LyrArc Article Gist
The Obama adminstration and Democrats start the U.S. "fiscal cliff" negotiations with a call for $1.6 trillion of additional tax revenues, twice the amount of $800 billion discussed in talks with Republicans in the summer of 2011. During the Obama-Boehner talks in mid-2011, the Republicans and Democrats neared agreement for a plan to cut the deficit by $4 trillion over 10 years, with new revenues of $800 billion. Obama then pushed to raise the revenue to $1.2 trillion and talks collapsed afterwards. The Republican side through GOP senior aides says $1 trillion in new tax revenues is where this could end up. The Republicans would agree to cap deductions for the wealthy as proposed by Feldstein-Romney, and the Democrats would agree to changing Social Security and increasing the Medicare eligibility age to above 65 as proposed by Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D., Maryland) in such a scenario.

LyrArc Article Gist
In a forceful speech at George Washington University, on April 14, 2011, President Obama outlined his proposal for addressing the U.S. budget deficit. His plan includes a mix of tax increases and spending cuts. His plan is for a $4 trillion deficit reduction over 12 years, with $1 trillion coming from revenue increases, $2 trillion from spending cuts, and $1 trillion from savings in interest because the U.S. would borrow less. Obama's plan would end the Bush-era tax cuts for people earning more than $250,000 a year and eliminate a number of tax breaks. Spending cuts would include cuts in Medicare costs, discretionary spending, and defense. Obama's plan would commit to automatic, across the board spending cuts and tax increases if an initial target is not reached by 2014. Obama said the Republican plan proposed by Paul Ryan presented " a vision that was less about reducing the deficit than it is about changing the basic social compact in America....The's nothing courageous about asking for sacrifice from those who can least afford it and don't have any clout on Capitol Hill."...

LyrArc Article Gist
Greg Ip of the WSJ provides this exceptional report offering readers remarkable clarity on what the Republican Tax Law does- its high and low points.  High Points 1. It reduces the corporate tax rate to bring it in line with other advanced industrialized countries. The corporate tax rate in Germany and Japan is 30%, in the UK it is 19%. For 5 years businesses can write off capital equipment immediately instead of depreciating over a couple of years. This could boost investment and growth. 2.  The law takes aim at deductions that led to distortions. It limits the mortgage interest deduction, and caps the deduction for state and local taxes. This removes the incentive to pay more for homes that exacerbated the housing crisis in 2008. The Alternative Minimum Tax is largely removed. The Low Points 1. The biggest drawback is that lawmakers did not properly fund the tax cuts. Of the 10 costliest tax breaks nine were not touched, including employer health insurance, retirement savings, capital gains. Only the state and local taxes deduction was reduced. And a new tax deduction  was created, a 20% tax deduction for small business (proprietors and partnerships) paying taxes on their individual tax returns. Taxes on the wealthy or value added taxes, reducing tax breaks, is how other advanced industrialized countries paid for the corporate tax cuts, but did not happen here. Additional economic growth  to generate added tax revenues is the way Republicans in Congress say this is funded. Yet this is a questionable assumption as Britain reduced the corporate tax rate to 19% without seeing a surge in economic growth, as Greg Ip pointed out in an earlier WSJ article. At best the Joint Committee on Taxation estimates $500 billion over a decade in added revenues from added growth leaving $1 trillion to be added to the deficit. The WhartonPenn Budget Model (WPBM) estimates only $140 to $367 bill from the additional economic growth resulting in added tax revenues. Under this model only 0.03 to 0.08 percent added U.S. economic growth per year is expected from the Republican Tax Cuts. Such a situation would be bad  for the U.S. as the gradual improvement in Debt to GDP ratio to 78% following the financial crisis of 2008 would be sharply reversed taking the ratio to 97% by 2027. An unsustainable trajectory which will require tax increases in a few years and hurt investment in education, health and infrastructure into the future. This is what worries many experts most on both sides of the political spectrum today about what the Republican Congress has pushed through for a legislative "victory." This is why experts believe this is not serious tax reform and will require a new effort after 2019.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
An account of the meetings between Speaker Boehner and president Obama in the fiscal cliff negotiations. The WSJ pieced together the flow of the negotiations based on interviews with aides and lawmakers. There is little to show the two sides closer than before the election. If anything the WSJ report concludes the discussions this time left both sides further apart, and the lack of trust in the relations between Republicans and president Obama has worsened. Speaker Boehner asks Obama at one meeting what he gets in return for offering $800 billion in revenues and Obama tells him he gets nothing. At another meeting Obama tells Boehner he is asking Obama to accept Mitt Romney's tax plan and sees no reason to do that. Obama's first offer is for $1.6 trillon in new revenue over 10 years, a permanent increase in the debt ceiling and $400 billion in spending cuts. The Republicans find 25 cents of spending cuts for every dollar in tax increases as simply unacceptable and hold out for $1 in cuts for $1 in new tax revenues. Obama drops down to $1.2 trillion in new revenues and Boehner asks for $100 billion in additional spending cuts. Boehner drops a demand for raising the Medicare eligibility age. Obama raises the tax figure for the Bush tax increases to incomes over $400,000, Boehner proposes $1 million. But no level of trust has been gained in the negotiations. And no rapport established, as at one point Boehner tells Obama the two can just stare at each other or he Boehner could come back. Boehner then proposes to pass Plan B in the House for Bush tax cuts on incomes over $1 million. At that point the president feels the Republicans are not negotiating in good faith and some Republican Congressman in the House say they would not support Plan B. The distrust on all sides is worse than before. In the weeks leading to this in Dec. 2012 a review of oped pages show Democrats and Republicans saying a bad agreement- meaning too much in spending cuts for Democrats and too much in tax increases for Republicans- was worse than the fiscal cliff of automatic cuts, which could be addressed in other ways....

