Josh Marshall has worked himself into a swivet over whether the Democrats in the House will vote on tax cuts for the middle class without cutting taxes for those who make more than $250K. Perhaps my political instincts (or my give-a-shitter) are irreparably busted, but I fail to see why this one vote will change much of anything in the Fall campaign.
The Democrats are running on a decent, some would say “outstanding” legislative record, which the Democrats call “accomplishments”. Even so, we’re in the middle of a jobless, anemic “recovery”. Fair or not, the “accomplishment” that people want to see is a real recovery, and that’s precisely what hasn’t been accomplished. I doubt that passing one more bill, or a hundred more bills, will move those who are angry about the economy and resolved to vote against the party in power.
I’m not saying the Democrats can do nothing, but getting tied up over whether the House is going to pass another bill that the Senate won’t bother to vote on is simply counterproductive.
Update: The latest AP poll shows that this isn’t a clear-cut win:
More than half the country backs raising taxes on the richest Americans, according to a new Associated Press-GfK Poll. The survey showed that by 54 percent to 44 percent, most people support raising taxes on the highest earners.
In a breakdown of the numbers, 39 percent agree with Obama, while 15 percent favor raising taxes on everyone by allowing the cuts to expire at year’s end. Still, 44 percent say the existing tax cuts should remain in place for everyone, including the wealthy.
TR
Actually, indications are that the Senate will not only vote on this, but likely vote before the House does.
And I agree with Josh that this is important. The record of accomplishments for this Congress is incredibly impressive, but most Americans — fuck, even many liberals — can’t see through the noise to appreciate that.
But the tax cut vote is easily understood — Democrats want to cut taxes for the middle class and the poor, Republicans want to cut them for the rich. Hold the votes, and whatever the result, that contrast is clear.
Allison W.
not like Americans will notice the tax cuts were extended anyway. If the cuts pass and they get asked in a few months – ‘tax cuts, what tax cuts?’
c u n d gulag
Symbolism is important in politics.
Especially if you seperate the tax cuts into two bills, you force the Republicans to vote twice.
Hopefully, they won’t support keeping the tax cuts for the middle and lower, and ‘double-down’ on keeping them for the rich.
What does that accomplish? Well, truthfully not a Hell of a lot, unless it works. But it would reinforce the fact, not a meme, that Republicans are for the rich, while Democrats side with the rest of the people (certain Whoreporatist Democrat’s not included).
aimai
If the American people have to wait for the DNC to call them up and personally tell them about all the “accomplishments” of the last year, like the phone call I just got, then, no, the Obama Tax Cuts for the Middle Class will go down in the dust of popular ignorance like everything else. I ended up giving OFA a mort of money which they used as a matching grant for people all over the country. People who want to give money and see their money matched could write to me and let me know they’d done it. I got one of the funniest angry letters of all time telling me that two people had donated a bunch of money, to be matched by mine and they were using the opportunity to write to me personally in case I knew someone in the Obama admin. Could I tell them to get a fucking move on and start talking directly to the common people and also please fire Geithner.
I wrote back and said that this was basically the very conversation I’d had with the DNC before I gave the money to OFA. Whatever these assholes do they need to do it hard, fast, and loud before the midterms. They simply have got to figure out how to communicate to their voters and stop pissing and moaning about how much they’ve already done for us. Its not enough. OK? Its not enough to get people off their couches and out of the cars they are living in. Some things are enough, and some aren’t. Oh, baby, you never had it so good isn’t going to cut it in order to motivate people.
Still, here’s hoping.
aimai
Punchy
Marshall also wont stop the 24/7 O’Donnell clownfest. Sometimes his myopia is grimmace-inducing.
He is likewise shocked that CT might go R. I’m telling ya, from where I live (flyover state), it’s gunna be all R in every contest. They’re going to win damn near every matchup nationwide. Peeps are pissed at Democrats.
Restrung
Not true. Everything over 200/250 gets taxed a little more.
BTD
I think you could not be more wrong.
This is an issue being debated rght before the election. It counts for a lot more politically than the unpopular health bill and the inadequate stimulus.
