I really hope that the Democrats will stand strong. As the NYT pointed out, if the Republican insist on holding the middle-class tax cuts hostage to their demand that the upper-income tax cuts be extended as well, the Democrats should “stand up to hostage-taking and let all the tax cuts expire on New Year’s Day, then reinstate those for the middle class.”

That seems like the key — the willingness to, if necessary, let the middle class tax cuts expire along with the upper-income ones, and then come back with a proposal to reinstate the middle-class tax cuts and force the Republicans to block that if they dare.

Their justification for why eliminating those Obama-era tax credits wouldn’t constitute reneging on their precious no-tax-increases pledge? Well, they say, those tax credits were “temporary” ones, so letting them expire isn’t the same as raising taxes. But as the Times editorial points out, the Bush-era tax cuts were supposed to be temporary, too. And frankly I’m a bit surprised that the Republicans would be stupid enough to pass a bill that, without question, raised taxes on low and moderate-income taxpayers even as it protected tax cuts for the rich, completely undercutting their claims that they are all about keeping taxes low for everyone, not just their rich benefactors. Maybe it’s just another example of them reflexively defaulting to the “Obama Things Bad, Bush Things Good” mentality that so frequently seems to rule their decisions, often to their detriment

The Republicans don’t seem to have any sort of cogent explanation for why they consider ending the “temporary” Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy to be a tax increase, but eliminating the “temporary” Obama-era tax credits for low and moderate income families somehow isn’t.

Lucky for them, there has been (as far as I can tell) very little reporting about the low and moderate-income tax hikes that were part of the Republican’s bill.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/07/why_the_tax_vote_matters.php?ref=fpblg

In cases where one party is strongly attached to renewing the law, and the other party would be perfectly content to let the law expire, then there are indeed both procedural and numerical advantages to the side that is willing to let the the law expire.

But in this case, it’s not just a question of the Republicans wanting the “temporary” tax cuts to continue and the Democrats being perfectly happy if they all expire (and therefore being able to take advantage of the factors that make it easier to block legislation than it is to advance legislation.

Unless the Democrats are willing to let the middle-class portion of the tax cuts expire (and it seems they aren’t) then they need to pass a new bill just as much as the Republican do.

Since a Senate minority or presidential veto can stop action, taking action is always politically more difficult than not taking action. Every bill must thntread a complicated maze of special interests and deals, as well as positioning for impending elections. Doing nothing and blaming the other side is politically much easier

Since a Senate minority or presidential veto can stop action, taking action is always politically more difficult than not taking action. Every bill must thntnative@gmail.comntread a complicated maze of special interests and deals, as well as positioning for impending elections. DoingNot A Native nothing and blaming the other side is politically much easier.