Dem Memo On Tax Cuts: 'Party Cannot Afford' To Let Opportunity 'Slip Away'

WASHINGTON -- Even as the details of a forthcoming compromise on the Bush tax cuts emerge, Democrats continue to be told by the party's messaging gurus that they're wasting a massive, if not critical, opportunity by acquiescing to Republican demands.

A memo circulating on the Hill and the consulting class -- and passed along to The Huffington Post -- argues that the party has "a real chance to regain some momentum" lost in the November elections by sticking to its preferred position on the Bush tax cuts.

Standing firm on keeping middle class rates in place while letting those for the wealthy expire "represents a major opportunity for Democrats," the firm Anzalone Liszt Research writes in a memo dated December 2, 2010. "[T]he party cannot afford to put it off - or let it slip away."

The messaging recommended by the firm's principals -- John Anzalone and Matt Hogan -- is hardly revolutionary material.

"By opposing a permanent extension of the tax cuts on income over $250,000, Democrats can not only put themselves on the side of the overwhelming majority of Americans, but also address two problem areas that plagued the party in the most recent election: their decline in support among Independents and a lack of trust in their commitment to reduce the deficit," they write.

What stands out, rather, is how late in the game the advice is being offered. Few in the party hold hope that they will stand firm on tax cuts. As the Anzalone Liszt Research memo was being circulated, in fact, negotiators seemed poised to cut a deal offering a two-year extension for rates across the board.

Democrats, indeed, are going into the last week or so of debate fully aware that they are moving against the tide of public opinion. And they are doing it despite the private warnings of their own advisers.

Anzalone Liszt Research tested messaging that described tax cuts for the wealthy as money that could, alternatively, be used to pay down the deficit and help small businesses. "77% of likely voters found it to be a convincing reason to end those tax breaks," the memo concludes, "including 46% who found it to be very convincing."

THE FULL MEMO IS BELOW:

taxcutmessaging

Comments

[nwerle]

05:16 PM on 12/09/2010

Obama is a Liar and a Coward - Clinton made the GOP blink

[R.W. Sanders]

10:35 AM on 12/06/2010

It seems that capitulation is part of democratic DNA. Otherwise, why give up on something they could so obviously win, at least they could win the public relations battle. There is a clear lack of leadership at work. Once again big money wins.

[splinky]

10:06 AM on 12/06/2010

If I were ever to believe paranoid fantasies about how the government is really run by a shadowy cabal, this would be the stuff that would convince me. How else can one explain a party (not just the president on this one, after all) which does not have the courage to do the thing they campaigned on and which is supported by a strong majority of the American people?

[Cacey]

09:22 AM on 12/06/2010

While I've praised Speaker Pelosi for having raised five kids before she entered politics, I'm beginning to wish she had started ten years earlier.  In doing so, she would be the ideal age to have run for President in 2008 and effectively led the nation into the 21st Century.  She is obviously the finest poltician of our time and a great leader in spite of the attemps of the Beck crowd to demonize here.

[poulser]

08:58 AM on 12/06/2010

Will the party please recruit a real Democrat to run for president in 2012? If they lose, what are we out? The GOP has been running the show for the past two years anyway.
As much as I supported Obama over Clinton in 2008, I think she was realistic about what the Republican­s really are.

[Marcospinelli]

03:30 AM on 12/06/2010

If Bush's tax cuts are allowed to expire as they are set to on December 31st, the deficit would be cut in half, instantly.   

If the tax cuts are continued for the rich, we would have to borrow $700 billion to pay for it.

If the tax cuts are continued for everyone, we would have to borrow $3 trillion to pay for it.

And if there is a 2-year extension "compromise", we would still have to borrow $70-140 billion for the rich's portion and $383 billion for the middle class's portion.

Obama is expanding the wars into Yemen.

Where's the money coming from?

Obama and Democratic leadership have already indicated they're on board with Social Security cuts, privatizing, etc.

There should be tax HIKES on corporations and the rich.  There should be massive cuts to the military.  Banks should be threatened with nationalization unless they begin lending to small businesses.

[grf67]

05:42 AM on 12/06/2010

Bring our forces home and let the bush leglislation expire. It is time that the country started working for itself.

[ruffmama]

07:02 PM on 12/05/2010

Tell Obama and all the Democrats in Washington....NO TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH....NO COMPROMISE.....NO DEALS.....NO EXCEPTIONS!

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Tell-Obama-NO-MORE-TAX-CUTS-for-the-RICH/133507893372707?v=wall

[SirSlappy]

06:04 PM on 12/05/2010

'Party Cannot Afford' To Let Opportunity 'Slip Away'

Why? What makes this opportunity any different than the 50 they squandered over the last 2 years?

