Originally Posted By: Lilo
The 1997 tax cut wasn't initiated by Republicans but by Clinton. It wasn't signed until August of 1997 and most of it didn't go into effect until 1998. It started out in the spring of 97 as Clinton's bill -Middle Class Bill of rights- and was ultimately supported by Democrats (164-41 in the House and 37-8 in the Senate).
They were indeed GOP initiated but of course Clinton gets credit b/c he was in office. Since when are capital gains tax cuts a Democratic strategy? That's why the current capital gains tax cuts were initiated by Bush and will expire at the end of this year because Obama will NOT be renewing them??

"Only a few weeks before the 1997 act was finally approved, Clinton promised that he would never sign anything like the unfair, budget-busting tax bills then pending in Congress...that promise turned out to be an empty one." Source

Originally Posted By: Lilo
The deficits had already been declining since 1993, which given Clinton tax policy, should not have been happening according to right wing economic models. By 1997 the deficit was almost gone.
It seems likely, though admittedly less certain, that the Clinton tax increases in 1993, while not derailing the economy as many had forecast at the time, did indeed slow the recovery compared to what the economy could have achieved. We were coming out of the 90-91 recession that had been preceded by 8 straight periods of economic growth and so strong economic expansion was expected, but that expansion would, could have been even higher without the Clinton tax hikes.

Originally Posted By: Lilo
There was a boom throughout the nineties, not just post 1998. I don't see how anyone could argue that. The facts are otherwise.
The economy should have cooled in 1997 but it didn't thanks to Republican tax cuts. As far as evidence for the 'real boom' occuring in the later portion of the decade: The economy averaged 4.2 percent real growth per year from 1997 to 2000--a full percentage point higher than during the expansion following the 1993 tax hike. Employment increased by another 11.5 million jobs, which is roughly comparable to the job growth in the preceding four-year period. Real wages, however, grew at 6.5 percent, which is much stronger than the 0.8 percent growth of the preceding period. Finally, total market capitalization of the S&P 500 rose an astounding 95 percent. The period from 1997 to 2000 forms the memory of the booming 1990s, and it followed the passage of tax relief that was originally opposed by President Clinton.

Originally Posted By: Lilo
In that 1997 bill was the child tax credit which was opposed by Republicans, increased tax free rules for certain savings accounts, exemption on capital gain taxation on primary residence for up to $500K and other things which were aimed primarily at the middle class, not the rich.
Again, it's the other way around. It was a Republican-led Congress that passed a tax-relief and deficit-reduction bill that was resisted but ultimately signed by President Clinton. The bill among other things lowered the top capital gains tax rate from 28 percent to 20 percent and created a new $500 child tax credit.

"Only a few weeks before the 1997 act was finally approved, Clinton promised that he would never sign anything like the unfair, budget-busting tax bills then pending in Congress...that promise turned out to be an empty one." Source

Originally Posted By: Lilo
"Today, the top federal income-tax rate for ordinary income is 35 percent, meaning that earned income is taxed at a rate 2-1/3 times higher than income from capital gains. That’s simply unfair. There is no good reason for wealth to be taxed at a lower rate than work."
It was President Clinton that ushered through Congress a large package of tax increases, which included the following: An increase in the individual income tax rate to 36 percent and a 10 percent surcharge for the highest earners, thereby effectively creating a top rate of 39.6 percent.


Originally Posted By: Pizzaboy
Your grasp for revisionist history is astounding, Frank tongue.

I'm a Democrat who didn't even like the Clintons from Day One, but give me a break. There might be some evidence that the economic downturn started during the second half of Clinton's second term, but there's no denying the fact that the deficit that Clinton inherited in '92 (when I voted against him), was all but gone by late '96 (when I voted for him).
There's a reason that ultra conservatives like Sam Walton voted for Clinton and it wasn't b/c they share the same home state of Arkansas; Clinton is a brilliant man who supported business and REAL economic growth.

But you have to go back and look at the advantageous historical circumstances that were prevelant when Clinton took office: The end of the Cold War brought a new sense of hope and greater certainty to the global economy. The price of energy was astoundingly low, with oil prices dropping to about $11 per barrel and averaging under $20 per barrel compared to prices above $90 per barrel today. The Federal Reserve had finally succeeded in establishing a significant degree of price stability, with inflation averaging less than 2 percent during the Clinton Administration. And, of course, a tremendous set of new productivity-enhancing technologies involving information technologies and the World Wide Web burst on the scene.

AGain, in 1997, at a time when the expansion was well along and economic growth should have slowed, Congress passed a modest net tax cut. The economy grew by a full percentage point-per-year faster over his second term than over Clinton's first term.