It gives the Dems a message that voters may take to – as opposed to the “greatest legislative accomplishments: line that is an unmitigated political failure, whatever the truthfulness of the claim (I am in the not true camp.)
WereBear
I think it’s a miniature of the current situation, and this drum should be banged loudly and often.
Resident Firebagger
Wait, what have the Democrats accomplished again?
uila
[long rant about widening income inequality, democrats increasingly in thrall to Big Money, unsustainable for a healthy democracy, throw me a frickin bone, etc etc]
keestadoll
I’ve been hearing a lot of buzz on the definition of “rich” in this issue. I was wondering about the benchmark of $250K…Would the weak-knee’d be moved in a substantial way if, say, that benchmark was changed to $500K? In other words, would enough of the constituents of those on the fence in Congress be lulled by moving that benchmark?
Speculating…
Napoleon
Maybe, but you just don’t quit campaigning for a November election in September and the 2 best things Dems could push in no particular order is 1) the Rep. are crazy and 2) they do nothing but carry water for the rich and don’t give a f— about you.
The tax vote is the perfect issue to highlight number 2.
joe from Lowell
Just to be clear, it’s not true that Democrats are opposed to extending tax cuts for rich people. Their plan extends tax cuts on income up to $250,000. People earning a quarter million dollars or more get a larger tax cut extended than people earning $50,000.
The debate is whether people earning more than $250,000 should get even more of a tax cut extension.
The Republic of Stupidity
There seems to be a bit of a disconnect in a lot of the rhetoric I’m hearing these days…
On one hand, the Teabaggers keep shrieking about too much government! too much government! too much government! as though that is the cause of all their miseries…
And now I’m hearing they’re going to toss the Dems out of office because…
***drumroll…***
Government ISN’T doing enough to get them back to work…
And I thought Glibertarians always trusted the ‘invisible hand of the market’ to fix everything…
John S.
Sorry, mistermix, but I think you are way off on this one.
America is the Saudi Arabia of shiny objects. The only way to Draw their focus off a shiny object is to present an even shinier object. That legislative record the Democrats have means bubkis to the average Joe, because it is full of seemingly intangible, long-term objectives. Americans want something NOW they can wrap their head around, and tax cuts is the perfect shiny object.
Heading into the election, if people are thinking that Democrats tried to cut their taxes, but Republicans are against it, that’s a real game changer. Especially if people think that Republicans ONLY want tax cuts for the rich. That’s a real winner for Democrats, and happens to be true. If it wasn’t electoral gold for the Democrats, the GOP wouldn’t be so freaked out about the prospect of it happening.
4tehlulz
@Resident Firebagger: Nothing that can fit on a bumper sticker. Go back to sleep.
TooManyJens
The real constituents of those on the fence in Congress are making well north of $500K. They’d just have to come up with a slightly richer Todd Henderson to be their public face. There probably should be more brackets, though.
TR
The blogosphere tends to forget that 95% of the country simply doesn’t pay as much attention to politics as people here do.
For the past two years, they’ve been dimly aware of background noise about health care and the stimulus and TARP and all these things that they’re either not sure of, or scared about.
But a tax cut is something everyone understands, or at least thinks they understand. The numbers can’t be fudged — they know their income, they know whether they’ll benefit or not, and they’ll vote accordingly.
In a world of what’s-in-it-for-me complaining, this is clearly something that would benefit them. And if you don’t think putting cash in people’s pockets wouldn’t impact their votes in a much, much more meaningful way than anything else Congress has done in the past two years, then you haven’t been paying attention to the last four decades in American politics.
There’s a reason the Republicans always campaign on cutting taxes. It gets votes and it wins elections. I can’t believe Democrats are too stupid to realize that.
John S.
@Joe from Lowell:
The problem is in the description, not the figures. The Obama tax cut should be described as a tax cut for EVERY American on their first $250k of income.
That’s all that needs to be done to make the point (and the truth) sink in. As an ad man, nothing infuriates me more about Democrats than their shitty messaging.
