Democrats used their time on Sunday TV this weekend to try and define the difference between closing a tax loophole and raising taxes. Republicans used an op-ed in CNN to bigfoot any hope of getting any additional revenue to try and cut the deficit. We concede the argument, before even making it. It sure would be nice to have a loudmouth like Anthony Weiner arguing for 'revenue increases'.
Democrats lose the argument before it even starts. On ABC's This Week, Rep. James Clyburn says:
“We are not asking anybody to raise anybody's rates,” Clyburn said. “We want us to have an effective tax collection and close these loopholes, stop giving billions of dollars in breaks to millionaires and billionaires.”
Well, you should be!
Why not? WHY NOT, Rep. Clyburn? The Republicans have won the argument thanks to their successful framing strategy, before it has begun. Why NOT ask people to pay some more taxes. Taxes have never been lower since the 1950's than they are today, and the result (along with unfunded wars) is an exploding deficit. At least advance the idea that there is a revenue shortfall that cannot be solved without adding revenue, and if it doesn't happen, at least we can accurately assign blame.
Democrats are reduced to penny-ante discussions of trying to define closing tax loopholes as not raising taxes. Well, if the 'specter' of raising taxes wasn't so toxic, you wouldn't have to be arguing what the meaning of a tax increase is.
Democrats are adopting a new approach: arguing that raising revenues by closing niche tax breaks is not the same as raising taxes.
Democrats plead for some revenue with a plaintive whimper. And Nancy Pelosi on CNN's State of the Union is reduced to the same line of argument of whether a tax loophole cut is or isn't a revenue increase without a tax increase.
“You cannot achieve what you set out to do if you say it's just about cutting. It has to be about increasing the revenue stream as well,” Pelosi said Sunday on CNN’s "State of the Union".
She said the deal should close special tax breaks, such as those enjoyed by major oil companies, but disputed House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s (R-Va.) characterization of these proposals as tax increases.
“It's not a question of tax increases,” Pelosi said.
“Make sure we understand, closing special interests’ tax subsidies is what they have walked away from,” she said of Cantor’s decision to pull out of the debt-limit talks.
The Huffington Post has framed the looming 'debate' as follows:
WASHINGTON -- With the United States government set to begin defaulting on its loans on Aug. 2, the administration is working with lawmakers on a deal to raise its borrowing limit in exchange for major spending cuts and, potentially, revenue increases to shrink the debt.
Note the framing - raising the borrowing limit, in exchange for spending cuts. This deal is a fait accompli. Then, (the oh so delicate and polite) revenue increases, are 'potentially' on the table. This is so weak.
Hours ahead of his meeting with President Obama, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is already drawing his line in the sand:
"Later today, I will sit down with President Barack Obama to discuss his request to increase the nation's debt ceiling," McConnell wrote in a Monday op-ed for CNN.com. "And I will make a request of my own: What, Mr. President, are you prepared to do about the massive deficits and debt that have grown dramatically on your watch?"
“What Republicans want is simple: We want to cut spending now, we want to cap runaway spending in the future and we want to save our entitlements and our country from bankruptcy by requiring the nation to balance its budget,” McConnell said. "The Democrats' response has been a mystifying call for more stimulus spending and huge tax hikes on American job creators. That's not serious, and it is my hope that the president will take those off the table today so that we can have a serious discussion about our country's economic future."
Has any Democrat loudly and forcefully used the media over the last two days to declare what must happen in the upcoming talks between Obama and McConnell and Harry Reid? Harry Reid - where are you? Anyone?
And McConnell goes one better by adding a complete lie to his statement:
“Throwing more tax revenue into the mix is simply not going to produce a desirable result, and it won't pass,” McConnell said. “I mean, putting aside the fact that Republicans don't like to raise taxes, Democrats don't like to either.”
I guess that depends on your definition of a what a desirable result is. If the desirable result is to balance the budget or reduce the deficit, as Republicans have been claiming, then yes, actually, 'throwing' revenue into the mix is actually the perfect solution.
Eric Cantor and John Kyl have dropped out of the talks over the unacceptable horror of taking away a tax break for having a corporate jet, and have kicked the talks upwards to the President and the Senate (even though the House is in charge of writing the budget). Given the result of last year's tax cut deal, this arrangement does not fill me with hope.
Democrats have had a tough timedealing with the GOP argument that they want to raise taxes while national economic growth is at an anemic 1.9 percent. Republicans were able to use that line of attack to cow Democratic leaders into extending virtually all of the Bush tax cuts through 2012.
If you want to reduct the deficit and you can't raise revenues, and all the little low-hanging fruit has been picked, what does that leave you with? Cuts to Medicare, no doubt.
Often the Democrats play kabuki theater to get tax cuts and other benefits for their rich benefactors, in a less obvious fashion than the Republicans. But here I do want to believe Rep. Clyburn and Rep. Pelosi really have the interests of average working Americans at heart. But, you have to get some spines to achieve them, Democrats, and not let yourselves be so 'cowed'.