President Obama (White House photo)
The new narrative for the 2012 election has emerged, and it's about time. They're not going to be talking about austerity. They're not going to be talking about deficits (we hope), but about fairness. And they're
starting with taxes.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada is planning votes all spring and summer in an attempt to end the tax breaks that corporations and wealthy individuals like Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney enjoy. [...]
[T]he Democrats are etching a sharp contrast with GOP initiatives on Capitol Hill, as Republicans continue to emphasize last year's proposals to change Medicare, cut regulations and develop the controversial Keystone XL oil pipeline.
"We're going to have a robust debate about whose vision is more promising for moving this country forward," Obama told House Democrats at their annual retreat Friday in Cambridge, Md. [...]
"The question is how do we pay for that?" Obama said about the costs of keeping those tax breaks in place. "Because when you give me a tax break that I don't need and the country can't afford, two things happen: Either the deficit increases or, alternatively, somebody else has to pay the tab—that senior, or that student, or that family who's struggling to make ends meet."
Every election is about defining the other guy, but in this one the contrast couldn't be sharper—who's looking out for the hedge fund manager, versus who's looking out for the rest of us. The argument held true in December of 2010 when Democrats had the chance to make the fight over ending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy really damage Republicans, but deferred. It's even more true now that the damage from the debt ceiling deal and the cuts it demands.
There couldn't be a stronger narrative to galvanize people against the Republicans, particularly with Millionaire Mitt as their presumptive standard bearer.