THE DEFICIT!

Senate Republicans are rolling out a plan to permanently extend an array of expiring tax breaks that would deprive the Treasury of more than $4 trillion over the next decade, nearly doubling projected deficits over that period unless dramatic spending cuts are made. The measure, introduced by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) this week, would permanently extend the George W. Bush-era income tax cuts [. . .] rein in the alternative minimum tax and limit the estate tax to estates worth more than $5 million for individuals or $10 million for couples.

Dems can not duck a vote on this issue, and of course, there is no reason to want to. But politically stupid is the defining phrase for Democrats. In any event, the issue will not go away. So it is time to put the Obama middle class tax cuts to a vote. In BOTH houses of Congress.

Speaking for me only

Chris Dodd has apparently decided to end his career as a poster boy for everything that is wrong with the Senate and Democrats. When he was running for President, he acted the progressive champion, but of course it was an act. Pols are pols and all. But it is amazing to see how he has chosen to end his tenure, with one embarrassing statement after another. Matt Yglesias on Dodd's latest:

We’ve got a limited amount of time here, I don’t know if there’s going to be any appetite to deal with these Fed nominees,” Dodd said.

I think I’ve shouted myself hoarse about the importance of these nominees already, but just to underscore it the Federal Reserve controls the economy. [. . .] Meanwhile, on the “limited amount of time” note how insane the Senate is. A sane legislative body could easily vote on three nominees in twenty minutes if it’s in a rush. If the Senate wants to take more time to actually debate, that would be nice too. But these nominees have been on the table since April and nobody seems to have anything to say about them. So just vote!

Chris Dodd is a disgrace. Good riddance to him.

Speaking for me only

Atrios comments on the Beltway Dem thumbsucking about the "new" Extreme Republicans (a/k/a Tea Partiers):

I'm really not on board with the "Republicans will rule one day so let's hope they're not crazy when they do" idea. First of all, Republicans... already crazy! I think the new batch of crazies are just more likely to be up front about it and less likely to be well trained in how to speak crazy in code. Second, yes Republicans might rule one day, but the existence of amateur crazy candidates makes that less likely. As for the fact that Republican voters are crazy...well, that isn't new either. What's new is they've gotten permission from their leaders (Rush, Glenn, Sarah) to stop voting for the establishment.

Amazing that this needs to be said. Do these Beltway Dems really think O'Donnell is more extreme than Inhofe or DeMint? Or Cornyn and Kyl? Really? Then again, the Beltway Dems are the same people having the vapors because Markos notes that there are similar world outlooks expressed by the foreign Taliban and the American Taliban. Dems need to be saved from these weenies.

Speaking for me only

Dem political ineptitude remains the most serious obstacle to their political success - Tea Party notwithstanding. Case in point - the Congressional Dems' reluctance to bring the Obama Middle Class Tax Cuts to a vote:

[M]embers of Democratic leadership [are] reflecting concerns from vulnerable members who don't want to take another politically juiced vote only to see action stall in the Senate and have to return to their districts without an accomplishment to boast about. "We're looking for the Senate to show leadership on the tax cuts, but we're having our discussions ourselves," said Xavier Becerra, Vice Chair of the Democratic Conference, in response to a question from TPM after a Democratic leadership meeting this evening.

Ok, waiting for the Senate to lead on any issue, much less this one, is waiting for Godot. The Senate must be cornered. But here's the larger point -who does not want to be for middle class tax cuts? "Vulnerable" Dems should be clamoring for this vote more than anyone else. Indeed, if the Dems do not bring this to a vote, the Republicans win the issue, as they want a vote on THEIR proposal to extend the Bush tax cuts. And it will be the Dems who block tax cuts for the middle class. This is so stupid that it is shocking, even from Dems.

Speaking for me only

Ezra Klein delivers the, as usual, obtuse Beltway blogger analysis:

Politicians are, by nature, a fearful species. But their nightmares became a lot more specific last night. The Tea Party, for all its unexpected successes, cannot topple every incumbent Republican in the country. But by toppling the right ones, it can make every incumbent Republican vote and speak and act with the Tea Party in mind. So though the Tea Party isn't likely to send all that many of its own Republicans to Washington, the likely outcome of last night's primaries is that the Tea Party takes over the Republicans who are already in Washington, and don't want to be sent home.

(Emphasis supplied.) Ezra fears GOP intransigence now that Mike Castle has gone down. Unlike the GOP instransigence that we have seen the past 20 months. Incredible. I suppose Klein is thinking of Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins. But I think it is clear by now that they had no plans to vote for any Dem initiatives. The small business stimulus bill, which is essentially Republican in its thrust, cleared a filibuster only because retiring GOP Senators Voinovich and Lemieux (a Crist protege) broke ranks. Snowe and Collins didn't. In terms of how Republicans in Congress will vote, the O'Donnell win means nothing. And anyone with eyes should know that. But the Beltway makes people blind.

Speaking for me only

Obviously, I agree with Atrios on the value of calling the middle class tax cuts proposed by Democrats as the "Obama Middle Class Tax Cuts." Ezra Klein opines from the Kaplan Ivory Tower:

Greg Sargent reports that House Democrats want to rebrand the extension of Bush's middle-class tax cuts as "the Obama tax cuts for the middle class." Sigh. Whether you think this is a good idea, a bad idea or a totally meaningless waste of time -- and you can guess which view I hold -- it's worth remembering that Democrats have known about the expiration of these cuts for 10 years now. If they wanted to create their own middle-class tax cut to replace Bush's expiring program and make sure they got the credit from the voters, they could've done that.

