I can't tell whether there is a rift here but Democrats seem to be giving mixed messages--shocking--on what the party plans to do with the immoral Bush tax cuts. In today's New York Times, Charlie Rangel, the new chair of the House Ways and Means Committee (and, as an aside, my congressperson) seems to say that raising taxes on the wealthiest people in the country is not on the table:
"Now, he is trying hard to be restrained, about Mr. Bush, his administration and his tax cuts. When asked about Mr. Bush's renewed insistence last week that Congress extend those tax provisions, Mr. Rangel paused and said, with almost visible effort, "Part of what I think is my responsibility is not to be critical of the president."
He brushes off speculation about his party's plans for the Bush tax cuts, many of which have been criticized by Democrats for years as a giveaway to the richest Americans; it is simply premature, he argues, since their expiration date is three years off. Stan Collender, a longtime budget analyst, says it makes no political sense for Congress to "deal with tax cuts before you have to, certainly not before the 2008 election."
Charlie, that's just idiotic. The tax cuts were irresponsible. Why wait? We elected Democrats to change the country and they have to be willing to fight to reverse one of the most egregious financial wet-kisses to the richest people in the nation. The pundits and the Beltway crowd may like to believe that class warfare doesn't carry weight in the country but people have had it with the CEO greed and the multi-billion bonuses for Wall Street buccaneers, while regular Americans struggle.
As I argued recently, the Democrats should push for the immediate rolling back of tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans--the top ONE percent of Americans who make more than $1.3 million--and let Republicans face a vote that boils down to: are you for giving the richest people more yachts and mansions or are you for making sure every American has health care (or, for that matter, investing in alternative energy so we can turn back global warming?). Let Bush veto the rollback and I promise you we will win more seats in the House and Senate in 2008 and probably the White House.
On the brighter side, Nancy Pelosi was singing a different tune on CBS' "Face The Nation", arguing that tax hikes for the wealthy should be on the table.
"As we review what we get from ... collecting our taxes and reducing waste, fraud and abuse, investing in education and in initiatives which will bring money into the Treasury, it may be that (repealing) tax cuts for those making over a certain amount of money, $500,000 a year, might be more important to the American people than ignoring the educational and health needs of America's children," Pelosi, D-Calif., said in an interview aired Sunday.
Let's hope Pelosi follows through on her intention to have some control of the committee chairs and directs Rangel to stop coddling the rich. It's smart economics and smart politics.