How To Win The Tax Battle

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Other Politics
Posted on Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 12:21:53 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Politico:

With a first meeting called for Thursday, House and Senate Democrats are beginning active discussions on when — and for how long — to extend Bush-era middle-class tax cuts due to expire at the end of this year. [. . .] Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) is more bullish on a permanent extension after adjustments are made in the higher rates. “With today’s budget picture, it’s no longer clear that we can afford large tax cuts for the most well-to-do,” he said, opening a Finance Committee hearing on the subject Wednesday. But in wrap-up comments later, Baucus made clear that he will push for a permanent extension of those provisions that affect middle- and working-class families.

[. . .] The House-Senate differences among Democrats appear driven, too, by tactical considerations regarding a second revenue battle left over from the George W. Bush years: the estate tax. [. . .] Baucus would like to use the middle-class tax-cut extensions as a vehicle to resolve this fight, and by promising to make those individual tax cuts permanent, Baucus gains some potential leverage with moderates in his party.

It does not matter if Baucus is embarrassed or gains leverage over "moderates in his party." Progressive Dems have the upper hand here - the Bush tax cuts expire if nothing happens. This is huge leverage, I like the noises Bernie Sanders is making:

Sen. Bernie Sanders [. . .] wants an estate levy even stricter than that of the House, and it’s not certain that the House bill — passed last year — would get the same votes now.

Sanders and progressives can get an "even stricter" estate tax by blocking all legislation and simply letting the Bush tax cuts lapse. For once, doing nothing is a real option. Inside the Beltway, protecting their wealthy benefactors is imperative:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) conceded Wednesday that the estate-tax issue has become entangled with the small-business bill — making it harder to proceed. And this adds impetus to Baucus’s argument that the better route would be to have the showdown battle in the context of the middle-class tax-cuts extension when Congress returns after Labor Day.

But it is not for progressive Dems. In short, to hell with Baucus and Reid on this issue, Progressives can get what they want by simply making sure nothing happens. They have the bargaining power now. Time to use it.

Speaking for me only

< The Discrediting Of Breitbart: Why Was He Ever Taken Seriously? | Lessons Learned? >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

How To Win The Tax Battle | 31 comments (31 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Excellent (5.00 / 3) (#1)
by ruffian on Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 12:28:51 PM EST

Finally Senate inertia is on the right side. I'd like to see Sanders pandered to as hard as Lieberman and Snowe usually are.

: yup (5.00 / 2) (#2)
by CST on Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 12:37:38 PM EST

last time that happened we got a ton of money for health clinics (and no, that money did not all go to VT).
At least pandering to Sanders makes a bill better instead of worse. Which is more than I can say for most senators.

By any other name (5.00 / 1) (#5)
by waldenpond on Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 01:00:27 PM EST

Republicans have a habit of calling a bill whatever they want. They attack the WS bill as a job killer etc. Not that Dems are better as I don't think that 'small business' bill is really a 'small' business bill. I was reading an article that one of the small businesses that will be affected makes over a billion bucks.

I expect tax cuts for the wealthy to continue. I just think they (Repubs and conserva-Dems) will call them middle class and define the middle class up.

Personally, I want the tax cuts to expire. I am willing to give up my tax cut for direct jobs.

but. as always, (5.00 / 1) (#16)
by cpinva on Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 01:28:26 PM EST

They have the bargaining power now. Time to use it.

they won't. to use power requires having a spine. the democratic caucus, in congress, represents the first known instance, in nature, of spineless bi-peds.

there were secret experiments, carried out years ago (rumor has it, by the cia), resulting in lab created spineless bi-peds. they were all supposedly destroyed, after some studies were completed on them. supposedly.

Yes dems have an advantage now (5.00 / 1) (#30)
by Slado on Thu Jul 22, 2010 at 01:09:16 PM EST

but it will be over in November.

The question is do they do nothing and then wait for the lame duck or next congress to worry about this?

My guess is they will split the baby and deliver some sort of mess that nobody likes.

Kind of like, stimulus, healthcare, ware on terror and financial reform.

It will be right on par with everything this congress and president does. Double handed and political unpalatable.

Here's to change!

Hope Sanders knows... (none / 0) (#3)
by Dadler on Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 12:54:51 PM EST

...how to play Bernie Ball. It's not only his ball, but his court at this point, if he and progressives really want it to be. Let it get "ugly." I relish the thought that, at last, some genuinely liberal ("of or pertaining to a free person") business is the cause of such attention and energy.

But wouldn't failing to ` (none / 0) (#4)
by Socraticsilence on Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 12:56:20 PM EST

extend the middle class provisions be a major loser- I mean the Upper Bracket and Estate Tax stuff is a huge positive for Dems but Middle Class Taxes never look good.

Not for progressives (5.00 / 2) (#7)
by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 01:05:24 PM EST

who mostly come from safe districts.

Progressives have all the leverage here.

Screw Baucus. Sanders is not against middle class cuts. He is against tax cuts for the wealthy.

The progressives will propose a middle class tax cut, and nothing more.

And if nothing is the result, then, well, that's ok too.


: Wait, if the result is nothing (none / 0) (#19)
by me only on Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 01:35:38 PM EST

then the Bush cuts expire and the middle class, in effect, gets their taxes raised.
Personally, I am torn. I don't really want to pay the extra taxes, but to finally be able to prove that progressives really are just taxers would be plus.

Your argument must assume that Republicans (none / 0) (#6)
by steviez314 on Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 01:03:45 PM EST

wouldn't vote for a stand alone bill on keeping the Bush tax cuts for the middle class, even if nothing was done on the rich tax bracket or the estate tax.