TR
@John S.:
Agreed. Obama at least gets this — he said as much in his CNBC town hall.
Rhoda
This is a big deal vote. It clarifys in a simple way all that is fucked up with Republicans and puts the anger on them.
It’s a good vote to pound them with and makes for a simple ad. If they take the vote it’s win-win-win. It’s fucking insane when they can’t even do the easy shit. Honest to God I can’t imagine how ANY kind of health care bill passed watching this tax thing get put together.
Hawes
I think Marshall’s point is less about this being a game-changer if the Dems pass it, so much as a game-changer if they fail.
This is such a political no-brainer: good policy and good politics and has such an ability to re-focus people on what they hated about GOP rule, that they should be coasting to this vote.
The fact that they aren’t – because they are afraid – suggests a level of fearfulness AFTER the election that will be awful to behold in its bedwetting tremulousness.
WyldPirate
I think you nailed it mistermix.
There are a shitload of people catching on to the fact that the middle class is dead, kaput and finito.
The US economy has been running on smoke and mirrors since 1980 at least when Ronnie Raygun killed the flight controllers union. That is the point when median wage growth became decoupled from growth in GDP. Thus, that’s the point when the rich began taking ever larger portions of total earnings.
the middle class has hung in there by taking multiple jobs, both spouses working, squeezing every dime of equity out of their home and amassing huge amounts of consumer debt. Now, all of the blood has been squeezed from the turnip.
There is a great graph floating around somewhere on the intertoobz that illustrates this. I can’t find it now, but wish I could
homerhk
small but important point – there is a recovery, it’s real and it has resulted in more jobs. It’s just not fast enough. Go look at Steve Benen or Ezra Klein’s charts of jobs lost before the Obama policies went into effect and jobs lost thereafter.
The recession lasted for almost as long as Obama has been President. A question: has ANY recovery post recession meant that the economy reached the position it was in before the recession within 18 months? Obama tried to tell everyone it was going to be long – I realise that that is cold comfort for people who are unemployed but them’s the facts.
And don’t come back to me with the stimulus was too small. I, for one, fail to see how an additional $400 or $500 bn could have helped when (a) not all the stimulus money has been spent in any event, (b) rightly or wrongly the country appears to be concerned with the deficit, and (c) the total amount of money injected into the economy was well well above the $800 bn figure of the stimulus.
TJ
If the “voters” stubbornly refuse to be “impressed” by your “accomplishments” the “politicians” are reduced to “symbolism”.
Steve
I think Democrats vastly overestimate the importance of taxes as a voting issue. Sure, there are people who are single-issue voters on taxes – and you’re probably not going to talk them out of voting for the no-new-taxes-ever party with a single vote.
This is particularly true under the present circumstances, where nobody is getting a tax cut no matter what. At best, middle-class folks are going to pay the same tax rates as they did last year. That is the reality as far as voters are concerned. All the rhetoric about how the tax cuts were going to expire before the Democrats extended them and how these are the awesome new “Obama tax cuts” won’t change the fact that people will be paying the same tax rate as last year. It’s not a game changer to campaign on “we didn’t raise your taxes!”
p.a.
I think J M is interpreting this issue as being potentially the only bullet in the Dem’s gun, since they haven’t done
muchanything to fire up the electorate with any of their accomplishments; it’s almost like they are embarrassed by their achievements and have ceded the playing field.Of course, being Dems, they’ll probably spin the cylinder and point the gun at their own heads.
homerhk
One further point: the economy before the recession was an illusion. It was built on sand and over inflated housing prices. So, it’s not just a question of recovery – it’s a question of recovery on a new and more secure foundation of the economy – which is why investments in education, infrastructure, green energy, healthcare etc are all absolutely vital as the foundations of the new economy. That was the point of the stimulus bill, that was the point of the healthcare bill and that was the point of wall street reform and the consumer agency.
Mike E
@TR:
And when Democrats actually cut taxes, Republicans portray this as “score-settling” and class warmongering. Rove is a fucking genius with this hit ’em where they’re strong shit. Plus, the media are a wholly owned subsidiary of the GOP. Dem message FAIL right out of the gate.
cleek
this really is a no-brainer. the Dems are in perfect scoring position – just tap the ball and it goes in. the goalie is flat on his back and the rest of the GOP team is busy waving to the crowd. but instead of walking up and taking the shot, the Dems are debating about what to do if the GOP fans start booing.
worthless passel of cowards.
joe from Lowell
@John S.:
I wonder, though, since the Democrats are running on this as “Republicans want to give tax cuts to the rich,” wouldn’t framing the Democratic bill in that manner undercut that message?
TR
@Steve:
Look at Gallup on this.
First, the economy is far and away the top issue for voters in this election, with 33% mentioning it as their top issue, and job creation coming in second, with 28%. That’s a full 61% selecting some aspect of the economic picture as their top concern for the election.
Obviously, cutting taxes isn’t the solution to longterm economic growth (and indeed, I’d argue, tax cuts would be part of the problem).
But if people are worried about the economy, they’re not thinking in macro terms, they’re thinking in terms of their own personal finances. They will pay attention to this issue, and they will vote on it.
Brandon
I stopped reading Marshall and TPM right after he decided that he wanted to be one of the Serious People and endorsed the war after a year of cozying up to Marshall Whitman. He’s a Villager wannabee. I have no time for that nonsense.
El Cid
As to whether or not such a vote would be of political assistance to Democrats, I’d think there are very, very good arguments that it would.
But let’s say we leave that question momentarily not settled.
I don’t think that most I’ve heard debating this particular issue vote as a campaign issue suggest that it would reverse the major trends of a Democratic setback.
However, if you think that (a) the move would be politically helpful to Democratic turnout and/or campaign issues, and (b) even marginal improvements to those might matter, then it’s worthwhile.
If you assume that such a maneuver (if you assume it would help at all) wouldn’t stop the Democrats from losing a tremendous number of House and Senate seats, yet might help the loss of even one or two of those, or more, as well as being much better policy, then it would make sense to do.
It’s not like something wouldn’t be worth doing if it only helps out a little. A little improvement, or a series of little improvements, are desperately needed right now.
(Again, I’m leaving out there the debate on whether or not it’d be politically helpful. I think it would, but that’s just on my basic feel of it.)
TR
@Mike E:
I think Rove’s genius is overrated, but that’s a fair point.
But I don’t think the answer to Rove hitting us where we’re strong is to make sure we’re weak.
The House Republicans are squealing over this, demanding an all-or-nothing vote that preserves all the Bush tax cuts, precisely because they know — and I’m sure Rove has told them — that this will be a huge political loser for the GOP if the Democrats can push through the middle-class tax cuts and leave the GOP out there campaigning alone for the rich.
The polls are ALL on the Democrats’ side on this. It baffles me why they’re not running full speed ahead — and why we’re not all urging them to do so.
SteveinSC
Ditto to all who say Mistermix is wrong on this one. A big part of the GOP talking points about huge deficits is because of the give-away’s to the rich over the past decade. The average Joe knows this and if he’s pissed at the Dems, he’s more liable to be motivated by “make the rich give back some” than complex bull shit about why its important to give away gobs of money to piratical banks. Class warfare, you betcha! ‘Cause that’s what the fuck it is.
artem1s
I doubt that passing one more bill, or a hundred more bills, will move
those who are angry about the economy andthe batshit crazies who are resolved to vote against the party in power.fixt
ppcli
@John S.: I couldn’t agree with you more, and I’m no ad man. The Republicans fix on a selling points and advantageous phrases and then drive it home relentlessly. “Death Tax”, “partial – birth abortion”,…
First of all, what’s with this “extending the Bush tax cuts”? The expiration date was built in to the original legislation. It had to be, or they couldn’t use reconciliation to pass it. Fine, so we are not “extending the Bush tax cuts”, we are deciding if we should cancel the “Bush tax increases”. If the Republican playbook was being used, every Repub mouthpiece would be instructed to use the phrase “Bush tax increases” at least 10 times each time he/she appeared on TV. They would do it without exception. Four weeks later, “even the Liberal” New York Times would be using the phrase “Bush tax increases” without quotation marks.
