Dwight Merideth had an excellent post the other day called “The Top 10 Ways To Change The Tone in Washington (For the Worse).” He could not have anticipated that the White House would have such a spectacular topper:
The White House helped to block a Republican-brokered deal on Wednesday to extend several middle-class tax cuts, fearful of a bill that could draw Democratic votes and dilute a Republican campaign theme, Republican negotiators said.
The White House blocked a package of tax cuts, targeted at middle- and lower-income taxpayers, because the bill was moderate enough to attract Democratic votes. They chose to fail, by their own principles, rather than allow a small amount of concilliation with the other party. I have a hard time thinking of a more effective way to give the finger to the principle of bipartisanship.
Michael Froomkin says, “This may be one of the most cynical ploys in US politics I ever read about. And I read a lot.” Paperwight has much more; he makes a good comparison to the Republican refusal to accept a Democratic deal to confirm most of Bush’s judicial appointments. And, he notices that the White House is attempting to soothe tempers by allowing more pork in the budget.
These guys have got to go.
Pork, now there’s an issue with bipartisan support.
Remember, this is about an extension of the Bush tax cut. It sailed through the house but was killed in the Senate by moderate Republicans over a legitimate funding issue.
Remember, this is about an extension of the Bush tax cut. It sailed through the house but was killed in the Senate by moderate Republicans over a legitimate funding issue.
Read the source material. In fact, the moderate Republicans in the Senate (read, people who don’t just cut taxes without any notion of fiscal accountability) were uncomfortable with further extensions of the Bush cuts, but were willing to extend for two years these particular tax cuts which benefitted the middle and working class. The Democrats were good with this, but the New Republican Tribe, including Bush, wanted a minimum 5 year extension.
So rather than getting the bill passed, Bush and the House Republicans killed it, so they could strip off the bipartisan taint, and then then bring it up again as an issue closer to the election.
Remember, this is about an extension of the Bush tax cut. It sailed through the house but was killed in the Senate by moderate Republicans over a legitimate funding issue.
Read the source material. In fact, the moderate Republicans in the Senate (read, people who don’t just cut taxes without any notion of fiscal accountability) were uncomfortable with further extensions of the Bush cuts, but were willing to extend for two years these particular tax cuts which benefitted the middle and working class. The Democrats were good with this, but the New Republican Tribe, including Bush, wanted a minimum 5 year extension.
So rather than getting the bill passed, Bush and the House Republicans killed it, so they could strip off the bipartisan taint, and then then bring it up again as an issue closer to the election.
Whoops. Sorry about that. I got a 500 server error on the first try, so thought it didn’t go through.
The administration is holding out for larger middle class tax cuts and is likely to get them in September. The Democrats will vote, now, for a watered down version (with funding!). Very sensible. I’m all for it. But, the Democrats are more likely to vote for the full tax cuts without funding in September. The present day middle class and the administration wins, the Democrats lose. This may be disgusting, but not for reasons presented in the post, above.
This may be disgusting, but not for reasons presented in the post, above.
Erm, no.
http://tinyurl.com/4mx42
The White House helped to block a Republican-brokered deal on Wednesday to extend several middle-class tax cuts, fearful of a bill that could draw Democratic votes and dilute a Republican campaign theme, Republican negotiators said.
…in an improbable series of machinations, White House officials opposed the tentative deal worked out between House and Senate Republican leaders that would have extended the tax cuts for two years at a cost of about $80 billion.
…
Claire Buchan, a White House spokeswoman, said the administration was still trying to negotiate. But Republican Congressional officials said the administration did not want a deal that Democratic lawmakers might support, giving them a tax-cutting credential, too.
…
“If the Democrats had been on the same side, it would have taken a lot of arrows out of the quiver,” said one Republican staff member.
Is the outrage over Washington playing politics? That the Bush administration doesn’t want Democrats to gain political points? I’m at a loss for words. I thought the disgust was over the perception that this posturing was at the expense of the middle class. My point was that it was over funding issues because the middle class is going to get their tax cut regardless of this political play.
I’m at a loss for words
And yet you posted over four lines in a third post.
I’m disgusted, though not surprised, that the White House would screw the middle class, not to score political points, but to avoid giving them away.
Funding issues had been resolved between House and Senate Republicans. Campaign issues intervened. I don’t pretend to know the future of middle class tax cuts, but the middle class is clearly not a priority.
