Quote:It would also be nice if everyone read everything before they voted on it, but this has not been true of American government since Washington was president, and probably not even then. I think most Democrats are assuming that the bill they voted for was what it appeared to be: the same package they've been discussing all along, with some t's crossed and i's dotted, and a few of the more vulnerable programs cut out to satisfy three Republican votes (Snowe, Specter, and Collins, no big surprises there). I think they're also more than happy to stick it to the Republicans, who have been spending the last few weeks with their fingers in their ears singing a happy song about fluffy pink tax cuts and trying desperately to ignore the fact that they haven't got a shred of credibility left, rather than facing up to reality and making a compromise with a President so eager to compromise he is giving Neville Chamberlain a run for his money.If you look at the history of this bill, the only thing that's been cut back on are the tax cut proposals to make way for more spending ideas. Because, you know, if we waited a day or two to let people read the bill they might actually lose political support. Better to get it passed quickly before the people understand what is happening and call their representatives.
As for the Laffer curve, neither the D's or the R's understand the edges of diminishing returns. It is true that if excessive taxes are limiting growth, then lowering taxes will encourage growth. But it is also not true that lowering taxes will always encourage growth. Unless the Congress was willing to take a huge political risk (not this Congress) and bring taxation of corporations in the USA in line (broaden the base and lower the rates) with our major international competition it would have little impact on the economy. I believe Mr. Obama wants to sell his ideas to Republicans, but I haven't seen anywhere that he is willing to listen seriously to their ideas. For now, compromise is on the back burner, and the only time "bipartisan" would be possible is if the R's at this point just rolled over on their principles and rubber stamped the D's agenda.