Obama strategists say he wants to get 80 or more votes in the 100-member Senate, and the emphasis on tax cuts is a way to defuse conservative criticism and enlist Republican support.
Look, Republicans are not going to come on board. Make 40% of the package tax cuts, they’ll demand 100%. Then they’ll start the thing about how you can’t cut taxes on people who don’t pay taxes (with only income taxes counting, of course) and demand that the plan focus on the affluent. Then they’ll demand cuts in corporate taxes. And Mitch McConnell is already saying that state and local governments should get loans, not aid — which would undermine that part of the plan, too.
For 30+ years, the conservative movement has insisted that tax cuts are always better economic policy than public spending. And despite the fact that such rigid ideology has proven bankrupt over and over and over again, it still confines American politics, as evidenced by a new Democratic president already appearing to embrace the right’s basic tax fallacies.
Sirota provides a chart by Economy.com’s Mark Zandi, a Republican. As Krugman has noted, the fastest way to get stimulus funds spent is to put them into unemployment insurance and food stamps. And those features may well be revealed as future parts of a stimulus plan, but it is sad that the first move here is to appease Republicans whose supply side crackpottery should by now be thoroughly discredited.
Katrina VandenHeuvel writes at The Nation about the Congressional Progressive Caucus’s proposed recovery plan:
It was just three months ago, after all, that Republicans successfully filibustered a stimulus that targeted unemployment insurance, food stamps and "shovel-ready" infrastructure projects–and that was only $56 billion.
The number of people living in extreme poverty increased 26% under Bush as of 2007. Making a commitment to help them is the right thing to do, and it’s long overdue — the Democrats abandoned them the last time around. Appeasing Republicans to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars in exchange for 80 votes just doesn’t seem quite as imperative.
Related posts:
- Ezra Klein Still Thinks the 2001 Bush Tax Cuts were a Victory for Centrists
- George Will Shills for Senatorial Candidate Who Blames Nation’s Economic Problems on “Poor People”
- ABC’s This Week with George Will, Cokie, Woodward Seeks Misinformation Record
- Unemployment Still Rising; Good Thing Collins, Snowe and Nelson Aren’t in Charge
- NYT Can’t Recall that Republicans Who Demand “Where Are the Jobs?” All Voted Against the Stimulus
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
If Obama can’t get through a progressive stimulus bill right now, when he has the highest approval ratings he’ll likely ever have, and a huge mandate, he’ll never be able to get it through.
Consensus above effectiveness is what the idiot 80% desire is about. This is amazingly, revoltingly, stupid and ideological (his ideology being “consensus matters above everything else, and any price is acceptable to get it.”)
Ian:
Is anyone telling him that this road is the way to Jimmy Carter Land? Is he allowing comments about this at change.gov?
Am I misremembering that we elected a Democrat in November? Why is Obama insisting on appeasing the Republicans? They are going to sh*t on him regardless. McCain might as well have won. At least then, this would make some sense. Jeez.
Yep, I’m beginning to see a pattern here. ya nailed it, Ian.
Thanks for the post, Jane. And No Lips Mitch is insane, as defined by when you do the same thing and expect a different result. stoopit.
One of the biggest misgivings I’ve always had about Obama is his reliance on the University of Chicago’s economic brain trust. This is the econmic school that Milton Friedman built, and his free-market approach to economics has been widely discredited. Unfortunately Obama’s economic team largely comes from that well, and it doesn’t seem like the best fount of knowledge.
Exactly…is this some kind of “we are all republicans now” sentiment after a dem victory in November? Bizarre.
I thought we were all Americans. Very different vibe than the GOP. Remember all the celebrity Republicans who left the party to support BO? Because they thought they were going to get something different than wingnuttery too.
Dugg
Also, you forgot the “c” in Republican. Although they don’t deserve it.
HERE’S what to do about the poor!
Absolutely correct.
Nothing further need be said. Reaching out to the GOP at this point – particularly when it comes to economic policy is self defeating. 51 votes or 81 votes are a red herring. Who cares?
A stimulus package that focuses on 90 percent of the population is needed – YESTERDAY. Get it done and screw the right wing nutjobs.
Now would be a good time for someone to out Mitch McConnell.
Obama’s solution to the economy and increasing poverty is to feed the poor to the Republican monster, eh? Republicans will smile fat and happy when Obama’s done and no more poor. A modest proposal from a post-partisan guy.
NelsonAlgren’s right that this is like JimmyCarterland, only worse.
Indeed. As Anton Chigurgh says to Carson Wells in the Coen Brother’s No Country for Old Men,
I guess all those people were right. Obama was a good candidate but we should have waited until he got more experience in the Senate. Maybe one more full term and he would have learned that you don’t need 80 votes to pass a bill – when you have a majority.
Obama sez: “I want as many votes as possible to be sure it’s veto proof. Oh wait……”
The Dem “leadership” in the Senate has to force Mitch and his boys to a vote and let them have to do their damn filibuster. Force them to take to the floor and defend there intransigence for hour after hour, one bufoon after another.
Memo to me: Ain’t gonna happen, no sir, not a chance…. change, what effin’ change?
while we’re looking at infrastructure improvements to stimulate the economy, what about bringing off-shore manufacturing and customer service and other business back from india, the philippines, etc.?
bringing outsourced jobs back to the US would go a VERY long way to restoring our productivity and would be a real stimulus.
Absolutely. You have hit the nail on the head. I fear obama’s DLC roots are showing.
Enough bitching — what do we DO about it?
(I suggest pushing the House. It seems progressives have more voices and better legislative leaders there.)
This is exactly the kind of thinking that put me off Obama in the first place. Status quo is the way to go.
Horrifying but not unexpected.
Besides wanting everyone to love him like Bill Clinton, why does the Obama team start negotiations by conceding every point the “loyal” opposition wants. Some brain trust. Four more years, Four more years! Blaaaaaaah
yeah. see what gets me about this is it’s about his whole way of governing; his whole way of going about things. If anyone thought he was a progressive’s dream they weren’t paying attention. But all I thought was, yeah, we’d disagree sometimes; he’d disappoint us sometimes on specific issues. But right from the start his entire approach is disappointing. We heard alot about “reaching out across the aisle” during the campaign. I figured, yeah. OK. If you need to do it, fine. But to do it in order to get unnecessary votes??? Who the hell needs 80 votes?
The only thing he’ll be getting from the R’s is derision.
My only hope for Obama is that he is giving the “hands across the political divide” the good old college try. Then he will say screw this and govern for the people. But I really sort of doubt it.
Only thing I can figure — well, not the only thing, but….. — is that he’s trying to build up enormous good will/popularity and they he can trade on that in the future and get through most of what he wants. Won’t work.
yup
NEW JANE UPSTAIRS!
That’s really my hope as well–that circumstances will force Obama to do the right thing for the people and the country after the “bipartisan” whoring fails utterly.
The people don’t count. Hell they don’t even exist in the minds of those in Washington. The only thing that counts there is what ever it is that the Corporate Masters want. On almost any issue compare what the people want and what the Corporate Masters want. The people ALWAYS lose. It’s government of, by, and for the Corporate Masters and screw what the people want.
Obama needs to shut the hell up and take 60 votes and do what he alledgedly wants to do.
Also to call out the pols that are obstructing.
Listening is fine, cowering is not. If he does keep this act up of looking for 80 votes then I know its all just an act and he is the same.
Change I can believe in ?????????
Sadly, he most likely is doing exactly what he wants to do.
The wanting everyone to love them is just an act. At least he is polishing his act for domestic and overseas consumption.
See if Clinton (or Obama or whoever) did not want “everyone” to love them they might have to actually do something about many terrible situations (however the “Terrible” situations are terribly terrific for some people).
The act will be quite strong in the first few months since that is when most people are watching. If they have Rhams way I am sure he will try to poision the well so progressives tune out and get disgusted (I do not think this will happen though since everyone is pumped from Obama telling them to do something (granted many will drop-off since the election is over)). I HOPE Obama does the right thing and drops the stupid games and provides real action and not an act.
And YellowSnapDragon.
Never thought he was a progressive, and I don’t have very high hopes (though my candidate turned out to suck anyway, and with Clinton you know you get since we already saw the first part of that dynasty).
My HOPE was that at least the guy is smart and hard working. Then that times were at a point where he really has to act for CHANGE.
I wonder if his buzz words from the camp trail will turn into funny historical irony as we go down the tubes with more of the same.
The way it is now with the people that are around him – he has zero progressives. So you would have to hope he has a secret plan (to get us out of Viet… I mean Iraq) to surround himself with DLC and NeoCon-Left but get back room advice from Progressives so he knows where his top-level advisors are coming from and Obama is the progressive (that he has surround himself with devil’s advocate and he is the only angels advocate)….hahahah.
Jane: Also the poor and low income workers are paying far more of their income in taxes than the rich. Please see here: http://www.itepnet.org/wp2kst.htmwhere. I got this information from my Church Council’s “Tax Fairness Workshop.” These studies have shown that no matter how revenue is raised across the nation by state (whether property taxes, income taxes or sales tax), the poor pay the most ~ sometimes up to 700% more of their incomes in comparison to wealthier people. As a matter of fact, Merrill Lynch, who just got 25 BILLION DOLLARS and do not think they even have to tell us how they spent it, HAVE NOT PAID ONE CENT OF TAXES IN ALMOST A DECADE.
Yet the perks and benefits continue to pour into the upper income’s coffers who by far use most of our infrastructure and get more breaks than the poor ever could ~ without having to answer for it as the poor has to for every dime.
IMO, we should talk about a “tax shift” to the ones who can afford it, which would not be a tax hike, only shifting it to the ones who could afford it, if one wanted to use the “Don’t Think Of An Elephant” framing that Dr Lakoff suggests …
Cat In Seattle
Thanks Jane!
We’ve tried the Republican Tax Cuts for the past 8 years, remember… Trickle Down economics don’t work! If the Democrats can’t stand up and vote for their constituents we can grass roots replace all of them in the House in 2 years. Maybe if Nancy, Stenny and the gang can’t win a vote in their protected gerrymandered cloisters that will convince them we want a Democracy not an Oligarchy.
The best anti-depression policy would be a permanent increase in the share of GDP going to non-defense government expenditures, mainly targeted on children (schools, food stamps, higher education, health), where the bang for the buck both now and in a more distant future is greatest. The unstated consensus in Washington is that anything that enlarges the government sector other than defense is ‘bad’. Why this is so, escapes me, and I’m a good professional economist, but that’s the it is.
At the very least, a balanced increase in taxes and expenditures yields a multiplier of ‘1′, which is to say you get exactly a buck’s worth of aggregate demand for a buck’s worth of extra spending paid for by taxes. We don’t need more flat screen teevees. But the people who supply them and the other crap that people dumb enough to watch television are exposed to would like to sell as much of them as they can. It’s their income.
Let me give a more generous interpretation of Obama’s position. The economy is sinking faster than a stone dropped from a helicopter. The rethugs don’t give a shit, because apart from those who put their money with Bernie Madoff, they are doing well enough to survive the crash. They are perfectly capable of holding up any bill in the Senate for six weeks. We don’t have six weeks. People are going to be laid off in droves in January, and it will get worse in February and March. So Obama has to trade off speed for anti-depression efficiency. It’s a tough call. That’s why we have a President, to make it.
Aren’t we already there? Except for the funny part.
My hope is that circumstances force Obama to change, actually. If he really means well, then the potential is there to do the right thing to stave off total destruction of the economy.
Could there be a better reason for doing away with the filibuster and enacting real solutions to the recession/depression, financial meltdown and housing crisis?
I could accept that if it were the case, but I doubt even McConnell thinks he could hold the Republicans in a filibuster like that.
Obama wants 80 votes, and this is the way to get them. I think that’s clearly the objective.
Many in D.C. are still trying to make a silk purse out of a sows ear. Whatever tax cut Obama may wish to have or ends up with will make little difference to the struggling middle class and the reason is quite clear. What the Federal government giveth, the state and local governments will taketh away. A $500 per tax reduction on income nets an employe getting paid bi-weelky on average $19 dollars. My property taxes this year on a modest $215,00 home in New York went up $380 this January and now Governor Patterson is talking about ending or putting on hold the states Star Program. There is also talk of hiking the gas tax as well as other fees. So when you come right down to it, it may be given to you in one pocket, but have no fear that some other government entity is ready to pick your other pocket. With D.C. it’s always one step forward for the middle class and five steps back.
A meainginful tax cut along with bringing manufacturing jobs back to the country is what is needed. Somehow, I doubt that countries like China and India are going to go quietly and it will take several years before Obama’s green ideas show any meaningful promise or for that matter, dollars pouring into the economy.
why does it seem that Obi’s Senate and the one we’ve seen since Dems got the majority (like that’s different from when they were the minority!) are 2 different groups of people?
is he talking about the same Senate rethugs that we all know and love so well or WHAT?
AND i know by not that it’s not ME, i’m NOT missing anything here.
what does that mean? that HE’S missing something/??????
HE SEEMS far far more confused than i feel and know i am.
this does not breed confidence!
I read it as ‘reptilian’ and didn’t think “Idealogues” was a mistake either.
We had one, months ago…. Remember that check that got mailed out to anyone making under 80k? Really helped didn’t it! Keep pissing on the fire, maybe it’ll go out…
It obviously wasn’t a high priority for Liberals, but it was an Obama campaign pledge. At least we can say our Dem president is going to fulfill his pledges. I only hope this approach bears fruit. There are a lot of things which require bipartisanship, even multi-partisanship, so I’m willing to watch and keep my fingers crossed.
Bipartisan was in quotes because when politicians say bipartisan what they mean is capitulation to the most rank ideological Republican way. Real bipartisanship is not a bad thing.
Maybe (?) Obama is (though he’d never admit it publicly) setting the Repubs up, you know, make them look like the anti-middle class elitists that they are if they try and filibuster or delay the stimulus package.
If so, can’t hurt in getting to 60+ Dem senators in two years.