Morons. Because Bush wants a longer extension, and more tax cuts, than the Democrats, it’s Bush who’s playing politics when he refuses it? You trust anonymous congressional staffers who are pissed because they didn’t get their way? Don’t play the media’s game for them.
The principle of bipartisanship? How fucking naive are you? This is an election year.
“The principle of bipartisanship? How fucking naive are you? This is an election year.”
Ahh, yes, election year! Just a few more months until the scourge of the Unelected Fraud is removed from our national landscape.
Unless, of course, the malAdministration orchestrates a “Looky-here we got Osama!” maneuver, or just cancels the election entirely.
In that case, time to fill the streets and Viva la Revalucion!
The NYT gives a lot of anonymously-sourced info here. Not that that’s always bad, but I wonder why.
The ABCNews article on this (at http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040721_2437.html) has a somewhat different take, which kinda supports paperweight’s idea that the White House wants this to come up closer to election day.
For what it’s worth, at least the ABC guys tell you why they have anonymous sources. I much prefer the style of their article.
Belatedly linked to this here, by the way, with little comment; it speaks for itself.
À Gauche
Jeremy Alder
Amaravati
Anggarrgoon
Audhumlan Conspiracy
H.E. Baber
Philip Blosser
Paul Broderick
Matt Brown
Diana Buccafurni
Brandon Butler
Keith Burgess-Jackson
Certain Doubts
David Chalmers
Noam Chomsky
The Conservative Philosopher
Desert Landscapes
Denis Dutton
David Efird
Karl Elliott
David Estlund
Experimental Philosophy
Fake Barn County
Kai von Fintel
Russell Arben Fox
Garden of Forking Paths
Roger Gathman
Michael Green
Scott Hagaman
Helen Habermann
David Hildebrand
John Holbo
Christopher Grau
Jonathan Ichikawa
Tom Irish
Michelle Jenkins
Adam Kotsko
Barry Lam
Language Hat
Language Log
Christian Lee
Brian Leiter
Stephen Lenhart
Clayton Littlejohn
Roderick T. Long
Joshua Macy
Mad Grad
Jonathan Martin
Matthew McGrattan
Marc Moffett
Geoffrey Nunberg
Orange Philosophy
Philosophy Carnival
Philosophy, et cetera
Philosophy of Art
Douglas Portmore
Philosophy from the 617 (moribund)
Jeremy Pierce
Punishment Theory
Geoff Pynn
Timothy Quigley (moribund?)
Conor Roddy
Sappho's Breathing
Anders Schoubye
Wolfgang Schwartz
Scribo
Michael Sevel
Tom Stoneham (moribund)
Adam Swenson
Peter Suber
Eddie Thomas
Joe Ulatowski
Bruce Umbaugh
What is the name ...
Matt Weiner
Will Wilkinson
Jessica Wilson
Young Hegelian
Richard Zach
Psychology
Donyell Coleman
Deborah Frisch
Milt Rosenberg
Tom Stafford
Law
Ann Althouse
Stephen Bainbridge
Jack Balkin
Douglass A. Berman
Francesca Bignami
BlunkettWatch
Jack Bogdanski
Paul L. Caron
Conglomerate
Jeff Cooper
Disability Law
Displacement of Concepts
Wayne Eastman
Eric Fink
Victor Fleischer (on hiatus)
Peter Friedman
Michael Froomkin
Bernard Hibbitts
Walter Hutchens
InstaPundit
Andis Kaulins
Lawmeme
Edward Lee
Karl-Friedrich Lenz
Larry Lessig
Mirror of Justice
Eric Muller
Nathan Oman
Opinio Juris
John Palfrey
Ken Parish
Punishment Theory
Larry Ribstein
The Right Coast
D. Gordon Smith
Lawrence Solum
Peter Tillers
Transatlantic Assembly
Lawrence Velvel
David Wagner
Kim Weatherall
Yale Constitution Society
Tun Yin
History
Blogenspiel
Timothy Burke
Rebunk
Naomi Chana
Chapati Mystery
Cliopatria
Juan Cole
Cranky Professor
Greg Daly
James Davila
Sherman Dorn
Michael Drout
Frog in a Well
Frogs and Ravens
Early Modern Notes
Evan Garcia
George Mason History bloggers
Ghost in the Machine
Rebecca Goetz
Invisible Adjunct (inactive)
Jason Kuznicki
Konrad Mitchell Lawson
Danny Loss
Liberty and Power
Danny Loss
Ether MacAllum Stewart
Pam Mack
Heather Mathews
James Meadway
Medieval Studies
H.D. Miller
Caleb McDaniel
Marc Mulholland
Received Ideas
Renaissance Weblog
Nathaniel Robinson
Jacob Remes (moribund?)
