The Most Important Piece of Paper in America

I hold in my hand one of the most important pieces of paper in America: Table T08-0071, an analysis of candidate John McCain's tax plan.

OK, it's not really in my hand because I'm typing, but I'm looking at it carefully, and you should too. It is a table constructed by the Tax Policy Center's steely-eyed tax analysts, and it reveals nothing less than McCain's secret plan to diminish the US government beyond recognition. If he gets his way, conservatives will finally be able to say they've achieved the goal set out by Grover Norquist: to get government "down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub."

The numbers in the table show the revenue loss to the Federal government from McCain's proposed tax cuts. In the far right corner is the 10-year total: -$5.7 trillion.

People deride the Republican candidate as "McSame," implying a continuation of Bushonomics as well as the president's foreign policy. But from the perspective of domestic policy, it's much worse. Sure, McCain extends the Bush tax cuts but that's the least of it. At $1.7 trillion they amount to less than a third of the damage.

Note also that the big ticket tax cuts-eliminating the alternative minimum tax and lowering the corporate tax-both follow on another Bush tradition of exacerbating market-driven (i.e., pre-tax) inequalities by cutting high-end taxes the most.

As I stresshere , McCain's plans to pay for these tax cuts amount to filling a crater with a teaspoon of sand. Earmarks won't get you there, so he'll have to go after discretionary spending. In fact, he's already suggesting a freeze in such spending, excluding defense, of course. Sound inoffensive until you consider that we're talking about kids' health care, education, child care, training for displaced workers, environmental and labor protections, and dozens more programs that lots of people actually need and care about.

Plus, he can't fill the hole he's dug with cuts in these programs either, which leads you to the inevitable punch line of all this: his target is the entitlements, Social Security and Medicare. Those programs have always been the big enchiladas for the Norquist shock troops and they've never recovered from their Social Security privatization defeat. Well, they're back, incognito.

McCain's top economist, a number cruncher of great integrity named Doug Holtz-Eakin, responds to the Tax Policy's analysis here, and he makes a good point or two, especially regarding the way they score the AMT, but his counterpoints amount to little more than quibbles. In fact, one can't help wonder if Doug, who used to inveigh against supply-side nonsense, has been drawn to the economic dark side. When recently asked about the extent to which these numbers fail to add up, his response was: "I think what [critics] ought to do is remember that the proposals are going to engender economic growth, which is the best thing you can do for near-term budget improvement." That's pure hand waving of the type with which the old Holtz-Eakin had no patience.

This story has yet to catch the fire it should, and hopefully will, once the D's get focused on McCain and his dim vision of government. But the point born of these numbers is as simple as it is compelling:

For seven long years, we've tried entrusting our government to those who discredit it, defund it, and fundamentally disbelieve in its role, except when they seek a lucrative contract or a bailout. We gone down the road-and it is a crumbling road, with potholes and failing bridges -- where the solution to every problem is a tax cut, where critical agencies are staffed with cronies at best and opposition lobbyists at worst, where secrecy trumps transparency and cynicism rules, where budget resources are never available for expanding children's health care, but always there for war.

Table T08-0071 is a road map to taking us far, far deeper into this morass. We must not go there.

Comments

[johnsnakecusak]

Thanks for a great look at the dangers of McCain's prioritys via his tax plans.

I quoted this blog on the HillaryForum and was immediately banned forever from their site.

Why? you might ask?

There is a large movement afoot there to convince Hillary supporters to vote for McCain if Obama gets the nomination. I posted a quote and a link to this thread as an argument against ever voting for McCain, to protest an Obama candidacy. This was obviously against the tide at HillaryForum and it makes one ask themself if the whole HillaryForum might be Republican Trollism enmasse.

It is more important to get the Democratic candidate elected in the fall, and this thread is a very important argument to that end. It is "the most important piece of paper....." etc.
Thanks again.

[clevelandchick]

I'm not surprised. Bill, Hillary, and her loyal posse would rather this very dangerous man be president than be forced to face the prospect of never getting another shot at the White House. They don't care what might happen to this nation, they want to punish the Democrats who dared not fall at the feet of the Clintons. I used to admire the Clintons, I used to defend the Clintons. Never again.

[johnsnakecusak]

I think that misses the point that a lot of these people posing as Hillary Supporters are actually McCain supporters trying to activate an anti-Obama campaign.

I am an ardent Hillary supporter, and most of the people that Ive talked to who are Hillary supporters, (and that is a lot) would never consider voting for John McCain.

I think you make a mistake of assuming that all people who claim to be Hillary supporters really are what they say they are.

[MajorKong]

It's worth noting what Dick Cheney said to Paul O'Neill when O'Neill questioned the second round of tax cuts: "We won the midterms, this is our due"

He didn't say "This will help the economy" or "This is what's best for the country".

He said "This is our due" - that pretty well sums it up.

[TommyMcCarthy]

Kudos to Jared Bernstien for this fine article. We need a lot more of this kind of cool, clear-eyed analysis of McCain's tax and economic proposals (or lack threof) in popular venues like Huffpo.

