The Parable of the Tax Cut

I don't use the word ''crusade'' lightly. The advocates of tax cuts are relentless, even fanatical. An indication of the movement's fervor -- and of its political power -- came during the Iraq war. War is expensive and is almost always accompanied by tax increases. But not in 2003. ''Nothing is more important in the face of a war,'' declared Tom DeLay, the House majority leader, ''than cutting taxes.'' And sure enough, taxes were cut, not just in a time of war but also in the face of record budget deficits. Nor will it be easy to reverse those tax cuts: the tax-cut movement has convinced many Americans -- like Tinsley -- that everybody still pays far too much in taxes.

The American Conservative Union, Citizens for a Sound Economy, National Taxpayers Union, Eagle Forum, Family Research Council and other grass-roots conservative groups signed a letter with Norquist denouncing Riley for a "grab for the special interests and unions" that "will burden every segment of society."

[...]

The plan would raise the tax threshold from $4,600 to $20,000 for a family of four, and raise the exemption per child from $300 to $2,200, which Riley says would cut or leave income taxes unchanged for two-thirds of the state's taxpayers. The top third of earners would pay more, as would corporations and large land and timber holders. Alabama's lowest-in-the-nation property taxes would rise on average to $490 a year on a $100,000 home (a $136 increase) and to $1,540 on a $250,000 home (a $536 increase), according to the governor's figures.

Riley's opponents also have targeted black voters, airing a radio ad on stations with mostly black audiences featuring a man with poor diction warning, "Our property taxes could go up as much as fo' hundred percent," and blaming "Montgomery insiders who have been ignorin' us for years." The ad was paid for by a political action committee whose top contributors are the state's largest bank, a leading insurance company, two timber and paper companies and county farmers federations -- all of which supported Riley last November. The state farmers federation also controls the insurance company, which would lose a large tax break that gives it an advantage over other insurers.

MR. RUSSERT: If you froze the tax cut for the top 1 percent of Americans, it would generate enough money to pay for the $87 billion for the war, if you did it for just one year. Would you consider that?

VICE PRES. CHENEY: I think it’d be a mistake, because you can’t look at that without considering what its impact would be on the economy. An awful lot of the returns in that top bracket are small businesses, and they provide an awful lot of the job growth in this economy. If you’re going to go increase taxes on small businesses, you’re going to slow down the extent to which we’re able to reduce unemployment. So I think it’s a serious mistake; the wrong time to raise taxes. [emphasis added]

As history shows, though, you can't fight America's profound social inequalities without appealing to Americans' profound religious faith. Despite Riley's defeat last week, let's hope that my fellow liberals take heed of his courageous example - and take back the reins of scriptural activism. As in the Bible itself, we might need a stranger to lead us out of our own political wilderness.

posted by kriston at 12:18 PM........

Sunday, September 14, 2003

Bizarre Street

I just caught Steven Soderbergh/George Clooney's K Street on HBO, and it's gotta be one of the more surreal shows I've seen. Or rather, hyperreal. The entire show centers around Paul Begala and James Carville, who coached Howard Dean on his debate skills before the National Black Caucuses Institute's Democratic debate—which happened on September 9th. And courtesy of Matthew Yglesias, I learned that the whole story about Carville and Begala coaching Dean 'broke' only yesterday, on Dean's weblog. And the show jokes (reveals?) that James Carville gave Dean that sweet line about Trent Lott and Mississippi's racial demographics.

Even stranger: This all happened on a television show. On a popular channel that people pay subscription fees to watch—not C-SPAN2. An hour after Sex and the City, even. So what the fuck is going on? Either they filmed that entire show between the 9th and today, or they're blurring some interesting lines between truth, fiction, and campaign strategy. Talk about putting the cart before the horse....

By all means, Dean scores points for sticking his neck out like this. No way any of those other Dems would've done it—hell, the show's already raising a ruckus in Congress. So I'm guessing next episode: Clark in Iowa?

UPDATE: Mary Lynn F. Jones, online editor for The Hill, gives us her notes on the show. Courtesy of Kevin Drum.


By far the weirdest aspect of K Street is the fact that George Clooney is involved, and it doesn't suck. Remember, Clooney made Batman intolerable.
posted by kriston at 10:12 PM........

Mean Dean

If you've heard rumors about a Clark veep run for Howard Dean's campaign (as the Dean campaign themselves kind of suggested here), I'd suggest you take a look at Josh Marshall's notes (ba-da-boom, ba-da-bing) on the subject. Folks in Dean's corner are scared of Clark, because despite their noted differences, Clark and Dean are trying to fill the same niche.

