The Corner

Which Tax Cut?

Conn Carroll thinks that Senators Lee and Rubio are making a mistake by trying to expand the tax credit for children, which would benefit “just a few select Americans.” Instead they should cut payroll taxes for everyone who works. Among voters, the core beneficiaries of an expanded child credit would be married parents. Carroll notes that “the Republican Party already has a lock on married households with kids. In 2012, Mitt Romney won the married with children vote 54–45 percent. Meanwhile, Obama won unmarried Americans 62–35 percent. Why are Lee and Rubio so intent on running up the margins among married voters with children?”

I’d like to see a lower payroll tax too. But I’m not convinced that it should be pursued to the exclusion of tax relief for families, for a few reasons.

First: Cutting the payroll tax would not address the double taxation of parents, where expanding the child credit would. Leaving aside the politics, that is, there’s a case on the merits for expanding the credit.

Second: Cutting the payroll tax does not seem to have broader appeal in polls than expanding the child credit—although the data we have are pretty limited.

Third: If Republicans propose to cut the payroll tax, they will open themselves up to the criticism that they are endangering Social Security and Medicare. Depending on how the revenue is made up, that charge may not be true. But it is much less likely to arise in the first place in response to proposals to expand the child credit.

Fourth: Republicans can and should do better among married parents than they did in 2012. George W. Bush got 59 percent of their votes in 2004, 5 points more than Romney. It’s probably more relevant, though, to look at all voters with minor children in the home. Bush won them 53–45 where Romney lost them 47–51.

None of this necessarily means that Republicans should accept the current level of payroll taxation. But I think the case for pursuing an expanded child credit is stronger than the case for seeking payroll tax cuts.

Ramesh Ponnuru is a senior editor for National Review, a columnist for Bloomberg Opinion, a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, and a senior fellow at the National Review Institute.

Most Popular

Law & the Courts

The March for Life Is a March for Truth

Pro-lifers are marching today, as they do every year, to commemorate a great evil that was done in January 1973 and to express solidarity with its innocent victims. The Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade eliminated legal protections for unborn children in all 50 states, and did so without any ... Read More
Law & the Courts

The March for Life Is a March for Truth

Pro-lifers are marching today, as they do every year, to commemorate a great evil that was done in January 1973 and to express solidarity with its innocent victims. The Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade eliminated legal protections for unborn children in all 50 states, and did so without any ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Clarence Thomas Speaks

Those who know Justice Clarence Thomas say that any perception of him as dour or phlegmatic couldn't be more off-base. He's a charming, gracious, jovial man, full of bonhomie and easy with a laugh, or so I'm told by people who know him well. On summer breaks he likes to roam around the country in an RV and stay ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Clarence Thomas Speaks

Those who know Justice Clarence Thomas say that any perception of him as dour or phlegmatic couldn't be more off-base. He's a charming, gracious, jovial man, full of bonhomie and easy with a laugh, or so I'm told by people who know him well. On summer breaks he likes to roam around the country in an RV and stay ... Read More
U.S.

Nadler’s Folly

Jerry Nadler must have missed the day in law school where they teach you about persuasion. The House Democrat made a critical error early in the trial of President Trump. He didn’t just say that Republican senators, who voted to begin the proceedings without calling witnesses, were part of a cover-up. He said ... Read More
U.S.

Nadler’s Folly

Jerry Nadler must have missed the day in law school where they teach you about persuasion. The House Democrat made a critical error early in the trial of President Trump. He didn’t just say that Republican senators, who voted to begin the proceedings without calling witnesses, were part of a cover-up. He said ... Read More
White House

On the Bidens, Schiff Opened the Door

You opened the door. Trial lawyers live in fear of that phrase. When a trial starts, both sides know what the allegations are. Both have had enough discovery to know what the adversary will try to prove. Just as significantly, both know what their own vulnerabilities are. A litigator spends his pretrial ... Read More
White House

On the Bidens, Schiff Opened the Door

You opened the door. Trial lawyers live in fear of that phrase. When a trial starts, both sides know what the allegations are. Both have had enough discovery to know what the adversary will try to prove. Just as significantly, both know what their own vulnerabilities are. A litigator spends his pretrial ... Read More