Christopher Sheil
Red Ted
Time Travelling Is Easy
Brian Ulrich
Shana Worthen
Computers/media/communication
Lauren Andreacchi (moribund)
Eric Behrens
Joseph Bosco
Danah Boyd
David Brake
Collin Brooke
Maximilian Dornseif (moribund)
Jeff Erickson
Ed Felten
Lance Fortnow
Louise Ferguson
Anne Galloway
Jason Gallo
Josh Greenberg
Alex Halavais
Sariel Har-Peled
Tracy Kennedy
Tim Lambert
Liz Lawley
Michael O'Foghlu
Jose Luis Orihuela (moribund)
Alex Pang
Sebastian Paquet
Fernando Pereira
Pink Bunny of Battle
Ranting Professors
Jay Rosen
Ken Rufo
Douglas Rushkoff
Vika Safrin
Rob Schaap (Blogorrhoea)
Frank Schaap
Robert A. Stewart
Suresh Venkatasubramanian
Ray Trygstad
Jill Walker
Phil Windley
Siva Vaidahyanathan
Anthropology
Kerim Friedman
Alex Golub
Martijn de Koning
Nicholas Packwood
Geography
Stentor Danielson
Benjamin Heumann
Scott Whitlock
Education
Edward Bilodeau
Jenny D.
Richard Kahn
Progressive Teachers
Kelvin Thompson (defunct?)
Mark Byron
Business administration
Michael Watkins (moribund)
Literature, language, culture
Mike Arnzen
Brandon Barr
Michael Berube
The Blogora
Colin Brayton
John Bruce
Miriam Burstein
Chris Cagle
Jean Chu
Hans Coppens
Tyler Curtain
Cultural Revolution
Terry Dean
Joseph Duemer
Flaschenpost
Kathleen Fitzpatrick
Jonathan Goodwin
Rachael Groner
Alison Hale
Household Opera
Dennis Jerz
Jason Jones
Miriam Jones
Matthew Kirschenbaum
Steven Krause
Lilliputian Lilith
Catherine Liu
John Lovas
Gerald Lucas
Making Contact
Barry Mauer
Erin O'Connor
Print Culture
Clancy Ratcliff
Matthias Rip
A.G. Rud
Amardeep Singh
Steve Shaviro
Thanks ... Zombie
Vera Tobin
Chuck Tryon
University Diaries
Classics
Michael Hendry
David Meadows
Religion
AKM Adam
Ryan Overbey
Telford Work (moribund)
Library Science
Norma Bruce
Music
Kyle Gann
ionarts
Tim Rutherford-Johnson
Greg Sandow
Scott Spiegelberg
Biology/Medicine
Pradeep Atluri
Bloviator
Anthony Cox
Susan Ferrari (moribund)
Amy Greenwood
La Di Da
John M. Lynch
Charles Murtaugh (moribund)
Paul Z. Myers
Respectful of Otters
Josh Rosenau
Universal Acid
Amity Wilczek (moribund)
Theodore Wong (moribund)
Physics/Applied Physics
Trish Amuntrud
Sean Carroll
Jacques Distler
Stephen Hsu
Irascible Professor
Andrew Jaffe
Michael Nielsen
Chad Orzel
String Coffee Table
Math/Statistics
Dead Parrots
Andrew Gelman
Christopher Genovese
Moment, Linger on
Jason Rosenhouse
Vlorbik
Peter Woit
Complex Systems
Petter Holme
Luis Rocha
Cosma Shalizi
Bill Tozier
Chemistry
"Keneth Miles"
Engineering
Zack Amjal
Chris Hall
University Administration
Frank Admissions (moribund?)
Architecture/Urban development
City Comforts (urban planning)
Unfolio
Panchromatica
Earth Sciences
Our Take
Who Knows?
Bitch Ph.D.
Just Tenured
Playing School
Professor Goose
This Academic Life
Other sources of information
Arts and Letters Daily
Boston Review
Imprints
Political Theory Daily Review
Science and Technology Daily Review