LyrArc Article Gist
The WSJ provides a fact check of Trump statements on crime, debt, and taxes. Trump says he is looking at a new plan for taxes not the $10 trillion in tax cuts over 10 years reducing tax collection by 22%, but something about a third of the size. No details are available on the plan. WSJ disputes Trump's statement that the U.S. is "one of the highest taxed nations in the world." WSJ points out that the U.S. in 2014 for federal, state and local government taxes collected 26% of gross domestic product in taxes, compared to average of 34% for about 30 countries, according to OECD. Debt to GDP ratio is about 75% that is high, but because of low interest rates the budget deficit is less than 3% of GDP, which is close to the long run average. For this reason economists say the government should invest in infrastructure and R&D that supports long run economic growth. On crime the record is mixed with increase in Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York City, but decreases in Washington D.C. and Baltimore. Police shootings were 67 in 2016 compared to 62 in July 2015, and the high being 280 officers in 1974 when Nixon was President. Crime was an issue in the 1968 Republican National Convention during the Vietnam era protests, police shootings and terror incidents attracted attention in July 2016, yet the situation today is very different from the war protests of the Vietnam era. On terrorism fact checks by the NYT and in Lyrarc shows Clinton at State Department and Panetta at Defense Department taking hawkish stands only to hit a barrier from President Obama for taking action needed in Syria, Iraq and Libya. Panetta's new book calls for robust action where needed. A Clinton administration would take action with allies in the Middle East. Even Hollande and Obama who pulled the U.S. and France out of following up in the French-British Sarkozy-Cameron led intervention in Libya, have changed policy, with Obama calling it his biggest mistake. France under Hollande with the U.S. is now actively engaged in the Middle East, having changed policy. It is highly unlikely that a Trump led policy which alienates most allies in the Middle East- Iran, Iraq and Saudis- is likely to work better than a determined Clinton-Panetta led effort which has support of the local countries on the ground actually currently on both sides because of complexities of Middle Eastern politics.  On trade a new administration will still have to work with China, India, the European Union, and other countries, as global trade supply chains are not likely to evolve overnight. Lessons will have been learned by Clinton about the need to bring back jobs and ensure the strength of U.S. manufacturing. Economic and jobs growth will require prudence in strengthening U.S. manufacturing coupled with global cooperation, which a Trump administration that alienates trading partners without the possibility of making any serious immediate gains in jobs, is highly unlikely to do better.      ...