David Brooks—one more conservative eager to give some campaign advice to the Dems, and actually has some decent pointers—notes in an Atlantic Monthly column that "[d]uring the past four decades forty-nine sitting members of Congress have run for President." None won. So the numbers make the case all the more urgent for either Dean or Clark to emerge as the Democratic Party's great white outside hope, and that means that the Dean camp has to portray Clark as the great white outside hype. Or, at least, a less-great white outside hope, and I'll bet that Clark will return with calls that Dean is the great white less-outside hope. The white part is pretty much the only thing those two aren't going to square-off over.


For whatever reason, the Atlantic Monthly column by David Brooks listed online isn't what's printed in the magazine. AM, just send me a note, and my resume is on its way.
posted by kriston at 3:00 PM........

Wishful Thinking

Or maybe drinking? I figure it could only be the effect of some hangover nastiness on either my part or Dick Cheney's when I heard the Veep call himself a "deficit hawk" on Meet the Press this morning.

That ridiculousness aside, Cheney's defense of the glut of contracts awarded without bidding to Halliburton was insulting:

[VICE PRES. CHENEY] [W]hen I was secretary of Defense, I was not involved in awarding contracts. That’s done at a far lower level. Secondly, when I ran Halliburton for five years and they were doing work for the Defense Department, which frankly they’ve been doing for 60 or 70 years, I never went near the Defense Department. I never lobbied the Defense Department on behalf of Halliburton. The only time I went back to the department during those eight years was to have my portrait hung which is a traditional service rendered for former secretaries of Defense. And since I left Halliburton to become George Bush’s vice president, I’ve severed all my ties with the company, gotten rid of all my financial interests. I have no financial interest in Halliburton of any kind and haven’t had now for over three years. And as vice president, I have absolutely no influence of, involvement of, knowledge of in any way, shape or form of contracts led by the Corps of Engineers or anybody else in the federal government, so...

MR. RUSSERT: Why is there no bidding?

VICE PRES. CHENEY: I have no idea. Go ask the Corps of Engineers. One of the things to keep in mind is that Halliburton is a unique kind of company. There are very few companies out there that have the combination of the very large engineering construction capability and significant oil field services, the first- or second-largest oil field service company in the world, and they’ve traditionally done a lot of work for the U.S. government and the U.S. military.

Three points here: First, it's frankly discouraging to believe that Cheney would assume that the only concern Americans have about the Halliburton contracts is if Cheney personally benefitted. We're not talking about Pete Rose or NCAA coaches here. I think skeptical or even curious Americans are smart enough to realize that the reciprocal benefit doesn't come in the form of a direct deposit, but through big-time political and financial endorsements for the GOP/Bush campaign. Or, alternatively, that those contracts are a return for previous political favors.

Second, someone should ask the Corps of Engineers. I'd be curious to see if there were as many visits from VP Cheney to their office as there were, say, between the VP and the CIA in the time preceding the disclosure of the Niger-uranium documents. There's no lack of CIA officials complaining of executive pressure on their office in the months preceding the war.

Third, Cheney extolls the positive lights of Halliburton at great length but concedes in his language that Halliburton isn't the only corporation in the world to offer those services. Yet there's no bid process, and it's hard for that oversight to not smack of favoritism. If I'm the executive branch, presented with a situation in which I have to subcontract to the private sector, and I want to go corrupt with my decision or I just really like Halliburton or whatever, I obviously ask for bids and then just give it to Halliburton.

Isn't that obvious? That's the ticket—a party ascendant for as long as the Republicans have been starts thinking it's impervious to criticisms, that it can shortcut wherever it wants, and you know what happens next....


Dick Cheney, re: presenting a budget prediction for reconstructing Iraq: "We have not tried to hide it under a bush."
posted by kriston at 2:00 PM........

Wha' Happened?

If anyone out there can explain this travesty, speak up! I missed the game because it wasn't televised here in DC, and I didn't think that Arkansas of all teams was worth a trip through rain to the sports bar. Apparently this UT-Arkansas thing used to matter, at least in Arkansas, but I sure as hell didn't care about it.

The turnovers sounded nasty, but Lordy, these rushing yards?


I mean, you're in trouble when a QB sneak produces your longest run of the game. (Unless Vic Young is at the helm....)
posted by kriston at 1:36 PM........

! - ?

BlogStreet