All these tax issues may be conjoined, but they don't have to be. I think a middle class tax bill would get 70 votes. Or at least, I'd love to hear the Republicans say we voted against a middle class tax break because we couldn't get a tax break for the rich.

BTD comment 7 (none / 0) (#8)
by CST on Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 01:06:17 PM EST

if this is the case, we still win.


Not at all (none / 0) (#9)
by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 01:06:55 PM EST

Bernie Sanders and progressives do not oppose middle class tax cuts.

They oppose tax cuts for the wealthy.

My point is that progressives can live without middle class tax cuts.

Nothing is an acceptable result for them.

They have all the leverage.


Here's a counter argument: (none / 0) (#10)
by steviez314 on Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 01:14:32 PM EST

Let's make a terrible assumption that a bill is introduced to extend ALL the Bush tax cuts, clearly not what progressives would want.

Don't you think you'd get every Republican and every Blue Dog to vote for it?

I wish it were not the case, but I don't think progressives have any leverage here at all. Because unlike health care or fin reform, Republicans love tax cuts.


The President of the United States has (none / 0) (#13)
by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 01:18:52 PM EST

the power of veto.

What are you telling me about what you think of the current President of the United States?

That he will extend the Bush tax cuts in toto while at the same time whining about the deficit?

It's possible isn't it? How sad is that?


It is sad (5.00 / 1) (#23)
by ruffian on Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 04:32:46 PM EST

but I'm sorry to say it would not surprise me if that is the outcome.


: That's how I gamed this out (none / 0) (#25)
by andgarden on Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 06:59:08 PM EST

in my head. I don't think Obama has it in him to draw a line in the sand here.

Well, that's a different question. I think Obama (none / 0) (#15)
by steviez314 on Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 01:23:02 PM EST

would veto such a bill. But that's not because of Bernie Sanders' leverage.

And as if on cue, 5 minutes ago, Kent Conrad came out in favor of extending the tax cuts on the rich along with the middle class.

So who has more power, Sanders and 20 progressive Democrats, or Conrad and 41 Republicans?


It is part of Sanders' leverage (none / 0) (#17)
by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 01:31:15 PM EST

My second thought is that a veto might even be (none / 0) (#18)
by steviez314 on Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 01:35:06 PM EST

overidden. Senate easier than House, but possible.

Remember, all those deficit hawks are BSers, as long as we're talking about tax cuts.


: Impossible (none / 0) (#20)
by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 01:37:58 PM EST

26 Dem votes for that? Impossible. To override a Dem President's veto? Impossible.
And DEFINITELY impossible.

Obama could (none / 0) (#14)
by CST on Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 01:20:26 PM EST

veto that bill.

Although in order for that to work you need Obama on board with a veto. But the other side needs 19 Dem senators and Obama.

Passing that bill may be a taller order than you think.


But the Dems better not... (none / 0) (#11)
by Dadler on Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 01:14:47 PM EST

...give away that nothing IS acceptable. They better push hard for their middle class down policy. They've negotiated against themselves enough already. If they once again call their own bluff, well, I won't be surprised but I will be infuriated. All in their court, I hope they REALLY know what that means.


: PROGRESSIVE Dems (none / 0) (#12)
by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 01:17:00 PM EST

They are different from Beltway Dems.

They better do something (none / 0) (#21)
by jbindc on Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 01:44:01 PM EST

A new Q poll out today once again shows the news isn't good for Dems. Not only does Obama poll at his lowest ever in his presidency (44%), but there's this:

A year after President Barack Obama's political honeymoon ended, his job approval rating has dropped to a negative 44 - 48 percent, his worst net score ever, and American voters say by a narrow 39 - 36 percent margin that they would vote for an unnamed Republican rather than President Obama in 2012, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.
This compares to a 48 - 43 percent approval for Obama in a May 26 national poll by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University and a 57 - 33 percent approval last July, just before the political firestorm created by opposition to his health care plan galvanized political opponents and turned independent voters against him.
In this latest survey of more than 2,000 voters, independent voters disapprove of Obama 52 - 38 percent and say 37 - 27 percent they would vote for a Republican contender in 2012.
American voters also say 48 - 40 percent Obama does not deserve reelection in 2012.
Anti-incumbent sentiment slams both parties as voters disapprove 59 - 31 percent of the job Democrats are doing, and disapprove 59 - 29 percent of Republicans in Congress. But voters say 43 - 38 percent they would vote for a Republican in a generic Congressional race.

Now the 2012 matchup stuff doesn't mean much now, but it does show that people are ticked and it's going to take a whole bunch of stuff (and some luck) to win back all that goodwill. Letting middle class tax cuts expire won't help.

No open thread (none / 0) (#22)
by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 01:47:16 PM EST

So I'll let this off topic comment slide.


: not off topic (5.00 / 1) (#24)
by diogenes on Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 04:48:33 PM EST

see quote "...Letting middle class tax cuts expire won't help."
Isn't politics what it's all about?

Are you sure (none / 0) (#26)
by NYShooter on Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 10:37:45 PM EST

of your last stat? I could've sworn I caught a Fox report where the "reporters," with long faces on, were lamenting the fact that, although all the numbers are going against Obama, the generic D's still held 6 point lead over the R's? And then they wrapped up by saying, "but that number's beginning to turn also"

hint: don't get old.


In the last Gallup Poll ... (5.00 / 1) (#27)
by Yman on Thu Jul 22, 2010 at 07:46:45 AM EST

... Democrats held a 6 point advantage among registered voters, but almost all of the other polls have Republicans up. The average is a +2.9% advantage for the Repubs.


Gallup used different methods in the (none / 0) (#29)
by BTAL on Thu Jul 22, 2010 at 09:22:58 AM EST