Many on both sides of the political spectrum want to point fingers at Obama for the government's failure to pass a jobs bill that raises the revenues needed to get people to work now while stabilizing the country's long term fiscal outlook. Notwithstanding the nattering of pundits both professional and amateur, the constitution is perfectly clear on where the buck stops on revenues:
The United States Constitution Article 1, Section 7, Clause 1: "All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills."
The president is in a difficult position because if he is seen to be making excuses people won't trust him to lead. So the question of where the buck stops is a bit fraught politically. That's why it is important to point out just what the constitution actually says about whose responsibility it is to raise revenue to create jobs and pay down the deficit.
Everyone knows that there's lots of work that needs to be done. We need to stop wasting taxpayer money on inefficient buildings. The time is now to put people to work on repairs and upgrades to public buildings. We need to prepare our children for the modern world and that means more interactive learning based on problem solving. Class sizes are getting out of hand and we could reduce those with some federal grants to hire teachers. These are investments in America that pay known dividends.
Local governments, as well as state governments, have been in a real pinch. For one they rely on regressive taxes like sales and residential property taxes. First of all, with housing how it is property tax revenues are down. Second consumer confidence remains low hence weakening the sales tax. Third because of business development poaching between state and local governments they have a hard time holding a line on commercial property taxes, Fourth, Reps have run on cutting taxes but they always go after the progressive state income taxes, not the regressive taxes and fees most working folks pay. Data clearly support the conclusion that state and local taxes are dominantly regressive: http://www.itepnet.org/.
Jan Schakowski (D, IL) of the House Progressive caucus has a great idea. There is lots of work that needs to get done in our communities. Let's hire people to get that stuff done: http://schakowsky.house.gov/.... Unlike Republican supply side stimulus, which with the Bush tax cuts still in place is part of the failing status quo, or demand side alternatives like the payroll holiday, which theoretically create jobs indirectly, Schakowski's plan directly creates real jobs. Not in theory but by actually hiring people to do what needs to be done. Since local governments are being squeezed into regressive tax structures, I see no reason why the federal government shouldn't pitch in by having the wealthy pay their fair share with some grants funded by a more progressive federal income tax. It is only fair.
The problem with all this is simply revenues. Since Republicans insist that borrowing not be increased we need more revenues if we're going to do what needs to be done. I think America is worth investing in, and I'm a proud Democrat precisely because of that fundamental difference with Republicans. But the House governs revenue bills. It's right there plain as day in Article 1, Section 7, Clause 1 of the US Constitution.
So if you're asking why we're not doing what needs to be done to create jobs and balance the budget let me remind you that the buck stops with Boehner on revenues. And if you're asking how you can help do what needs to get done, the answer is not to point a finger at the president, who has no authority to raise revenues. The answer is not more infighting. The answer is to elect more and better Democrats to get behind Schakowski and the rest of the House Progressive Caucus.