iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Richard Trumka

Richard Trumka

Posted: December 17, 2010 10:03 AM

Today's passage of the $858 billion deal struck between Republicans and President Barack Obama provides vital assistance to a record number of long-term job-hunters. And we certainly needed it -- an average of about $290 a week for Americans who want to work but have been unable to find jobs for more than six months.

But the price was too high. While desperately poor families are forgoing Christmas this year--prompting children to pen "Dear Santa" letters that ask for basics like boots, coats and money for electricity bills -- Republicans fought tooth-and-nail for a gilded gift basket of income tax cuts worth $120 billion for America's super-rich, and a new estate tax exemption would let off all but America's 50 wealthiest families so their pampered children can keep more of their millions.

Let's call these the cut-and-run Republicans, who cut taxes and run from responsibilities.

It's a shame. America's families are suffering. Our dismal economy teeters on a ledge. Last month we saw the number of long-term jobless workers reach 6.3 million, a record high, and a million more than last year.

Despite record corporate profits and two trillion dollars of cash on hand, no one's hiring.

For two years, Republicans have raised alarms about the deficit, convincing some Democrats that it would be imprudent to spend money to fix our economy. Deficit hysteria gave cover to those creating legislative gridlock, stalling and reducing much-needed investments in America's infrastructure and our future, measures that would have created millions of new jobs and rebuilt our economy toward a powerful and prosperous future.

Far from being a time for the American government to pull back, this is the time to invest and rebuild. When jobs and tax receipts are increasing, America can prudently address the deficit.

Instead, we've seen Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell on the Senate floor pull a dour face and warn like a stern parent about reckless spending.

House Speaker-to-be John Boehner is so committed to fiscal restraint, he said, that he would bring up a cost-cutting measure every week in the House. Every single week.

But the Republican Senate minority promised to block every piece of legislation, and even threatened to shut down the government, if they didn't get those tax cuts for billionaires.

What about the billions those tax cuts add to the federal deficit? The cut-and-run Republicans didn't blink an eye.

Where was McConnell's "old-fashioned discipline" that prompted the Senate's record 133 filibusters in 2010?

Where was Boehner's tirade on the House floor against saddling future generations with debt?

These Republicans have finally lost the last shred of credibility.

True fiscal conservatives from generations past wouldn't recognize these new reckless champions for the super-rich.

But we'll remember. From this vote forward, when the cut-and-run Republicans pull out the "fiscal responsibility" card to oppose bills that benefit the American people rather than America's richest individuals and families, the rest of us can tell them to take a hike.

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 50
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
parlimentMike
It's not un-American to investigate 4 crimes.
04:40 PM on 12/17/2010
Politicians who vote to fund wars without raising the taxes to pay for them, and the presidents who allow it have no right to use the phrase fiscal responsibility regardless of the party they register with. Parties that enact Republican legislation, after Republican legislation also have no right to try to scare us with the Republicans being in control after the next election, since they allow them to be in control now.
RealistBC
Micro-bios must pass muster.
04:25 PM on 12/17/2010
Lower taxes do not need spending offsets, yet any other government spending does? Until someone can explain to me how this makes any rational sense, then I will stand with Trumka and anyone else who thinks that the Republicans are a bunch of lying hypocrites who feed their greed addictions with the misery of others.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MeinNH
Ooooo Silly Me
04:20 PM on 12/17/2010
" We've seen Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell on the Senate floor pull a dour face and warn like a stern parent about reckless spending.

House Speaker-to-be John Boehner is so committed to fiscal restraint, he said, that he would bring up a cost-cutting measure every week in the House. Every single week.

But the Republican Senate minority promised to block every piece of legislation, and even threatened to shut down the government, if they didn't get those tax cuts for billionaires.

What about the billions those tax cuts add to the federal deficit? The cut-and-run Republicans didn't blink an eye."

If I hear anyone say that "we can't afford" (such as in the case of a paltry $250 to disabled vets and seniors, education, health care, medicare, medicaid, food stamps, and the list goes on) by those that have held their breathe and threatened to turn blue over continuing failed tax cuts....well I think my head will just explode.
photo
George Hanshaw
There are none so blind as those who will not see.
03:46 PM on 12/17/2010
I think it's time we went after the root cause of what's hurting US government, these obscenely powerful unions that extort big concessions ouut of politicians for the out-years, long after the politician involved have themselves left office.

