Thursday, January 10, 2013

The fiscal cliff and the filibuster: Lawrence O’Donnell gets it wrong



1/10/2013 10:40 AM
Again, I have to listen to someone saying that Republicans broke Norquist’s pledge? Again I have to read ‘dump the filibuster’ posts on facebook? There’s Gingrich claiming that shutting down the government in 1995 (like the GOP is again threatening to do) is why Clinton decided to work with the Republicans, and that’s why Gingrich deserves credit for the only balanced budgets in recent memory. And then there’s Lawrence O’Donnelll gloating last week on his ‘Last Word’ show about how the Republicans haven’t voted for a tax increase since Bush the Rational’s administration, but they have now…wrong.

Let’s go over this one more time.

When Obama got into office, he and the Democratic Congress followed through on his campaign pledge: not only did taxes not go up on the middle class, they started to go down. Don’t ask a Republican about this, he’ll lie. Read the record, read the news from then.

The first tax increase on income since Bush the Rational left office is the 3.8% tax on capital gains that was included in the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) to fund some of it. This is why the wealthy funded so many SuperPACs trying to get it repealed. That tax went into effect 10 days ago. And remember, NOT ONE REPUBLICAN voted for that Act. Not one. 

All the income taxes that were going to go BACK up as part of the ‘fiscal cliff’ deal were the Bush/Cheney tax cuts from 2001. Rules in the Senate then used a PAYGO rule that could only be overridden by a 60-vote majority. These rules mandated that budget bills cause no net deficit over the scoring time window of ten years. But they allowed using expected on-budget surpluses in the calculation, like the CBO’s 10-year $3.1 trillion estimate in 2001.

Long story short, the Republicans an expiration date into the tax cut bill, returning the rates to their original levels just before the end of the ten-year window. With that small addition, they could pass it un the Senate’s reconciliation rules, which kept discussion to 20 hours, and prevented filibustering by the minority party, the Democrats.
They ran pretty much the same act in 2003, with Cheney breaking a 50-50 tie vote in the Senate, after reconciliation rules made the bill un-filibuster-able and aligned the expiration date on those dividend and capital gains tax cuts with the 2001 tax cuts.

So, in 2010, all of these tax rates were going back UP to where these rates were when Bush took office. Except that Obama and a Democratic lame-duck session decided to extended them all for two years, just to get another year of Unemployment Insurance for all the people that Bush the Dimmer had put out of work, and that his minions refused to provide employment for during the 2009-2011 Congressional cycle.

Fast-forward to 2012, post-election. Again, the tax cuts are about to expire. Only now, there’s the added ‘fiscal cliff’ of sequestration, a mandated across-the-board cut on everything in the federal budget. Between higher taxes for everyone and less output by the federal government, guaranteed recession in 2013.
  
Since the economy has been held hostage by the TeaBagger majority in the House, there is still massive unemployment. But the 2012 election definitely went against them by every measure, and Obama, having run on tax increases on the wealthy, follows through. The TeaBaggers drag their feet, and the date the tax cuts expire passes. 

This is VERY IMPORTANT.  

Because when McConnell gets almost all the Senate Republicans to vote to extend the middle class tax cuts, and Boehner gets almost all the House Democrats and a few of his moderate(?) Republicans to vote to extend the middle class tax cuts, no one breaks the pledge to Norquist. NO ONE votes to increase taxes on the wealthy. 

Because a tax increase on the wealthy was never on the table. 

The Bush/Cheney tax cuts for the wealthy simply expired, as those Republicans wrote them, to avoid all the House and Senate budget rules that would have prevented them from ever passing if estimates of budget surpluses and the costs of the cuts had been even close to accurate back at the beginning of the reign of Bush the Dimmer. 

Sure, Republicans planned to make them permanent. After ten years, no one would notice, right? But first they needed bigger majorities in Congress, and new budget rules. Instead, they got Obama and lost all of Congress from 2007 to 2011.
So no Republican voted to increase taxes, O’Donnell. Ten yard penalty for inaccurate gloating.

Which brings us to now, and the threatened shutdown.

The TeaBaggers are claiming tax increases are off the table, since we passed them. (We didn’t.) So now they’re threatening to shut down the government again, like they threatened in 2011, by not raising the debt ceiling. In 2011, this cost the US its super-duper credit rating, lowering it to ‘almost superduper’, but still, we took a hit because of these clowns.

And now Gingrich, a history professor, is rewriting history to cheer them on. His majority in the House in 1995-‘96 twice brought the US government to a stop, by sending Bill Clinton a balanced budget, balanced by making massive cuts and eliminating large parts of the government. Clinton vetoed them twice, and the citizens, seeing the Republicans show their hand on what to cut for the first (and ONLY) time in recent history, immediately sided with Clinton. When he instead proposed a budget that included tax increases, to levels we are now largely back at, and Americans approved, Republicans saw the writing on the wall. A bare few in the House voted with the Democrats against the Republican leadership, and the Democratic Senate followed. Between these increases in taxes and the dot.com boom, Clinton then had several years of surpluses.

Gingrich now tries to claim credit for getting Clinton to work with Republicans. The reality is that his incompetence gave Clinton the huge surge in popularity polls need to overcome Gingrich’s speakership, which ended soon after with his own party ousting him over ethics(!) violations, soon replacing him with Denny Hastert. 

You may have heard this name recently, regarding “the Hastert Rule”, which Republicans use: no bill comes to the floor for discussion unless the Republicans can pass it without any Democratic votes. So much for “across the aisle” or “bi-partisanship”.   

THIS is the big change that happened in the tax cut debate, Lawrence. This is the rule Speaker (and Republican) John Boehner broke, for the first time since Gingrich let that Clinton budget pass back in 1996. This is the real change worth noticing. And saving the nation almost cost Boehner his speakership.

Because, on the day those middle-class tax cuts were made permanent, Boehner had to ask himself the same thing so many Americans should ask themselves every day:

“Am I an American, or am I a Republican?”

Because, as Boehner showed, and as the TeaBaggers who voted against his continuing speakership demonstrated, you can’t be both.

1/10/2013 11:57 AM
     

No comments:

Post a Comment