LyrArc Article Gist
As the final Republican tax bill is debated in Congress on December 19, 2017, Senator Bob Casey cited the following points from the Joint Committee on Taxation Report on the floor of the Senate.  1. Americans building their hopes that their pay checks in February 2018 will be increasing are in for a big disappointment said Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon, a senior member of the Finance Committee. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimate is that for the 57 million families making less than 100,000 dollars a year the tax cuts in the Republican legislation will either not reduce their taxes or reduce the taxes by about $100 a year. 2. The bill does little for the big tasks facing America of rebuilding failing infrastructure. Senator Casey cited 4500 bridges needing repair or replacement in Pennsylvania alone. It also does little for health care access for middle class families and is likely to lead to 10% increase in health care premiums. Affordability of college and other hurdles of middle class and working class families remain unaddressed.   3. The $9 billion in the estate tax cuts would finance the Children's Health Insurance program which has expired.  4. The $36 billion in tax cuts for corporations comes at a time when corporate profits are at the highest they have been in 15 years, according to Vanguard founder Bogle. He also points out that wages as a percentage of GDP are the lowest in 15 years. The tax cuts in the Republican bill are not likely to correct this imbalance.  5. The share of GDP of people making more than one million dollars in 1980 was 11%, this is up now in 2017 to 20%. This has led to questions about the wisdom of these tax cuts which disproportionately benefit a very small percentage of Americans who do not need these tax cuts, and come with significant sacrifices for the middle class in terms of what is available in public services, and the cost to their children as infrastructure and access to health and education is made more distant because of a growing U.S. debt from this tax cut. The big problem then with this bill is that it further damages intergenerational mobility in the U.S., undermining the foundation of a democratic society. Damage has already happened in the past three decades as Federal Reserve chairman Janet Yellen pointed out at a conference on Economic Opportunity and Inequality on Oct. 17, 2014, saying-"The past several decades have seen the most sustained rise in inequality since the 19th century after more than 40 years of narrowing inequality following the Great Depression." This is why there is substantial agreement in the media from the Wall Street Journal's Greg Ip to Krugman in the New York Times that the bill fails to correct a harmful trend, and goes further in the wrong direction for a democratic society.       ...

LyrArc Article Gist
US president Biden proposes to reduce the US deficit by $2 trillion by increasing taxes on American households worth more than $100 million that would apply to their earned income, and their unrealized gains on liquid assets like stocks. Biden also plans quadrupling the tax on stock buybacks by companies, a tax approved in the Inflation Reduction Act of 2021. The deficit in 2023 will be about $1.4 trillion and rise to about $2 trillion, so that Biden's plan is to practically eliminate the  large deficit if the Republicans come on board. Republicans prefer cuts in spending. US companies have engaged in a dramatic increase in stock buybacks in recent years leading to calls for increasing the tax on stock buybacks. Biden says even high income households will not see an increase in their taxes, only the wealthiest households with over $100 million who have benefited vastly through the Reagan type policies of the last two decades. These households with over $100 million in assets will not be affected in the same way as students, workers, and middle income households are affected in shouldering a large part of the burden of these Reagan type policies that did not adequately fund education, healthcare, and manufacturing in communities across America. This was a period when Democrats in Congress awed by Reagan type policies failed to vigorously oppose policy that increased the US deficit and burden on households for health costs by not allowing Medicare to negotiate prices with pharmaceutical companies. A senior AARP official says that when we talk about the Biden Inflation Reduction Act of 2021 the key component is the Medicare price negotiation with companies that is now law. Why Republicans and Democrats before Mr. Biden allowed such a gross distortion for two decades since 2001 that burdened ordinary  working Americans while neglecting American manufacturing, till Mr. Biden assumed the presidency, says much about the policies of the last two decades and how it has affected ordinary working families. Shriveling factory towns and creating much distress in these communities with these distortions that are a legacy of Reagan type laissez faire policies that government should do little. The result of these policies is that manufacturing is concentrated in only one country for the whole supply chain something that would never have happened with a thoughtful policy planning process. India and Vietnam are only today seen as alternatives for the supply chain in 2023 when policies were in place in these countries since 2014 for the supply chain to be distributed in a way that would be a win-win situation for all countries, avoiding the national security threats of today with overconcentration of manufacturing in China. This has not benefited China or the US because of the rancor and tension it has created. It was the fall of the Berlin Wall that created some of this awe for Reagan, when looking at it objectively it was nothing more than a course correction in Europe after the Hungarian revolution suppressed in 1956, Czech in 1968. It had little to do with what policies the US should pursue for workers and families, just as the war in Ukraine today remains another course correction in a different direction in Europe, and does not affect domestic policy in the US to build a better society for workers and families that Mr. Biden is doing. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This view from the Editorial Board comes as Republicans in Congress geared up for a legislative victory decided to ignore the expert opinion of the Joint Committee on Taxation and polls showing a majority of Americans disapprove of the tax law. It says a "corrosive partisanship" that is affecting the nation has led to this decision. Not an informed consensus necessary to make real and lasting changes to the tax laws that increase growth without disrupting hard won gains in social cohesion after World War II.  Republicans pushed through a trillion and half dollars in tax cuts in the law that reduces the corporate tax rate to 21% from 35%, and cut taxes in 2019 by 51 times ($51,400) for the top 1% of incomes compared to ($1000) for middle class families earning less than $100,000 (Tax Policy Center). The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates it will add $1 trillion to the U.S. deficit as only $500 billion is expected in increase in government revenues over a decade from additional economic growth. This is supported by evidence from countries such as Britain that implemented this type of corporate tax cut without generating much economic growth, says Greg Ip in the Wall Street Journal. The "victory" then comes at a high cost says the Washington Post- in years to come programs to help the growing lower middle class and working class will be subject to cuts and taxes will have to rise to balance budgets.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
One year after the tax cut analysis shows the effects were muted and most of the increase in business investment comes from the drop in energy prices. The U.S. economy grew 3% in 2018. The tax cut lowered the corporate tax rate to 21% from 35% and cut rates for closely held businesses. Analysis shows investment growth picking up from trends in 2016 and 2017.

LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman points out the major problem in the Republican tax cut legislation in 2017- not enough to help the middle class and adding 1 trillion dollars to the deficit. Krugman says even the Bush tax cuts had enough broad public approval because of help to the middle class. So what is the Republican message and rationale for taking this action? This is that the tax cuts will generate an economic boom . Yet the tax cuts in other countries including Britain, as Greg Ip pointed out in the Wall Street Journal recently, have shown that this does not lead to the boost in economic growth that is expected. Krugman agrees that this is unlikely to happen. There is another rational explanation and this is Republican need for a legislative victory heading into next years midterm elections. In which case the decision for tax cuts was not really based on the deep sense and conviction after much debate that this will inevitably create a surge in economic  growth. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This Washington Post editorial says Obama and the politicians, both Democrats and Republicans, want something for nothing. The Ryan budget, Obama's health care plan, all require paying for it with higher taxes, but the mention of the word "tax" is the last word any of the politicians will say. These comments come as the U.S. Supreme Court considers the mandate that young Americans and others be forced to pay for health care along with the rest, as required by the health care mandate, with the idea of keeping costs down. The idea of getting something for nothing was also emphasized in an op-ed in the WSJ, March 29, 2012, by Mayor Bloomberg of New York City, where he called for letting the Bush tax cuts expire for all income groups, and an up or down vote in Congress on the Simpson-Bowles deficit reduction plan, as part of a two step plan.

LyrArc Article Gist
Pete Domenici of the Domenici-Rivlin deficit reduction commission and Sam Nunn are part of the initiative- Strengthening America- Our Children's Future. Other members of this initiative are Warren Rudman and Evan Bayh. Here they provide ideas on how to address the fiscal cliff of automatic cuts in spending that are approaching at year end under an agreement between Republicans and Democrats in Congress. The agreement was designed to offer the worst outcome for Republicans (huge cuts in defense spending) and worst outcome for Democrats (cuts in entitlemnt spending) as a last ditch effort to force the two parties to come to an agreement on deficit reduction. It comes after president Obama failed to accept the Simpson-Bowles deficit reduction commission proposals as a basis for working out a plan and as Republicans in Congress were dead set on avoiding any tax increases. In a recent WSJ editorial praising the CEO statement of 80 U.S. CEO's- organized by the Fix the Debt initiative inspired by Simpson and Bowles- the Journal called the CEO's support for tax increases encouraging and was critical of Republican "deadenders" who flatly opposed any tax increases. Domenici and Rivlin say kicking the can down the road again as Congress has a tendency to do is not the answer and a vigorous effort by responsible members of Congress is needed to come up with deficit reduction using the proposals of Simpson-Bowles commission and Domenici-Rivlin commission. This will end the uncertainty plaguing business confidence that is leading to decline in business investment- decline of 1.3% in the 3rd quarter of 2012- and a weakening of economic recovery. To this end Domenici and Nunn have brought together 35 members of Congress to push forward and held four public forums with experts including hearing from John Taylor, Martin Feldstein and Larry Summers....