(Gov-elect Jerry Brown is a special case. What he's about to endure REEKS of irony.)

It was always a bad idea to grant unionization rights to government employees. Now it's becoming obvious we just can't afford the result. Cities should be encouraged to go into bankruptcy to shed themselves of these obligations and states should terminate as many workers as possible NIW - before they reach retirement eligibility for a retirement the state can not afford.

Later, we can hire people back under more reasonable terms.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
atexasdem
Pointing out the foolishness of republican voters.
04:31 PM on 12/17/2010
So what you believe is that workers should not have the right to band together and speak out. Interesting.You don't believe that workers should negotiate work rules then. You don't believe in a fourty hour work week or outlawing child labor. You don't believe in demanding safe working conditions. All these things were fought for by your parents and the other union workers of America. Thousands died to gain you the work rights that you have and you would spit on their sacrifice.
Now that Americans have decided it's every man for himself and companies are always most concerned about their workers we've seen what has happened. Because I don't believe in getting my "facts" from a right wing news source, I've included some articles that show you just how wrong you are. Read them and learn.

http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/2009/02/efca_factsheets.html
http://www.aflcio.org/joinaunion/voiceatwork/efca/57million.cfm
http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/economies/Americas/United-States-of-America-WORKING-CONDITIONS.html
http://www.sharedprosperity.org/bp182.html
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm
photo
George Hanshaw
There are none so blind as those who will not see.
05:08 PM on 12/17/2010
"“So what you believe is that workers should not have the right to band together and speak out. Interestin­g.You don't believe that workers should negotiate work rules then."

When the employers are allowed to band together in monopolistic fashion, I'll agree that the workers should be able to also - at least for private employees.

Public employees work for the taxpayers. If they don't trust us to do right by them, they should find a job elsewhere.....
photo
quorthon
Anti-freedom, anti-life
04:36 PM on 12/17/2010
Here we go again with demonizing gov't employees.

"Later, we can hire people back under more reasonable terms."

You mean minimum wage and no benefits?
RealistBC
Micro-bios must pass muster.
04:55 PM on 12/17/2010
No - Indian wages and NO benefits! Retirement = death.
photo
George Hanshaw
There are none so blind as those who will not see.
05:06 PM on 12/17/2010
"You mean minimum wage and no benefits?”

If that's all they are worth, hell yes. But government employees can always take their case t their real bosses, THE PEOPLE WHO PAY THE TAXES THAT PROVIDE THEIR SALARIES. If they can't convince a majority of these people they are worth more than the minimum wage, why should they get more?
03:46 PM on 12/17/2010
True, but it made me wonder how many people voted in their best interest in Nov or just voted for the party for whatever ridiculous reason???
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Trepasky
Sanity is neither free nor easy
03:07 PM on 12/17/2010
When a family seeks help and the Republicans say, not unless we can afford it, and then give such lovely gifts to themselves and the rich, it causes one to ponder and realize, the cheer for many is the slap in the face from Republicans saying the unemployed are 'lazy'
They are not just hypocrites, they fill blank empty shells of former humans, now puppets of their masters, the wealthier.
Sociopaths and psychopaths have at least a reason for their lack of compassion and empathy.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MeinNH
Ooooo Silly Me
04:21 PM on 12/17/2010
Once again they have spit in the face of the " same American people" they say that they are doing the business of......just sayin'
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
myke3000
Facts are stubborn things...
02:16 PM on 12/17/2010
"Let's call these the cut-and-run Republicans, who cut taxes and run from responsibilities."

Tax-cut tourettes. Get re-elected. Wash. Rinse. Repeat. same thing happens over and over again, and ultimately the country will spiral downward until someone acts like an adult in the room and calls them out on their behavior and stands up to them - firmly.

I think a lot of folks had/have faith that this President was that person. I hope he is as well, but I wish he was a bit more firm in his fights as he would win them. He displayed that he can do it - when he attended the Republican caucus luncheon last year and took questions; when he held the Health Care summit and made both transparent and televised both meetings. I surely hope we see more of that, and we could have used it on this debate for the tax cuts extension.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
TheRealThang
you can pray you will never let it slip away.
02:00 PM on 12/17/2010
surely you don't think the rich and powerful actually BELIEVE trickle-down works. That's just what they tell the suckers, you know that right?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
marignymitch
E pluribus unum percent
01:46 PM on 12/17/2010
As have the Democrats who support this nation-busting bill.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rinpochet
Do unto others ...
03:40 PM on 12/17/2010
As the Republicans would not support extension of unemployment benefits without all the goodies for the rich, they had little choice. Although wish Obama had put up a fight against those tax cuts for the wealthy.