If Ezra Klein has not yet figured out that politics is stupid, then he should stop writing about politics. While politics is, and will always be, stupid, it still matters. If you can't deal with the fact that politics is stupid, you stop writing about it.

It's also worth noting that in fact President Obama DID run on middle class tax cuts that included those being proposed now.

Speaking for me only

TPM reports on Dem ineptitude:

A senior House leadership aide says[:} "We shouldn't force his hand, we should let the Republicans dangle out there with their divisions exposed and keep hammering them on holding middle class tax cuts hostage for $700 billion in debt-financed tax cuts for the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans [. . .] You don't need a vote in the House to say the party is blocking tax relief for the middle class - you can just point and say, 'Look! Senate Republicans blocked it,'" the aide said.

This is, of course, all kinds of stupid, and a ruse. The "senior Dem aide" (I'll bet dollars to donuts a Hoyer aide) is floating this to see how it will play in order to protect Blue Dog Dems who do not want to vote against a middle class tax cut and who may be just stupid enough to do it. Well the balloon went over like lead:

Whopper of a late update: Another senior leadership aide called TPM about an hour after this post was published to say that leadership is still considering all of its options, including a vote after all. [. . .] "We may have a vote anyway to get people on the record," the aide said. "There are a number of leaders who would like a vote even if the Senate is not able to get to 60 votes. It's good for us, it shows we're for the middle class, they are for the rich."

Gee, you think? Of course, Steny Hoyer's Blue Dog friends may line up with Republicans. Their choice and their consequences.

Speaking for me only

TPM:

An Associated Press story made waves this morning, by claiming that Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell had received a pledge from every member of his caucus to block tax legislation unless it extends all of the Bush tax cuts, even for the richest Americans. This morning spokesman Don Stewart told TPM that article is incorrect. "They're correcting this story," Stewart says. "I only said what I've been saying for months: there are no Republicans who support tax hikes[.]"

In response to the original report, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid pounced [--] "It is unconscionable for Senate Republicans to hold middle-class tax cuts hostage in order to secure more tax giveaways for millionaires and CEOs who ship American jobs overseas," he said in a statement. "Today's declaration by Senate Republicans means they are willing to raise taxes on the middle class and small businesses in the middle of a recession...by this Republican logic, until rich CEOs get what they want, middle-class families can't get what they need."

(Emphasis supplied.) The GOP will cave on this if Dems stand their ground. Harry Reid's statement tells you where this is heading, Joe Lieberman notwithstanding.

Speaking for me only

Josh Marshall:

Legislation and politics aren't two separate worlds. Each feeds off each other, as the Democrats learned to their profound discomfiture during the Health Care Reform debate last year. Especially on the cusp of an election, any inability to grasp this can and usually is fatal. Reasoning that the views of the GOP leadership in the House are secondary because the bill has to get through the Senate only makes sense if your field of vision doesn't extend more than half a mile out of your Senate office.

Via Susie Madrak, how Rebecca Traister became a Hillary-bot:

The thing that had a radicalizing impact on me began after [Hillary lost in] Iowa. Because there was this pile-on, and to me it was mind-bending. It was coming often from people on the left. It was like something they had been keeping inside as they bit their tongues and covered this woman who had the gall to be the front-runner and the “inevitable” candidate, which was the word that they threw out there. And finally she had shown weakness, and they were just going nuts.

[. . .] I was one of those few, proud, now deeply embarrassed John Edwards supporters. So when it came to super Tuesday I had to choose between her and Obama, about whom I felt roughly equivalent. I wound up almost flipping a coin and voting for Hillary, but I was still completely ambivalent about her. Eventually I became a lot more aware of the ways in which not only Hillary but also her supporters were being talked about. I became increasingly sensitive to the scorn directed at her, and it built and built as she continued to fight, and it drove me nuts. Because I thought her continuing to fight was awesome and hilarious. I thought it was completely redefining how we view women and our expectations for them in public and political life. She would not comply. She would not give in. She would not do what the pundits wanted her to do, what her opponents wanted her to do, what reporters were insisting that she do, what everyone was telling her was the smart thing to do or, in one case, the classy thing to do. She just kept going. [MORE . . .]

Joe Lieberman:

I know that many people, including the President, have argued that the tax cuts should not be continued for people making more than $200,000 a year, but to me these are the people we need to be using their income to spend and invest to spur growth and job creation[. . .] I want the top income earners in our country to have the confidence and the money to spend and invest over the next year, rather than worrying about paying more in taxes to the federal government.

98% of Americans will be held hostage by Joe Lieberman and the Republicans who will deny them tax relief unless the top 2% get huge tax breaks.

Speaking for me only

Ezra Klein:

Congress is back in session today, and it's got a lot on its agenda. A food safety bill, for instance. The Bush tax cuts. An infrastructure bank. Ratification of the START treaty. But as Brookings' Thomas Mann says in this preview, they're not likely to actually do any of it.

Of all those issues, only one has political resonance - the Obama tax cuts for the middle class. The rest will surely be put over for a lame duck session, if they are passed at all.

Here is the one time where Democrats get to be for tax cuts and can force Republicans to oppose tax cuts. And if nothing happens because the Republicans hold the Obama middle class tax cuts hostage for tax cuts for the wealthy, what happens is the Bush tax cuts lapse as scheduled. If the Democrats and the President can not win this issue, then they should just disband the Democratic Party.

Speaking for me only