Tax Bill Passes House

After the Senate passed a bill 89 - 8 to allow taxes for the wealthiest Americans to rise, the House of Monkeys Representatives voted late last night to approve the Senate bill by a vote of 257 - 167. Individuals making over $400,000 and families making over $450,000 will see their income taxes increased, and will see an increase in the rate they pay on capital gains. Unemployment benefits for 2 million Americans were extended for a year, and the sequestration of funds for domestic and defense programs was delayed for two months, setting up another battle on that and the debt ceiling.

Interestingly, the bill passed the House with 85 Rethugs voting for the measure, including hapless Speaker John "Orange Boner" Boehner and Randian Rep. Paul "Lyin'" Ryan. Voting against the measure were 151 Rethug dead enders, including Majority Leader Eric "The Cancer" Cantor, who is clearly scheming to win the Speakership at some point.

Cliff Dwelling

In our post-New Year's Eve, almost post-cliff state (the "fiscal cliff" deal passed by the Senate early this morning won't be taken up by the House until this afternoon at the earliest), we hereby offer selected commentary on "the package:"

From Robert Reich, who sees a lot to dislike about the "lousy" deal (and doesn't even count the loss of the payroll tax cut).

From Matthew O'Brien, who talks about the biggest thing missing from the deal, the aforementioned payroll tax cut - or an equivalent middle class stimulus.

From Paul Krugman, who, like Noam Scheiber, doesn't like the deal, but thinks it is better than what some were fearing from the "conceder-in-chief," whom the Rethugs needn't fear in future "negotiations."

From Michael Tomasky, who sees a 200-year-old pattern of obstruction and thinks, considering that, Obama did... ok.

From us, we'll withhold final judgment until after the lesser ape house House of Representatives acts, but right now, it's safe to say we have to go with Ms. Maroney:

(Photo: Olympic gymnast McKayla Maroney's not impressed.)

Come Together, Right Now, Over Me

Many of us in the Washington, D.C., area have heard or read of the Starbucks PR stunt campaign using the message "Come Together" written by its employees on coffee cups to urge a fiscal cliff deal. The stunt campaign contains an implicit sentiment: all that's missing in today's political climate is the spirit of compromise and accommodation ("Can't we all just get along?"). Ezra Klein has an analysis and a better idea:

I don’t think you can look at the last three years and say the White House hasn’t tried to come together with the Republicans.

I also don’t think you can look at the last three years and say the Republicans have tried to come together with the White House.

The check on that sort of behavior is blame. If Republicans are being intransigent and the American people want compromise, then, in theory, the Republicans will get blamed. And that does seem to be happening: The GOP polls terribly, and they lost the 2012 election.

But at the elite level — which encompasses everyone from CEOs to media professionals — there’s a desire to keep up good relations on both sides of the aisle. And so it’s safer, when things are going wrong, to offer an anodyne criticism that offends nobody — “both sides should come together!” — then to actually blame one side or the other. It’s a way to be angry about Washington’s failure without alienating anyone powerful. That goes doubly for commercial actors, like Starbucks, that need to sell coffee to both Republicans and Democrats.

That breaks the system. It hurts the basic mechanism of accountability, which is the public’s ability to apportion blame. If one side’s intransigence will lead to both sides getting blamed, then it makes perfect sense to be intransigent: You’ll get all the benefits and only half the blame.

The two parties are not equivalent right now. The two sides are not the same. If you want Washington to come together, you need to make it painful for those who are breaking it apart. Telling both sides to come together when it’s predominantly one side breaking the negotiations apart actually makes it easier on those who’re refusing to compromise.

Maybe if Starbucks were truly interested in "solving the mess in Washington," it could get its employees to write a different message on its over-priced coffees: "It's The Republicans, Stupid."

UPDATE: President Obama appeared on Sunday talk shows today to emphasize that he's met the Rethugs more than half way, and that the press needs to stop playing the "both sides are to blame" card when it's clear that the Rethugs haven't absorbed the message from the election.

UPDATE II: As Paul Krugman points out, Starbucks compounds the problem by directing people to a web site with a well-known austerity agenda.