The Democrats care about the well being of the American worker while the Republicans would walk over their bodies to give away taxpayer money to their wealthy friends.
12:51 PM on 12/17/2010
The Republicans effectively gave up any claim to "fiscal responsibility" in the first year of the Reagan administration, when they enacted tax cuts without enacting the companion cuts in the budget that Reagan's budget director, David Stockman, proposed. Since then, they have continued to claim that they are for "fiscal responsibility," but repeatedly have failed to take concrete action to support that claim.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
TheRealThang
you can pray you will never let it slip away.
12:44 PM on 12/17/2010
certainly Republicans are to blame. Their policies destroyed this country. But their Democratic enablers also deserve the blame.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Marianne TB
01:52 PM on 12/17/2010
fanned
jerseyjoe99982002
less government means more in my pocket
12:22 PM on 12/17/2010
Lets be intellectually honest here. Obama was more concerned with his legacy on healthcare than working on jobs. Rich people do not horde their money in banks. They invest money to create jobs. Government, on the other hand, wastes money. Government does not create anything. They dont make homes and they dont make autos . They create nothing and only waste everything
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MilesToGo
12:42 PM on 12/17/2010
Hey, Joe, your judgment about government is over-drawn. A society needs a well-regulated government for very many reasons, because is can help "set the table" for good commerce, production and safety and fairness for all the people. As for the wealthy not hoarding: Just look at what happened recently in Switzerland, which had promised to identify suspect deposits...nothing. The issue curiously went away. Why do you think off-shore and Caribbean banks are so popular? Because wealthy want to pay their fair share of taxes. Get real, man.
jerseyjoe99982002
less government means more in my pocket
01:04 PM on 12/17/2010
Miles. Thanks for the nicely written comment. I also agree that society does need a well- regulated government. I also believe that the private sector needs to be regulated to a degree. But over regulation can be just as harmful as not enough regulation. As far as off shore banks are concerned , where money is sheltered and hidden, that is where government can do some good. Everyone needs to pay their fair share. The problem the approach to the rich is this. Those that want to tax the rich more, are the same peolpe that know the loopholes. Did you ever ask yourself why both parties dont close the loopholes? Basically, I am saying that the Dems use the rich argument for power and votes, and the Repub s do the same. Both parties are corrupt in my opinion
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
TheRealThang
you can pray you will never let it slip away.
12:45 PM on 12/17/2010
Here's another apologist for increased corporate welfare. Always with their hands out wanting more unearned money. Its never enough.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Marianne TB
01:53 PM on 12/17/2010
yep
12:10 PM on 12/17/2010
The solution to this economic destructio¬n is not extending unemployme¬nt compensati¬on and saying we're compassion¬ate. That prolongs the problem. The way you address unemployme¬nt is by creating a growth environmen¬t -- and there's not one Obama policy that does that.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
TheRealThang
you can pray you will never let it slip away.
12:43 PM on 12/17/2010
I thought Obama's cutting taxes for the rich would spur investment? Reaganomics? Yay?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JonathanLA
01:24 PM on 12/17/2010
You are wrong! Obama's policies to building the infrastructure certainly create jobs--especially construction jobs which with the housing crash are what started this whole mess!
12:00 PM on 12/17/2010
Allowing the gross accumulation and concentration of wealth to continue in this country will ONLY lead to more of the same, especially after the SCOTUS franchised out our votes to shadow PACs.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:48 AM on 12/17/2010
WHY do people consistently/conveniently forget that the dems had a hand in this debacle?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Under Fed yet Fed Up
Always great distaste for both political parties
11:53 AM on 12/17/2010
Only dems and liberals seem to forget.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MilesToGo
12:48 PM on 12/17/2010
Honest Democrats acknowledge a shared responsibility. But it is an issue of proportionality, and the conservative, GOP buisness & banking-oriented "leaders" by a large margin drove what became our current financial debacle. "The Economist" listed the 25 most responsible for this Great Recession, and as I recall about 2 were Democrats or liberal-leaning, the rest were GOP or conservative politicians (that is, a few were not Americans.) Factually, the Dems didn't share equally in the causes.