Moses2317
MIstermix – I have to disagree with you on this one. Yes, we need to do more to make sure the economy fully recovers from the Bush Recession. But a vote on tax cuts for income under $250k is a great opportunity to illustrate clearly the differences between the parties. The Democrats are working to benefit the vast majority of individuals and small businesses who make less than $250k per year. The Republicans are trying to hold that effort hostage in order to provide an average of $103,000 per year to the top 2%, and also want to permanently eliminate the estate tax, which is paid by 0.3% of estates.
If Democrats win this fight, then they have another victory (some would even say accomplishment) to take to the American public, which counteracts the false impression that we haven’t achieved much and are not fighting for average Americans. If Republicans manage to filibuster it to death, we have a high-stakes and popular issue on which to paint them as being beholden to the wealthy elite at the expense of everyone else. Either way, it is a win for us.
Winning Progressive
Steve
@TR:
That does not say to me, in any way, that taxes are going to be a huge issue in this election – or any other. You think saying “I want the economy to improve” is code for “I want my taxes to go down by a couple percent”?
It’s possible that a tax increase, under the present circumstances, could be the final nail in the D coffin. But I don’t think it follows that millions of voters are eager and willing to pull the D lever just as soon as they get a minor tax cut – or, to be more accurate, just as soon as they find out next year’s taxes will be the same as this year’s.
Republicans have such a strong brand on the tax issue that Democrats wouldn’t be able to get elected to dogcatcher if taxes had the across-the-board salience you ascribe to them.
jwb
The weird thing about this issue is that the goopers are so clearly panicked by the very thought of this vote going forward. The fear is palpable. I think the Dem strategists and leaders see this as well, which is why they are trying to move forward on the issue. What I don’t quite get is that group of Dems who evidently can’t see this as the winning hand that it so clearly is. Well, actually, I’m pretty sure it’s the stupid, whiny donor class that’s at issue, but still…
ppcli
@joe from Lowell:
I don’t see that as a problem. Democrats say “We wanted to give everyone a tax cut, the Republicans tried to stop us because they wouldn’t let us give everyone a tax cut unless we gave the rich an EVEN BIGGER cut.” Maybe needs some rewriting to make it soundbite-sized, but it sounds to me like the makings of a body blow.
John S.
@Joe from Lowell:
I don’t think it really steps on the message at all. Here would be my gameplan:
1) Frame the OBAMA tax cuts as being for EVERYONE on the first $250k they make.
2) Introduce a bill for #1 as a single item.
3) Introduce a separate bill for BUSH/REPUBLICAN tax cuts on any income Americans make above $250k.
4) Make popcorn.
Nothing would make it clearer to the public that “Republicans want to give tax cuts to ONLY the rich”. Whereas Democrats want to give a tax cut to EVERYONE. Get it?
bkny
uh, actually, many of those democrats are running from those ‘accomplishments.’
John S.
@mistermix:
Dude, way to double down on being wrong. Last time I checked, 54 percent to 44 percent was a clear 10 point margin in the WIN column.
44 percent is not a majority.
Napoleon
@TR:
I actually think he is a terrible stratagist. His ass was saved from his stupid mistakes in 2000 by the SC and in 2004 won with the narrowest margin an incumbant has won by (and to boot with a war going on so he should have been able to take advantage of a rally round the flag effect).
John S.
@ppcli:
I couldn’t agree more with you about the framing. See my comment above.
Mike E
@TR: There’s something to be said about the beauty of a ruthless two-handed spade shot to the skull, something the Repugs have mastered but the Dems can’t lower themselves to execute properly. This is war. Repugs are shameless in this realization, and Dems could win whole legions of fans if they get on a similar footing. As for myself, I’d come buckets if my former party would go medieval on their asses, instead of their current trajectory of becoming Repub Lite.
mistermix
@John S.: My point is that the way Marshall is talking about this, you’d think this is such a no-brainer, but it isn’t. “Clear-cut win” would be at least 60/40 territory.
Maybe there’s no such issue, and this is the best Democrats can do, but even so, is it worth the time and attention TPM is giving it?
@everyone: I agree with those saying that this should be framed as a tax cut for everyone, on the first 250K you make. That said, the electorate is used to tax cuts, they’ve had plenty of them, and I can’t see that another is going to turn the tide that’s currently running against the Democrats.
Zifnab
@TR:
The problem I’m having at this point is that if you are making less than $250k, you’ve got Democrats who will let you keep your tax cuts and you’ve got Republicans who will let you keep your tax cuts. So from where I’m sitting, it’s something of a push.
The Republicans can vote for the extra $700 billion in tax cuts for the wealthy, but because they don’t have to adhere to PAYGO (because tax cuts are always free!) no one sees this $700 billion as money not spent on stimulus or national security or jobs or education or health care.
If the Democrats want to ram home what the Republicans are actually trying to do, they need to poison the Rich People Tax Cuts by forcing Republicans to actually cut something out of the budget. Perhaps tie the bill to immigration reform and threaten to gut the INS. Or tie the bill to military spending and cut huge chunks of the defense budget if the Rich Guy Tax Cuts pass. Tie to to aid to Israel. Tie it to the F-35. Tie it to farm subsidies.
Then, if any Republican is stupid enough to vote for it, you can run ads all day against the bastard, saying how the Republicans think tax cuts are more important that national security. And if Republicans vote against it, you can mock them by claiming “Even the Republicans won’t vote for these tax cuts, they’re so bad”.
Make that second vote hurt.
Dave
The tax cut move is a good one because of its simplicity. Which says volumes about the limited attention span and intelligence of the American electorate as a whole. But it’s easy to understand and benefits the vast majority of voters. As a bonus, it has a whiff of class warfare (deserved or not) that people like to indulge in when times are hard economically.
This is where the GOP has worked themselves into a corner. Unable to compromise or negotiate on anything lest their Tea Party base boot them out, they are easily outmaneuvered on these kinds of issues. It only remains for the Democrats to not fuck it up. Which is, sadly, not an impossibility.
ppcli
@Dave:
It only remains for the Democrats to not fuck it up. Which is, sadly,
not an impossibility.a certainty. (Fixed)mr. whipple
Wasn’t there some polling on the first Obama tax cut, and like only 5% or some other insane number knew their taxes were cut, and the rest thought they stayed the same or went up?
TR
@mr. whipple:
Entirely different scenarios — that one was largely geared to a relaxation in payroll tax cuts, while this is an income tax cut that everyone understands.
This isn’t the magic bullet, but it points out a stark contrast between the party and could easily sway independents who’ll be key in swing districts.
And as someone else noted, the consequences of not doing anything will be huge — the GOP and their media enablers will paint this as “your taxes are going up on the Democrats’ watch” and run like hell on it.
mcd410x
@TR:
They’ll do this no matter what the Democrats do. Which is what paralyzes the Democrats. It’s Pavlovian.
mr. whipple
I agree with ya there. They’ll probably say it either way.
hilzoy
mistermix: I could be getting this all wrong — there’s only the Politico story TPM linked to to go on — but what they’re describing isn’t about whether or not the Democrats schedule a vote that forces the Republicans to vote against renewing tax cuts for people under $250k. (The political move.)
They’re talking about the possibility that the Democrats could adjourn without doing anything on taxes. Doing nothing means that unless they pass a bill in their lame duck session, all the Bush tax cuts expire.
Now, we could debate the merits of this (I favor a temporary cut for people under 250k.) But Republicans have already started referring to letting the Bush tax cuts expire as a “tax increase”. Letting the tax cuts expire for people making over 250k is “raising their taxes”. Etc. Letting the tax cuts expire for everyone would absolutely be described as “raising everyone’s taxes”, and Democrats would be left trying to defend the distinction between raising taxes and letting tax cuts expire. Not what I’d want to stake my political life on.
“Raising everyone’s taxes” would hand the GOP the mother of all issues on a silver platter. I cannot imagine why they are so much as thinking of this. Which is why I really hope Politico is completely wrong, and have a hard time believing that even the Democrats will do this.
TR
How so?
The AP cut those numbers one way, showing that a clear plurality of 54% favors Obama’s approach.
But you can just as easily cut the number the other way, combining those who want just the under $250K cut and those who want the $250K cut and the over $250K cut, and you have 83% who want to see taxes cut for those under $250K in some form.
I trust Stan Greenberg more than the AP, and his take on this is that it’s a clearcut win for the Democrats:
TR
@mcd410x:
Sure. But it’d be nice to make sure our candidates and the saner voices in the press can be able to point out that this is a lie, rather than rolling over and making it a guarantee.
mistermix
@hilzoy:
Yikes. I agree that this is a serious problem.
John S.
@mistermix:
I see. I get what you are saying now, but I think we’re talking about two different things. It may not be a clear cut POLICY win, but it sure as hell is a clear cut POLITICAL win. I think on a lot of topics, there is a lot of confusion over the difference between these two goals. Sometimes they happen to coincide, but often, they do not.
That said, it absolutely is worth the time TPM is spending on it, especially if the House decides to fuck off at the end of the week without doing ANYTHING.
kindness
Sometimes more than others doing what is right is what is important. Whether it gets any votes in November is besides the point.
Can’t you see the value in it beyond election results or is that the only metric anything is valued by now?
Nick
While we’re all sitting here huffing and puffing about how the Democrats will screw this up/are screwing this up/are cowards, are the President, Speaker and dozens of Democrats not out there actually MAKING the case for ending the tax cuts for the rich? Why are we ignoring them?
John S.
Yeah, which makes a lot of sense if Obama and Democrats are out there saying “we want to lower EVERYONE’s taxes”. The problem is, they aren’t saying that, and this over/under framing completely fucking blows. It’s too complicated for the average American and certainly for the brain-dead media.
The OBAMA tax cuts are for EVERYONE on the first $250k they make. Period. Let’s all say it together.
Nick
@kindness:
The problem is, elections have consequences, especially for Democrats, and doing all the good in the world doesn’t mean a damn thing if you lose an election and it all gets rolled back or compromised anyway.
So election results have to be in the back of your mind when you legislate.
jimBOB
Dems should definitely go ahead on this, but it’s going to operate mostly on the margins. This election is, and was always going to be, about 10% unemployment.
Hint for junior political watchers: If the unemployment rate is in or close to double digits, all elections will be a referendum on unemployment. And whoever is in power will get their butt kicked.
The time to do anything about this was a year and a half ago. Failure to pass an adequate stimulus then is why we are here now. The rest is just hand waving and shouting.
(Yeah, I’ve heard all about how it was politically impossible to pass a bigger stimulus. Maybe so. But there’s a direct line between there and here, and the fact that the economy wasn’t dealt with on a sufficient scale then is nearly all you need to know about the coming midterm losses.)
Nick
@John S.:
Because the framing of “we want to lower EVERYONE’s taxes” leads people to think of the Republicans’ plan, to extend the cuts already.
I had this argument with someone the other day, and I tried to explain that even if you make a million dollars, the first $250k will get a tax cut, and this dude just stared at me like I was speaking Urdu.
Steve
@TR:
While I don’t question Greenberg’s findings, isn’t it ironic that the Democrats “show seriousness on the deficit” by passing a tax cut that increases the deficit by $3.2 trillion over the next 10 years. The Republicans want to increase it by $3.9 trillion, you see, which shows how much (not very) worse they are.
It’s a reminder that elections do not really occur in a reality-based place.
Zifnab
@jimBOB:
The Democrats simply aren’t willing to embrace hardball politics. Partly because even the most liberal Senators like Schumer and Kerry bend an ear to the big banks in their states. Partly because they’re feckless cowards.
But when the stimulus was under debate, you had nearly a trillion on the table. Winning over that 60th vote involved giving up over two hundred billion in concessions. 20% of the stimulus was axed (and not a penny out of the AMT fix) because the Democrats were more worried about getting money out the door that instant than playing politics and forcing Republican Senators to actively filibuster legislation.
Would a month sans stimulus really have been so bad, if it compelled panicking bankers and business owners to start screaming at their Republican reps to do something? Under similar panicky circumstances, Republicans choked out the PATRIOT Act and the AUMF against Iraq.
TR
@Steve:
Oh, for sure.
Allison W.
@Nick:
Yes, they are. you see, its not only the media that ignores Dems.
Nick
@jimBOB: Yes, we know this, the election is about unemployment and there was nothing we could have done to prevent it from being about unemployment.
And even if it wasn’t about unemployment, it would be about the next issue on everyone’s list…the deficit, which, if we had tackled unemployment would be astronomical.
hilzoy
Rumor has it the Democrats will not adjourn without doing anything on taxes.
Allison W.
@Zifnab:
They would have been screaming for more tax cuts. I don’t think the stimulus needed more tax cuts.
valdivia
so I am totally excited cause I finally get to go to an event with president Obama! Yay! There is a big kick off for the campaign here in DC on Thurs the 30th at DAR Const. Hall and I just got invited. Sooo excited.
/total obot, still.
Davis X. Machina
@Mike E: Entirely too many Democrats believe that being in power by itself, or holding office by itself, is corrupting, to the extent that they’re uncomfortable actually being in power or holding office, or doing what feels like acting as accomplices to those who do.
And no spades get swung as a result.
That they’ve been encouraged in this view by long experience with the Republicans, and not a few Democrats, who when in power, or in office, turn out to be corrupt, is an explanation. It’s not an affirmative defense.
The next march on Washington should be the Million Hamlet March.
Drive By Wisdom
Obama tries to buy four cheesesteaks with a $1. Really.
I guess that is at least some inflation over what Capone had to pay.
Bulworth
Yeah, I don’t give a shit either. Also, too.
BTD
Your update is silly. Nothing the Dems have done, or otherwise are proposing to do, gets 54% approval.
This is as big a win on an issue as the Dems have.
James E. Powell
@TR:
For the past two years, they’ve been dimly aware of background noise about health care and the stimulus and TARP and all these things that they’re either not sure of, or scared about.
Exactly. And because the Democrats did not aggressively mix it up when the Republicans were generating that background noise, the great mass of low-information voters who might be inclined to vote Democratic have no idea what Obama and the Democrats have actually done, they’ve only heard it’s bad.
Nick
@BTD:
Today they will attempt to put in place a repeal of DADT, that gets more than 54% approval.
BTD
@Nick:
You have a link to support that assertion?
hilzoy
Not going to happen.
BTD
@BTD:
Never mind – you are right. In fact, it is as high as 78%.
BDeevDad
Obama says it succinctly at the end of this talk with a hedge fund manager. To paraphrase:
jimBOB
@Zifnab:
Which probably says something good about their character, but something bad about their political judgment.
Maybe getting pasted this time around will cause enough trauma to convince the remaining ones to play the game as ruthlessly as the goopers do? Naw, silly me! I’ve been waiting for that to happen these past 30 years, and it never does.
Nick
@jimBOB:
Which proves my point, this country has no character
Look, I like that the Democrats are open to bringing all ideas together to find common ground. I also think the public admires that too, but
This from the same country that whines about partisanship and not getting shit done. Democrats though, are adults, they favor leaders who make compromises 54%-39% over those who stick to their position.
http://congressionalconnection.nationaljournal.com/2010/09/americans-want-their-leaders-t.php
What was that about the Democratic base?
TR
More polling evidence that this is a huge winning issue for Democrats.
Cain
@Punchy:
What are they pissed about? Economy? I’d like to ask these R voters how tax cuts for the rich and even more tax cuts for the rich is going to help them struggle through this economy?
cain
liberal
@jimBOB:
How is attempting to compromise and cooperate with a bunch of thugs willing to do neither a sign of a good character?
liberal
@TR:
As Krugman said,