Austerity and a Nation of Casual Cruelty

At the risk of turning this blog into "What Charles P. Pierce Said," we look again to the sage of Boston for his thoughts on the "austerity agenda" being mercilessly flogged by the likes of Pete Peterson, "Fix the Debt," and the once great Washington Post Kaplan Daily:

Not all that long ago, we had a national election in which the idea that we are all equal partners in the ongoing creative act self-government out of which comes a political commonwealth suited to the needs of the majority of the country was extensively litigated and, at the end of it, the question was decisively settled in the affirmative. Willard Romney's gaffe about the "47 percent" blew out two of the tires on the bandwagon, and then his selection of zombie-eyed granny-starver Paul Ryan blew out the other two, and that extravaganza of I-Got-Mine-Jack conservatism that went galumphing through Tampa finally cracked both axles. Then, of course, the whole show moved back to Washington, and became subject to the gentle ministration of the political elites and the courtier press that serves them, and the definitive decision of the election quickly was forgotten in favor of the notion that some deal, any deal, was better than what lay beyond a completely artificial deadline that had been produced a year ago in response to a completely created crisis. There is no question that some people will get hurt if we roll all the way down the GFI, but, if the president and the Senate do their jobs, the pain will be temporary. The imposition of an austerity agenda as part of some bipartisan "deal" would be infinitely worse.

The crazy-ass Rethuglicans have no real interest in "deficit reduction" other than as a stalking horse for shrinking the non-military part of the Federal Government down to a bathtub-drownable size (G. Norquist); some Democrats, it seems, are too enthralled with making a deal at almost any cost (B. Obama), and the Beltway Bubble dwellers are, well, Bubble dwelling (R. Marcus). As Pierce says, we're being fashioned into a nation of casual cruelty.

(Image: Cat food-- it's what's for dinner.)

Cliff Diving

August 14, 2012:

"Number one, I guarantee you, flat guarantee you, there will be no changes in Social Security," Biden said, per a pool report. "I flat guarantee you." (our emphasis) -
"First Read," NBC News.

Yesterday:

"The White House says the president’s plan would cut spending by $1.22 trillion over 10 years, compared with $1.2 trillion in cuts from the Republicans’ initial offer. Of that, $800 billion is cuts to programs, and $122 billion comes from adopting a new measure of inflation that slows the growth of government benefits, especially Social Security. The White House is also counting on $290 billion in savings from lower interest costs on a reduced national debt." (our emphasis) - the New York Times, 12/17/12.

Negotiating with yourself again, eh, Mr. President? We thought you and the Democrats won in November on a platform to protect Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

Elections are supposed to have consequences, but not in a perverse way.

Cartoon of the Day -- Fiscal Cliff Edition

Starsky and Hutch Simpson and Bowles to the rescue!

(click to enlarge)

(Tom Tomorrow, via Daily Kos)

Quote of the Day

"How is the president supposed to negotiate with people who say, 'Here's my demands. By the way, I can't give you any specifics. Just make me happy'"? -- Nobel economics laureate Paul Krugman on ABC's This Week.

"Fiscal Cliff" Reads

Eugene Robinson on Speaker John "Orange Boner" Boehner's weak hand and the faux indignation of the Rethuglicans and their Beltway media shills about President Obama holding his ground on eliminating the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy:

"How dare he? President Obama, I mean: How dare he do what he promised during the campaign? How dare he insist on a 'balanced approach' to fiscal policy that includes a teensy-weensy tax increase for the rich? Oh, the humanity."

Ezra Klein reminds us about the deal the Rethuglicans could have had last year and the fact that they are still in deep denial:

"Boehner opens his latest letter by reminding the president that 2012 was 'a status quo election in which both you and the Republican majority in the House were re-elected.' That’s technically true and in every other way incorrect. The fact is that 2012 was a Democratic rout, in which Democrats got more votes than Republicans at the presidential, Senate and House levels. Boehner remains speaker because redistricting saved his majority. Nothing more."

And the main economic and budget pivot that the Democrats ran on and won? Higher taxes for the wealthiest Americans.

Oh Noes! The Fiscal Cliff!

(click to enlarge)

And let's not forget our broken media's role in fanning the flames of hysteria. They have ads to sell!

(Tom Tomorrow, via Daily Kos)