Get FREE NRO Newsletters

 

June 11 Issue  |  Subscribe  |  Renew

Close

New on NRO . . .

The Corner

The one and only.

Print   |  Text
 

Will the Professional Left Triangulate?

Nancy Pelosi doesn’t like the White House tax compromise, tweeting “GOP provisions in tax proposal help only wealthiest 3%, don’t create jobs & add tens of billions to deficit.” Seventy-four percent of contributors to Obama’s presidential campaign are “deeply opposed” to compromising with the Republicans and extending tax cuts for those making $250,000 or more, according to a SurveyUSA/Washington Post poll. And Jennifer Rubin reported that Harry Reid came back from the White House last night looking like “someone shot his dog.”

Is this temporary disappointment or a signal that there may not be the votes to pass the compromise?

Today may be the critical turning point. Joe Biden was shipped to the Hill to have lunch with senate Democrats and persuade them to support the deal. It’s likely to be an uphill task. Sen. Tom Harkin (D., Iowa) slammed the compromise, saying, “Senate Republicans have successfully used the fragile economic security of our middle class and the hardship of millions of jobless Americans as bargaining chips to secure tax breaks for the very wealthiest among us.” Sen. Mark Udall (D., Colorado) has also come out against the legislation. And Senate Democrats are also under intense pressure from some liberal activists not to buckle: one 10,000-member group, who successfully shut down two phone lines in the White House yesterday, plans to target Senate Democrats now.

House Democrats may be even trickier to win over. “There was no consensus or agreement reached by the House leadership,” said House majority leader Steny Hoyer this morning, adding that many House Democrats felt “giving tax cuts to high-income Americans is not appropriate.” DCCC chairman Chris Van Hollen also spoke negatively about the plan on Bloomberg Television this morning. “House Democrats have not signed off on this deal,” he said “I will meet with our caucus later today to discuss it. I have some serious reservations about parts of this deal. I understand the importance of getting to an understanding, but there are certain elements that I think will cause a great concern to members of our caucus.” Rep. John Conyers (D., Mich.) also announced his disapproval, saying “I can tell you with certainty that legislative blackmail of this kind by the Republicans will be vehemently opposed by many, if not most, Democrats.”

Jake Tapper outlines some of the arguments the White House plans to make to furious Democrats: that letting taxes increase on the middle class or failing to extend unemployment benefits to score a political point would be cheap, that congressional Democrats failed to hold a vote on their preferred version of the tax cuts, and that making a deal with the new GOP-dominated House and less heavily Democrat Senate in January would have resulted in an even worse deal for the Democrats. If those arguments fail to win Democrats over today and tomorrow, President Obama will have a difficult time rounding up the votes the compromise needs.

New on The Corner. . .


COMMENTS   7

EXPAND  

Genna
   12/07/10 14:08

Is Nancy Pelosi clairvoyant? She must be if she can predict that allowing small businesses to keep and reinvest the money they earn will not create jobs. Tone deaf doesn't even begin to describe Ms. Pelosi's approach to all that ails us.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   12/07/10 14:19

Well, Obama let the Dem controlled House bear the brunt of the voter backlash for his signature and unwanted entitlement program, Obamacare. Maybe this is Pelosi's payback for Obama. Dem party internal strife is such fun to watch!
I do find Pelosi's comment kinda funny when she talks about extending the tax cuts adding tens of billions to the deficit. In other words, she already spent that money and if she doesn't get it the bounced check will be even bigger!

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   12/07/10 14:30

Well of course Nancy Pelosi doesn't think this creates jobs. This is the same woman who claimed that Obamacare and unemployment checks create jobs.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   12/07/10 17:40

Sure it's safe for a few senators & representatives in secure districts to disparage the compromise, even vote against it. But do you really think they can block it. The Republicans (and President Obama) only need 5 Democrat senators (15 to break a filibuster) and 39 representatives to vote their way. Think they can't get it?

So Pelosi and Reid and a couple of big lefty money raisers vote against extending tax cuts. What does that mean?

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   12/07/10 18:53

I think the Democrats would be crazy to turn down this deal. If federal taxes go up in 2011, the economy will further contract. Substantively, this will create even more human misery as we have more long-term unemployed people. Politically, a further downturn in the economy will spell the end of the Democratic majority in the U.S. Senate and of President Obama's presidency. They will be so unpopular by the end of 2011 that in 2012 we will be looking at a historic realignment election along the lines of 1896 and 1932.

Ironically, the GOP is doing the best thing it probably can do for President Obama (and the people of the United States) by forcing him into thinking rationally about federal taxes.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   12/07/10 19:30

I'm no economist, but can someone provide me a link to any kind of proof, studies showing that low taxes for the rich create jobs? It's easy to state this but I'd like to see some backup for this. I'm not saying there isn't any such proof, but I'm wondering where this idea comes from beyond wishful thinking. Similarly with financial and corporate regulation. Where is the proof that deregulation is the best thing for the markets?

I was pretty sure the 1940s to about 1970 were the most stable financial periods in the history of the country, as well as the period with the most financial growth, and it was a period marked by high taxation (especially for the rich) and increased regulation of business and financial markets.

I consider myself fairly centrist but I'd like to see some proof for this whole 'less tax for the wealth = jobs' thing.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Troll
   12/08/10 01:50

I have no proof that tax cuts for the wealthy do not create jobs, but, as a small business employee, I can't imagine a tax hike on my employers helping me. Not too long ago, I remember bonuses and pay raises. I hope for more of them some day.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse

Add a Comment

Already Registered? Log In Here.


The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.


* Designates a required field.
© National Review Online 2012
All Rights Reserved.
Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital

Gift Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital
NR Apps
iPhone/iPad
Android

NRO Apps
iPhone
Support Us
Donate
Media Kit
Contact