While this type of discussion may not be as EXCITING as those about the latest gaffe or pissing match ,....ultimately it's much more relevant to this Novembers choice for President.
Less heat =more light.

McCain's personal story, maverick status, and overall likeability makes him seem the least UN-palatable of the Republicans, and therefore potentially supportable to independents and centrist Democratic crossover voters.

That's why it's even more important to carefully analyze (as our media consistently FAILS to do) the ACTUAL contents of the candidates' tax and economic proposals, as Mr. Bernstein has done here.

Most Americans would agree that we're in a hell of a fix, economically, and have a general idea of the policies which got us here.
Many would be quite surprised to learn that the likable Sen. McCain proposes to not only continue these policies but to excacerbate the situation dramatically, and to lock us in to these policies far into the future.


Many thanks to Jared Bernstein for taking on the dry and often thankless task of raising awareness around this important issue. I hope he and others will continue to do so through November. Regards...................................................tm

[RandomStu]

Perhaps we could acknowledge an apparent conflict. Surely the writer of this post is familar with some of the horrendous harm our government is doing, bombing people and such. So shouldn't we at least CONSIDER that maybe it's not such a great idea to stop shoveling money at it? Why does the poster seem to assume that it's such a wonderful thing to feed this beast of government, when our experience shows us such terrible consequences?

Stuart's "Random Thoughts" blog

[mnyegele]

I agree with Kashatthree, albeit I feel that people on Oregon should have their chance to voice their views. (The primary season is still way too long. We desperately need to consolidate it - and Florida and Michigan need to get their act together and play by the rules.) We need to end the feuding in the Democratic party. I voted for Obama, but I would support Hillary if she won. I'd expect the same attitude from Hillary's supporters. United we stand; divided we fall.

We need to end the "me" type of politics. That's one Change I can really beliee in. As a recently retired teacher in an inner city high school in south Los Angeles, I got drafted to serve as senior class sponsor 4 times. I always preferred teaming up with 2 or 3 other colleagues and sharing the responsibilities. That's what Hillary, Obama, Edwards, and other leading Democrats need to do: form a team, form an alliance. The person who most deserves to head the ticket is the person who puts the "we" in the Democratic party, above the "me". The Superdelegates need to make that clear to both Clinton and Obama. I just wish any one with any connections to Superdelegates on either side of the Clinton-Obama divide would convey that message to the Superdelegates.m (P.S. I've already written my share of letters.)

[davidpeace]

With the mainstream media refusing to focus on the incompetence of McShame, it seems as if they have already chosen our next president for us, again. There are two potential outcomes: Either the bottom 90% becomes so fed up with the status quo of the ruling elite that we have the next revolution, or the US quietly goes the way of the dodo. I'm betting on the latter.

[Kashathree]

What needs to be done is for Clinton and Obama to reach a level of understanding and work together to keep McCain from winning the election. Bush's seven-1/2 disastrous years in the now tainted White House should be all we need to think about to know we must NOT allow another Republican to carry on these horrific deeds--and lack of deeds. We grow weary of Barbie Hellary and her temper tantrums. Give it up. Obama, take the high road and do not debate Hellary on her terms. She's embarrassing herself already; she doesn't need help from you.
Beat McCain!

[luziannagirl]

There is no such thing as a "free market". If there were, it would be o.k. to:

1) Open a toxic landfill in your back yard.

2) Grow opium poppies and marijuana in the front yard.

3) Make the toxic waste and addictive substances into a huge line of consumer products that sell like hotcakes all over the country and run all the honest locally owned merchants out of business.

Oh, wait. If we truly open up markets free of all regulation, then everyone would have a chance to make money , and not just the 5% who already do items 1-3, on the q-t. That ain't gonna happen, folks. So, I don't think anyone truly wants a free market, because after all, nothing in this life is free. Somebody always pays the true cost of goods and services.

Right now, we the 98% are paying heavily for the 2% at the top.

The question is, who is big enough and brave enough to oppose the big moneyed interests and pull this country out of the maw of true evildoers interested only in short-term profit at any cost?

[austinobserver]

The "little people" are not supposed to think too deeply about it. Even a regulated market, which would be intended to and which would to some extent prevent the worst of what you describe, will always be fundamentally flawed. That is because when everyone is dependent on and judged by how much they rake in, then that fact will determine the value system. And the prevailing values in a market system will ensure that those who design the rules for the economy and the society will always warp the rules for their own benefit. So even if ideally such a "free market" or well-regulated market would provide the greatest amount of benefit for the greatest number of people (i.e., it was utilitarian), that ideal could never be approached as the rules would always be twisted and distorted to benefit those who make them and those who have the power to influence those who make them.

