Proof

Here are some excerpts from the very same newspaper about the cutting of the Alternative Minimum tax last time it was in Congress

Copyright The Washington Post Company May 13, 2006
In the debate over the tax bill that Congress passed this week, supporters toasted it as essential to continued economic growth while opponents described it as a boon to the wealthy that the nation can't afford.

The proposed changes to the nation's tax system, though, which President Bush plans to sign into law next week, have a more idiosyncratic set of winners and losers than the talking points on either side might suggest. The bill would cut taxes by $70 billion over the next decade -- about $23 per person, per year. But the benefits are concentrated among people with very particular tax situations, a relative few people who might save thousands of dollars.......

......The AMT provision doesn't much benefit those with the highest incomes, analysts said, because they're already being taxed at a higher rate. Instead, it's those with upper-middle incomes who win - - those whose households make $100,000 to $500,000 a year. Such families with lots of deductions -- such as from having several children or paying high state income taxes -- have been particularly exposed and therefore stand to benefit.

This is a pretty fair article if one wants to read the entire thing. They bring both sides in of the equation. They don't really say that it favors the super wealthy at all, but you'll note that they aren't exactly touting the fact that by cutting the AMT they are helping the middle class.

But if the democrats want to do it... remember it only helps the middle class.

de "poppin my colla" Tocqueville