Monica Crowley asserted "liberals like the Clintons" argue against tax cuts, but Sen. Clinton has proposed tax cuts

››› ››› TOM ALLISON

On Fox News' Your World, Monica Crowley asserted that "liberals like the Clintons" argue "against tax cuts" and to "let the government have more of your money." In fact, Sen. Hillary Clinton's website says that she would "[l]ower taxes for middle class families by: extending the middle class tax cuts ... offering new tax cuts for healthcare, college and retirement, and expanding the EITC [earned income tax credit] and the child care tax credit."

On the April 7 edition of Fox News' Your World, while discussing the Clintons' income since leaving the White House and whether former President Bill Clinton should relinquish his annual lifetime presidential pension, radio talk show host and Fox News contributor Monica Crowley asserted: "[T]he hypocrisy of the Clintons is: 'Well, we're happy to tax you. We're making all this money, and therefore, we don't need the Bush tax cuts.' Well, if that's the case then, then forfeit that money, give it back to the U.S. Treasury and let the government have more of your money, because that's what they're arguing for the rest of us." Crowley also claimed that "there's something to be said for saying, well, look, especially for liberals like the Clintons who argue for increased taxes and against tax cuts, for them to say, 'Look, I don't need this government stipend because I can certainly afford to cover my own expenses on my own.' " In fact, contrary to Crowley's assertions that "liberals like the Clintons" argue "against tax cuts" and to "let the government have more of your money," Sen. Hillary Clinton has proposed tax cuts for the poor and middle class.

As Media Matters for America has documented, Clinton's campaign website says that she would "[l]ower taxes for middle class families by: extending the middle class tax cuts including child tax credit and marriage penalty relief, offering new tax cuts for healthcare, college and retirement, and expanding the EITC [earned income tax credit] and the child care tax credit." And in a March 27 speech on the economy, Hillary Clinton called for "middle class tax cuts":

CLINTON: I have proposed a very specific agenda to end the giveaways to corporate special interests and to save the American people at least $55 billion a year.

That's money that can go right back into your pockets through middle class tax cuts, money we can use to create new high-paying jobs, to invest in our nation's futures (sic) again, you know, for rebuilding our roads to our schools to our manufacturing sector.

From the April 7 edition of Fox News' Your World with Neil Cavuto:

CAVUTO: Well, $52 million in speeches, nearly $30 million from book sales -- Bill Clinton earning a small fortune since leaving the White House, but should he be leaving that $191,000-a-year presidential pension behind, as well? Well, Monica Crowley says yes. She's a radio talk show host, Fox News contributor. So, with all that money, who needs a pension, is what you're saying?

CROWLEY: He's raking in money hand over fist, and he's really taken the post-presidency and turned it into a lifestyle experience. He has taken the Clinton brand and cashed in after leaving office -- and look, we live in a capitalist economy here. We live in a free-market economy. Nothing he's doing is illegal. But to make, what, almost $110 million between the two of them and still to take the $191,000 presidential pension seems to me to be a little bit obscene.

You know, the hypocrisy of the Clintons is: "Well, we're happy to tax you. We're making all this money, and therefore, we don't need the Bush tax cuts." Well, if that's the case then, then forfeit that money, give it back to the U.S. Treasury and let the government have more of your money, because that's what they're arguing for the rest of us, Neil.

CAVUTO: OK, now, if you look at what the Clintons made since 2000, there is a great deal of money. They have given a great deal to charity. They have paid a higher tax rate than anyone in their bracket, close to anyone in their bracket would. So, haven't they paid their due?

CROWLEY: Well, they've certainly paid their share of taxes, but my point is that the presidency is a very unique thing. There was only one president in modern times who didn't cash in on the office once he left it, and that, ironically, was Richard Nixon, who never charged a penny for the speeches that he gave after he left the White House. He took the pension, but he didn't believe in cashing in on the office. He thought that the office required a certain amount of dignity and respect once you leave it. Now --

CAVUTO: Well, there are many who would argue --

CROWLEY: There were people --

CAVUTO: -- that he trashed that with the whole Watergate thing while in office, but --

CROWLEY: Well, I --

CAVUTO: I see -- no, I see your point.

CROWLEY: That's a legitimate argument to make. But I --

CAVUTO: I see your point. Let me ask you this, though.

CROWLEY: Yeah.

CAVUTO: There is the Michael Bloomberg example in New York where he takes a $1-a-year salary --

CROWLEY: A dollar -- right.

CAVUTO: -- 'cause he's a billionaire and all of that. You think the same should apply to elected officials who have a lot of money --

CROWLEY: Well, yes, because not only is it unseemly for people like the Clintons who are making so much money, then to be on the government payroll with a pension, even though they're due it -- there's something to be said for saying, well, look, especially for liberals like the Clintons who argue for increased taxes and against tax cuts, for them to say, "Look, I don't need this government stipend because I can certainly afford to cover my own expenses on my own." A hundred and ten million dollars over six or seven years?

CAVUTO: Maybe they're foreseeing a day --

CROWLEY: I think that they can.

CAVUTO: -- where a Democratic president comes in and the tax rate's back to 70 percent, so they want a little cushion.

CROWLEY: You know, the other thing -- I mean, we mention the Nixon example, and there's certainly some questions surrounding that example -- but I'll tell you, in 1985, Nixon gave up his Secret Service protection voluntarily, because, at that time, it was costing taxpayers almost $4 million. And he said, "I don't want to be a burden on the taxpayers anymore, I'm going to hire my own private security." So, in addition to giving up the pension, I believe that the Clintons -- particularly Bill -- Hillary, she's running; that's different. But once she stops running, if she is not the nominee, they should pay for their own security and get off the government payroll here.

CAVUTO: All right, obviously we're not destined for the next Clinton Christmas party.

Posted In
Economy, Taxes, Elections
Network/Outlet
Fox News Channel
Person
Monica Crowley
Show/Publication
Your World w/ Neil Cavuto
Stories/Interests
Hillary Clinton, 2008 Elections
We've changed our commenting system to Disqus.
Instructions for signing up and claiming your comment history are located here.
Updated rules for commenting are here.