[lvuback1]

Mr. Bernstein's paragraph beginning "For seven long years..." is almost a work of art in summing up what's going on in Washington.
It's hard to believe the Republicans have gotten this out of control, wreaking havoc on the national ecomony and lives of all those Americans not in that 1% controlling 99% of the wealth.
While that 1% is content to keep its gushing profits flowing using the care-laden lives of powerless Americans, they are determined to banish every entitlement that either keeps these powerless barely afloat or keeps their lives barely tolerable.
Finishing up a speech in the family manse of the billionaire Hunt dynasty in Dallas, George Bush opined, "Every Republican should live like this." (Vanity Fair, June 2008)
Republicans have become the reincarnation of 18th century French royals. And Louis XVI nailed it, guys: apres vous le deluge.

[quest44]

McCain is a weak candidate and the Republican's know it that is why some states have changed the voting requirements to include proof of citizenship which would only hurt the poor and minorities two groups they know would not vote Republican.
There should be an outcry against the Republican parties tricks to stack the deck in their favor but if there is I certainly haven't seen it ,so maybe media is blacking them out too .

[siegfried89]

If downsizing government so it can be drowned in a bathtub includes the DEA, the IRS and the Federal Reserve then have at it boys and more power to ya.

[bgregs]

Of course it also includes the social safety net of SS, Medicare, food stamps, and welfare. And the public safety provisions of police, fire, and military. And the rules which keep the drugs that your doctor prescribes safe. And the rules which make your doctor liable if he screws up. And the rules which allow you to seek redress of a wrong that your neighbor does to you when he cuts down a tree which destroys your roof. Or shoots your wife.

It also includes the roads, the education system, the monetary system (so that you don't have to grow all your own food, and drill for your own oil, and build your own car!!!) etc......

Maybe gov't isn't such a bad thing after all........

[luziannagirl]

Yeah, Sig, but the government also includes the EPA, which keeps deadly poisons out of your drinking water (or should), the FDA, which keeps deadly poisons out of your medicines (or should), and the military, which keeps our country from being overrun by decidedly un-democratic and un-American barbarians and warlords and predatory profiteers.

All functions of government simply CANNOT be performed by the marketplace, because marketplace dynamics apply to the short-run,while ignoring the long run.

Throwing the baby out with the bathwater regarding the role of government is how we got into this mess in the first place.

If given a chance, babies do grow up, after all, and eventually bathe themselves.

[BassMonk]

The Federal Reserve is a private bank, not part of the government.

[bgregs]

Just like the post office is a separate private entity, right? While it is somewhat separate, it is still monitored by the federal gov't, with its governors appointed by the president!

[keclxivq]

We will never have a good economy, renewable (green) energy or anything like it until the guys in charge are held accountable. Which seems so far-fetched at this point I don't see it in the cards. If you speak up you get a one way ticket to Gitmo. The oil industry is trying so hard to get a grip on renewable energy we will never see it because we allow them to but every new idea so it can't be used. They will not allow it until they control it all.
First words I want to hear from the next POTUS - Take all the Bush 2 administration members (past and present) to Gitmo for questioning about subversion and treason, or maybe no reason at all. Don't hurry with the process once you get them there. Treat them just as they wanted the average guy on the streets of the United States to be treated. Maybe after seven years or so they might understand what our country stands for! What assholes, the lot of them.

[richardgordon]

The irony of Republican political dogma is that they say they beleive in small government and a reducing government expenditures but what happens when they get into power? They turn the government into a monolithic wasteful monstrosity that overspends by trillions, has government prying into the public's private affairs and reduces everybody's freedoms and will imprison "those who don't fit the mold at a whim" with out due process or rule of law. They also want to control how you behave and how you think. Eventually, if things were taken to the limit, under Republicans they would turn the United States into a totalitarian police state. The only people who would actually have any freedom are the ultra rich who owned everything. Which would be small cadre of corrupt morally bankrupt souls who's only goal in life is to own everything and exploit the earth until catastrophic failure.

[TommyMcCarthy]

HuffPost's Pick

"Richard Gordon's" in-a-nutshell overview hits the nail squarely on the head, as it were. The ultimate extention of Repulican economic dogma really IS about freedom:

Each citizen will recieve all the freedom he or she can afford to purchase.

Well said.............................................................tm

[bassnman]

545 Final

There are no insoluble government problems.

Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power.

Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like 'the economy,' 'inflation' or 'politics' that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.

They, and they alone, have the power.

They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses - provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees.

We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!

Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper.

[bassnman]

545 Part 3
No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits.

The president can only propose a budget.

He cannot force the Congress to accept it.

The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes.

Who is the speaker of the House?

She is the leader of the majority party.

She and fellow House members, not the president, can approve any budget they want.

If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million can not replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts - of incompetence and irresponsibility.

I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people.

When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.

If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red.

If the Marines are in IRAQ, it's because they want them in IRAQ.

If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.

[merryblue]

agreed. they are the same leaves on the tree that ubl comes from .... they are the ones who overthrew russian then engulfed europe and the swept across asia and now rip at our shirt tails as well. ruling the world is their cause.

[bassnman]

535 Part 2

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president and nine Supreme Court justices - 545 human beings out of the 300 million - are directly, legally, morally and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress.

In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered but private central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority.

They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman or a president to do one cotton-picking thing.

I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall.