Last week, I had a one-on-one interview with Congressman Charlie Rangel, now
Chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee.
Set among the throng of media interviewing him, our aim was to get some feel of
Congressman Rangel's general aims and how that may impact the overall U.S.
economy.
Usually Democrats are perceived as bad for business and bad for the U.S.
economy.
But Rangel showed to me a desire to be pragmatic and open-minded. There was no
talk of throwing overboard Bush tax cuts. Indeed, there was some talk by Rangel
of eliminating the odious AMT tax.
Story Continues Below
You can read the full interview — go here now.
Right from the get-go, Rangel replied to my question about his general aim, "I'm
not going for anything; I'm going for what I can get done."
Asked about the thorny problems of a tax simplification, he replied, "It's just
a question of, you know, we can't do anything with a veto possibility hanging
over our heads. And we don't know how far the Republicans are willing to go with
a progressive tax. So . . . all of these things are being explored now by staff.
But the Republicans and I don't want a political confrontation before we've
tested our ability to work together."
On the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT), Rangel asserted that, "I am very anxious
to eliminate the trillion dollar burden we have on 23 million people." He agreed
with indexation, saying, "Yes, it would mean removing the burden on those people
who have not been indexed . . . it is so unfair. No one challenges the fact that
it was never intended."
We got the impression that indexation of the AMT is what is now termed "low
hanging fruit" and can be achieved relatively easily by a bipartisan Congress
under the leadership of such people as Charlie Rangel.
[Editor's Note:
A 2007 global
recession is in the cards. Here's how to position yourself now for monster
profits before the panic headlines begin
.]
On estate tax, Rangel said, "We just don't go along with full repeal, but we
have already offered, as alternatives to the [full] repeal, a $3.5 million
exemption for single [people] and a $7 million [exemption] for a couple and also
a reduction in rates." We feel Republicans should accept this as "progress".
On suggestions for a flat tax, Rangel replied constructively. Indeed more
constructively than we feel many Republicans may have done. He said, "We have
staff to look into all the possibilities, . . ." But he added that any flat tax
would have to reflect an ability to pay.
Understandably, Congressman Rangel was not prepared to make commitments on
longer-term issues.
Asked about the abolition of double taxation of dividends and the "sunset"
clauses on the Bush tax cuts, he replied, "That's 2010. I'm 76 years old and I
don't buy green bananas. What happens in 2010 will depend on what the economy
looks like, what the budget looks like and where the President has taken this
crazy war!"
I believe Congressman Rangel has both a positive and pragmatic attitude. If he
is successful in obtaining bipartisan agreement on key financial and economic
issues, we believe it will help to restore some of the lost prestige and
credibility of our Congress and that will be good for America and, in the long
term, that means all of us.
Editor's Notes:
