OK, so Obama caved. We knew he would. He’s that type of president…. unfortunately.
I go back to my continuing meme of the Republican party living in some sort of opposite world, where up is down, in is out and right is always wrong (though they wouldn’t agree with that last one). The party who’s been screaming about the deficit did everything they could to make sure the Bush tax cuts for the uber-rich in this country were extended… and to pay for those continue cuts they’re willing to borrow from China, Russian and anyone else who’ll lend the money. Can someone please explain to me how that makes sense?
President Obama, while trying to rationalize going back on yet another campaign promise, said that some of us just want to continue fighting. He has it wrong. It’s not about fighting. It’s about standing on principle and not giving in when the other side is so clearly wrong! We understand compromise… but not giving up without a even trying. If he really wanted to send a signal to Congress that he was serious, he would have said he’d veto anything that extended tax cuts on income over $250,000. But he didn’t.
Yes, there are some good things in this deal. Unfortunately, President Obama’s lack of leadership is overshadowing them.
Ezra Klein did a good job of pointing out the give and take in this morning’s Wonkbook…
I’ll admit it: I didn’t think they had it in them. A temporary extension of the Bush tax cuts? Sure, they could manage that. Fear is a powerful motivator in Washington, and nothing scares politicians like the threat of a tax hike on their constituents. But an actual, negotiated deal, in which the two parties sit in a room and give things up, and compromise on positions they’d taken in public, and walk out with a deal that accomplishes more than was strictly necessary? I didn’t see that one coming.
The deal has something to annoy everyone — but also something for everyone. You’re a Democrat? The tax cuts for the rich are extended, and the estate tax deal exempts inheritances up to $5 million while cutting the rate heirs pay to 35 percent. But that’s why the Republicans like it. You’re a Republican? The tax cuts are only extended for two years, and they’re paired with 13 months of unemployment insurance, an extension of a variety of tax credits passed in the stimulus, and a new payroll tax cut — all of them deficit-financed. But that’s why the Democrats like it. You’re a deficit hawk? The deal adds more than $700 billion to the deficit. And, let’s be honest, you got nothing in return.
It’s important, however, to keep the actual policy in perspective. If you’re a Republican who argues that long-term uncertainty about tax rates and the deficit are the main problem for the economy, this deal only eases tax uncertainty for two years and it makes the deficit worse. If you’re a Democrat looking for more stimulus, this isn’t nearly enough, and most of what’s there is just an extension of programs that are currently in place. In reality, the politics of the compromise might mean more to the market than the specifics of the policy: The two parties actually have the ability to sit in a room and come to a compromise. That has implications far beyond yesterday’s tax cut deal. It suggests that we may see more get done in the next two years than many of us thought, and there’ll be more capacity to respond to crises than some feared.
So, what happens next? Well, Senator Bernie Sanders went on The Ed Show last night on MSNBC and said he’d put up a fight!
That’s a start. And the very motivated people at the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC) aren’t going to take this lying down. If you want to help fight this deal, go to www.boldprogressives.org and sign up. PCCC’s Senior Online Campaign Director Jason Rosenbaum will join me on the show this morning with their response.
I’ll also talk with blogger Susie Madrak who was on a conference call with the White House last night. Though no Obama apologist, Susie points out that there is some good in the deal.
And she’s not alone in thinking that way.
Of course, as it’s Tuesday, Gotta Laff of ThePoliticalCarnival.net will join me in the second hour of today’s show to talk about all the craziness in the news, and share her latest Blunt video too…
Here are some of the stories we’ll discuss:
President Obama announces deal to extend tax cuts transcript
77% of likely voters found paying down deficits reason to end tax cuts
Ezra Klein: Can the White House win in 2012 by losing on the Bush tax cuts now?
“My advice to Obama now might be: ‘Give ‘em hell, Barry.’”
Frank Rich: Stockholm Syndrome and President Obama
Joe Lieberman wants Senate to stay in session until it repeals DADT
Thanks for sharing this Jon.. to be continued~!
I’m tired of fighting progressive fights and losing like for Marcy Winograd, David Segal (at least a Dem won the general election in RI CD1) and Ann Kuster. And not getting as much money for electricity and transportation fuel source transition (oil, coal and natural gas to solar, wind, hemp, cooking oil biodiesel) If I take the time to speak out I want to have a high chance of winning.
Here is my take on the tax cut caving compromise and the text of Peter Welch’s letter PCCC is organizing to get signers of.
tax cut extended to progressives’ Obama-abandoning disgust
House must pass a bill with cuts for over $250K earners for Dec 6, 2010 compromise to take effect. It wasn’t in the bill they did pass week of Nov 29-Dec 3.
Turn to the language in defeated Prop 23 on 2010 California ballot that would have suspended the global warming solutions act until unemployment dropped to 5.5%. House extends, for 2 years, tax cuts for middle class including the unappreciated (because no check sent out like W Bush’s) withholding tax cuts Obama passed in ARRA (stimulus bill) and gets unemployment insurance extended at compromise of cuts for over $250k in income.
But, House adds language that if unemployment not down to 8% by 2012 the cuts expire and unemployment insurance automatically extended to all recipients as of 2011, who are still recipients in 2012, until unemployment rate drops to 6 or 7%. Even if House can’t pass this language or Senate rejects it Democrats getting provisions into public discourse (helped by progressive netroots and what little progressive talk radio there is supplemented by internet) puts pressure on rich who get their cuts to use the money privately for the commons not on luxury items like bigger house furnishings, planes and boats.
http://www.welch.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1259:welch-to-white-house-dont-back-down-&catid=37:2010-press-releases&Itemid=77
Welch to White House: “Don’t Back Down”
Monday, 06 December 2010 18:44
As President Obama took to the airwaves Monday night to announce a deal to extend the Bush tax cuts, Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) called the plan “fiscally irresponsible” and “grossly unfair.”
In a letter to Speaker Pelosi that Welch circulated to his House colleagues Monday night, Welch wrote, “We support extending tax cuts in full to 98 percent of American taxpayers, as the President initially proposed. He should not back down. Nor should we.”
Welch will send the letter to Speaker Pelosi after gathering signatures from his colleagues on Tuesday. The full text of the letter is copied below.
Dear Madam Speaker,
We oppose acceding to Republican demands to extend the Bush tax cuts to millionaires and billionaires for two reasons.
First, it is fiscally irresponsible. Adding $700 billion to our national debt, as this proposal would do, handcuffs our ability to offer a balanced plan to achieve fiscal stability without a punishing effect on our current commitments, including Social Security and Medicare.
Second, it is grossly unfair. This proposal will hurt, not help, the majority of Americans in the middle class and those working hard to get there. Even as Republicans seek to add $700 billion to our national debt, they oppose extending unemployment benefits to workers and resist COLA increases to seniors.
Without a doubt, the very same people who support this addition to our debt will oppose raising the debt ceiling to pay for it.
We support extending tax cuts in full to 98 percent of American taxpayers, as the President initially proposed. He should not back down. Nor should we.
Sincerely,
PETER WELCH
Member of Congress