LyrArc Article Gist
Gerald Seib of the WSJ says president Biden is coming back with new actions to revive the Democratic agenda after a challenging period in the first year. Yesterday's first formal press conference of 2022 gave Biden an opportunity to respond. Why the WSJ, NYT, did not cover on their online edition front pages president Biden's first formal press conference on Jan. 19, after 1 year of the Biden administration, will remain a mystery. With the American press acting this way it did not take much for Germany's DW.com to run the story with the title "Biden's first year weighed down by disappointment," with a thoughtful Biden at the press conference replaced by a picture of Biden staring downwards.  This is only the first year of the Biden administration. Actions are planned to ease the supply chain situation and bottlenecks at ports. Much is made of inflation, Afghanistan, Ukraine, by Republicans assailing the Biden record. President Biden responded to this by asking at the press conference what Republicans are for. On Afghanistan Biden held firm on not investing billions of dollars every week when there is so much need in America and the rest of the world at this time of the pandemic after a failed adventure for 20 years in "a graveyard for empires."  Biden pointed to the bright spots in 2022- vaccination and testing achievements in the face of anti-vax sentiment with 200 million vaccinated, the job creation in the economy with unemployment way down and wage increases by employers, and the $1 trillion in infrastructure spending tackling much needed projects state by state with immediate impact. Rarely has a president faced so many challenges in the first year as Biden pointed out- vaccination drive in the face of the Delta variant and anti-vax sentiment, the Ukraine crisis with a president Truman period like event of the Berlin Wall coming up just potentially around the corner, and efforts to tackle problems left untackled for a generation in infrastructure, for working families and climate change. Scoring on infrastructure spending, one of the three, with the other two for working families and climate change to be tackled in the remaining three years and beyond.  Biden also told the American audience at the press conference that he was reminded of what his father used to tell him- that if all goals are equally important, nothing is important. In saying this he said help for working families through child tax credit, child care assistance, community college education funding, health care costs, climate change investment were priorities for his administration that would be tackled step by step. And he pointed out from the outset of the conference that only one or two senators were blocking the party's plan for children and working families. All 48 other senators were united in the Democratic party behind his plans for workers and families. As were 5 Republican senators who he said he would not disclose because of confidentiality. In that sense president Biden already has the majority he needs in Congress. This is not happening because of the peculiar situation of the 2016 and 2020 elections in the US and also in Europe- the historical problem of administrations of Democrats in US, Social Democrats in Germany, and Labor in Britain having give up on their working class families and middle class roots. Tech revolution and internet has further complicated the situation with economic changes, tech companies not paying taxes normally due, and tech workers shifting to Democrats yet living in a world distant from working class families fracturing social cohesion. This is changing in Germany with Scholz in Germany with the help of the Greens determined to restore the dignity of working class families, for Biden with a similar coalition, and a process underway in Britain as Labor returns to its roots. In essence Biden was saying- the process of unwinding decades of unwise policy that hurt America as a nation and leader of the free world would take time, requiring a patient step by step approach. To bring America closer to its own roots and Jefferson's immortal words of "all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, and among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness." Jefferson went on to say in the Declaration that when government becomes destructive of these ends it is the Right of the People to alter it.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The failure of the Supercommitte in the U.S. Congress by the Thanksgiving deadline will not have any immediate consequences. This is because automatic spending cuts that are supposed to go into effect if the Supercommitte fails, do not go into effect till Jan 2013. This gives Congress another year in which to come up with necessary deficit savings. This is a major reason the two sides divided on major issues from the extension of Bush tax cuts and tax increases, and facing pressure from their party's interest groups and voter support groups, have no special incentive to reach a compromise. Such a compromise also means politicians taking the political risk of not being reelected. Another dynamic that is in play in November 2011 is that interest groups in the Republican and Democratic parties both now see the "sequester," as the automatic cuts are described, as a better alternative than any bipartisan agreement that cuts health and retirement programs. For anti-tax groups, the automatic cuts are better than a deal than includes tax increases. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) says: "We promised tax cuts. And I think we need to have cuts." For liberal groups, the trigger or sequester for the 2013 automatic cuts is better than a deal that cuts health and retirement programs. The trigger for automatic cuts will cut agency budgets, but spending for the poor and the elderly -including food stamps, Medicaid, Medicare- is exempted. Eric Kinson, co-director of the Strengthen Social Security Campaign, says no deal is better than one that is flawed, the extra time gives the country time to pause and think about the alternatives....

