supply-side mantra.

It is also worth noting the comments from Ronald Reagan's budget director, David Stockman, who wrote in New York Times in July of 2010, "This debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party’s embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don’t matter if they result from tax cuts. Through the 1984 election, the old guard earnestly tried to control the deficit, rolling back about 40 percent of the original Reagan tax cuts. But when, in the following years, the Federal Reserve chairman, Paul Volcker, finally crushed inflation, enabling a solid economic rebound, the new tax-cutters not only claimed victory for their supply-side strategy but hooked Republicans for good on the delusion that the economy will outgrow the deficit if plied with enough tax cuts."

There's also the comments from Bruce Bartlett, who also served in the Reagan Administration, writing in July of this year, "It would have been one thing if the Bush tax cuts had at least bought the country a higher rate of economic growth, even temporarily. They did not. Real G.D.P. growth peaked at just 3.6 percent in 2004 before fading rapidly. Even before the crisis hit, real G.D.P. was growing less than 2 percent a year."

Before Republicans criticize Obama's economic policies, they need to hand him his higher tax rates.

Dave of CO 7:58PM December 10, 2011

sorry mr. bill,your most recent rant STILL does not disprove what i stated,but i admire your spirit.

facts are stubborn things!

bruce b of NV 6:15PM December 10, 2011

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

Back to blog

Scott Galupo

Scott Galupo

Scott Galupo is a Washington-based freelance writer. He formerly worked for House Republican Leader John Boehner, and was a staff writer for The Washington Times.

advertisement

Robert Schlesinger

An End to the NRA’s Angry Swagger

Polls show that overwhelming majorities of Americans, and even of NRA members, favor universal background checks.

Mary Kate Cary

Washington’s Toxic Stew

President Obama's burgeoning problems affect more than this week’s three scandals.

Latest Videos

advertisement