[TSOCANUCK]

03:54 PM on 12/05/2010

why don't the dems let them fillibuster...? something wrong with your politics .. something very fishy ..show america the truth about who really wants tax cuts for the middleclass

[Moonchild420]

01:04 AM on 12/06/2010

See... I said that too something strange going on........

[TSOCANUCK]

03:48 PM on 12/05/2010

who are the 5 democratic senators that voted against middleclass tax cuts ... are these guys millionairs ?

[MrUnlimited]

09:42 PM on 12/05/2010

probably; after all, aren't most senators millionaires in general?

[Anarcho-Syndicalist]

12:14 PM on 12/05/2010

With the exception of Palin, I think any one of the top tier Republican candidates can win against President Obama. On the stump he was great. He seemed principled and firm in his beliefs, but what a difference becoming President has made on him. He looks weaker and weaker every day. He's the Amazing Shrinking President. Jimmy Carter looked like Churchill compared to him (and I like Carter). Let's face it: people don't vote for candidates who appear weak. I don't have a clue as to why the President refuses to mix it up with the Republicans, but it is a terrible mistake, and the Democratic Party could very well suffer even greater losses in 2012 because of Obama's difficulty sticking up for himself..

I don't know if Obama's even capable of standing up to Republican bullies, but I think that he needs to be challenged for the nomination. If he loses, he clearly was vulnerable. If he wins, maybe he's learned something. Either way: aren't all of us wondering why he's acting the way he is?

People don't like bullies, but that doesn't mean that people want to be led by a guy who refuses to stand up for himself or his values. We have a problem, and it happens to be the man we elected President

[TClaudiusDrusus]

12:23 PM on 12/05/2010

Yes we can !
are the change we've been waiting for!

I'd like a return, please, and my money back.

[TClaudiusDrusus]

12:25 PM on 12/05/2010

Yes we can *provide cover for Republican policies*!
*The Republicans* are the change we've been waiting for!

I'd like a return, please, and my money back.

[Formatting and text came out the first go round]

[Boomer946]

12:09 PM on 12/05/2010

I am old enough and have seen enough political contests to know that deals have to be made. But, one thing all politicians must do is pay attention to their base and what their base wants. They then must distinguish between the 'nice to haves', 'would really like to haves' and the 'must have or the world ends' issues. The Dems have not been doing that very effectively thus far since President Obama took office. This tax thing is one of those 'world will end' issues. We know they have to do things that benefit corporate America, but those should not be the priorities they have been the last two years. So, Dems, you have passed the less than $250 thousand tax cut in the House; you have had two votes in the Senate which excluded the richest Americans from getting tax cuts. Those were good steps that pleased your base. Now, for your next act, you need to put a stake in the ground and tell the Repugs there will be no more retreating. Make the Repugs come to you. If they don't, let the tax cuts expire for everyone and go on a public relations blitz hammering the Repugs for throwing the American people under the bus being driven by the rich.

[sdmcmla]

02:51 PM on 12/05/2010

#97.  Fanned.

[hopeisalive]

12:04 PM on 12/05/2010

To allow for all of the cuts to remain for a limited time seems like caving in to the Party of NO. If they temporarily extend things to the upper 2%---a year---and permanently keep those cuts for the other 98% would be the only compromise I would find remotely decent as long as extension of the unemployment insurance is also part of the deal. Giving in to Mr. McConnell and Mr. Boehner is the worst of all things.

[HowardScottPearlman]

12:02 PM on 12/05/2010

Forget the Bush Tax Cuts !

Just raise the Personal exemption for all by $5000.

[Tony12345]

11:12 AM on 12/05/2010

In the end, you have the Democrats to thank for letting two bills fail in the Senate... One would have kept the lower rates for all earning less than $250k, and the other would have kept rates the same for all earning less than $1 million. Both bills failed and both included 'neys' from the Democrat side...

Those opposing the resumption of the old rates for those over $250k include:
Those include: Russ Feingold (leaving--no longer accountable), Ben Nelson (leaving--no longer accountable), Joe Manchin (just won and supported by Obama), Jim Webb and Joe Lieberman.

Funnily enough, Dick Durban, Tom Harkin and John D Rockefeller IV (himself the bluest of blood but claims to support the 'middle class') joined Mr Lieberman to oppose Schumer's compromise for higher rates for those earning more than $1m....

Perhaps those not kicked out should be given a 'tea party' effect and primaried out in their next cycles? It's the only way to hold politicians accountable to the people...

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/05/us/politics/05cong.html?_r=2&hp