LyrArc Article Gist
The corporate share buybacks announced by U.S. companies in the last 3 months now exceed $200 billion, more than double than in 2017, according to a WSJ analysis. This includes Cisco, Wells Fargo, AbbVie, Amgen, Alphabet (Google). The surge in corporate buybacks started in December after the tax cut of the Trump administration cut U.S. taxes by $1.5 trillion over a decade, cutting the corporate tax rate for large companies from 35% to 21%. The tax cut also included a one time tax for repatriation of $2 trillion held by U.S. companies overseas. This WSJ analysis says there are questions whether the tax cut is working, whether it will encourage new investment, lead to companies increasing wages, or whether this will largely result in corporations returning money to investors with larger dividends and corporate buybacks. Morgan Stanley's analysis of earnings transcripts of companies in the S&P 500 show 44% of the companies say they will use some portion of the tax gains to make capital investments and increase wages, with 28% going in the opposite direction and using them to return money to shareholders. Experts caution that corporate buybacks do not always lead to the company's stock outperforming the stock market. The future of companies depends more on the capital investments and in human capital. There is a sense that workers wages have stagnated since the mortgage financial crisis in 2008, with the economic crisis, globalization and outsourcing, reduced alternatives for workers, geographic pressures in relocation, all pushing wages down.  This is being closely watched with articles on stagnation in wage growth this week in the NYT and WSJ, and earlier in the Economist magazine. Reports on the Trump administration tax cuts passed by a Republican Congress suggested a large tilt towards benefitting the highest income households. Problem with higher stock prices reaching the broader middle class are recognized in that one third of stocks are owned by overseas investors, and 84% of the remaining stocks are owned by the wealthiest 10%. Republicans have turned to bonuses typically of $1000 per person given by companies yet this amounts now to about a few billion dollars over an estimated 4 million Americans, says this WSJ analysis. This is not enough to justify a huge tax cut and raise the deficit by over a trillion over 10 years on the assumption that it would lead to higher wages or capital investment when about $200 billion goes to boosting stock prices. This comes at a time when the American middle class is not broadly invested in the stock market after the exit following the battering stock prices took during the 2008 financial crisis. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Hillary Clinton's estate tax plan would increase the estate taxes on the largest estates from 40% today and her proposed 45% to the higher figure of 65% proposed by Senator Bernie Sanders. Compared to the current $5.45 million exemption only the first $3.5 million would be exempt from estate tax for individuals ($7 million for a married couple). The top rate of 65% would apply to individuals with over $500 million. Beyond $10 million a 50% rate, and beyond $50 million a 55% rate.

The latest proposal adds $260 billion over 10 years adequate to pay for simplified small business taxes, and for expanding child tax credit.  Over 10 years Clinton would increase taxes by $1.5 trillion to pay for expanded education assistance, paid family leave and other programs. She would increase federal revenue by 4% and have the burden fall on only a small portion of households.

LyrArc Article Gist
Senator McCain's vote for the Republican tax bill is uncertain, says this report in NYT. McCain opposed the 2001 and 2003 Bush administration tax cuts on the grounds of benefiting the rich and not doing enough for the middle class. McCain is known to oppose large spending that aggravates the deficit, and the current Republican plan would add $1.5 trillion to the deficit. In 2003 McCain said on the Senate floor he could not support the use of "billions of federal dollars to cut taxes for our nation's wealthiest." How will he vote this time? Holtz-Eakin, his policy adviser in the 2008 campaign says he is not sure, it all depends on what is better, the status quo or this change.