Hullabaloo

Monday, July 20, 2009

 
What Defines A Democrat?

by digby

I know that the Democratic Party wants to be a big tent for pretty much everybody in the whole wide world, but this seems to me to be a disqualifier:

A group of Democrats elected in recent years from some of the country's richest congressional districts have emerged as a stumbling block to raising taxes on the wealthy to pay for President Barack Obama's ambitious health-care overhaul just as the plan has begun to meet increasing resistance over its cost.

Friday, two freshmen representatives -- Dina Titus, from suburban Las Vegas, and Colorado's Jared Polis, representing Boulder, Vail and some of the tonier suburbs of Denver -- joined Republicans to vote against Mr. Obama's top-priority health-care overhaul when it faced a vote in their House Education and Labor Committee. One reason was a one-percentage point-surtax on couples earning between $350,000 and $500,000 -- gradually increasing to 5.4 percentage points on earnings more than $1 million -- to pay for it.

I know that many Dems are corporate lackeys who look out for big business. I find it hard to believe they can call themselves anything but conservative Republicans, but somehow they have convinced their constituents that helping business helps save jobs, so its a progressive ideal. It's something we need to work on.

But as far as I'm concerned, if you don't believe in the progressive income tax you've talked yourself out of the Democratic party, period. There is no more fundamental tenet of the progressive philosophy. It's like being a socialist Republican -- philosophically incoherent. (And you'll notice, there aren't any such things.) Protecting people who make more than $350,000 dollars a year from being taxed beyond their currently historically low level --- the vaunted top 1% --- simply cannot be a Democratic value. It's absurd on its face.

This is concern trolling by the Wall Street Journal, to be sure. But they didn't make up Jared Polis' position. If Polis can't explain to his wealthy Democratic constituents why they have an obligation to give back to ensure that our society is stable and secure and our economy is strong, then he needs to go into another line of work.


.
digby 7/20/2009 10:00:00 AM |