BY MICHAEL S. JOHNSON
The tragedy and the comedy of the fiscal cliff negotiations are that they have little to do with the fiscal cliff.
The fiscal cliff is a relatively straight-forward collection of budget issues. But like so many other budget issues that have become the playground of ideologues, the fiscal cliff negotiations have been hijacked by a herculean clash over political dogma, a classic struggle between progressive forces dedicated to the redistribution of wealth and libertarian forces dedicated to dismantling government as we know it.
This is hardly the place or the time where profound political principles and philosophies of government should hang in the balance, not when the country is in such dire need of pragmatic politicians who can make some decisions.
The reality is the fiscal cliff is a pre-engineered series of legislative deadlines, some contrived in the heat of a political campaign by desperate politicians trying to save their own skin. The two deadlines that dominate the headlines are the expiration of the Bush tax rate reductions from 2003 and the sequester, the automatic spending cuts, both of which kick in Jan. 1. There are other deadlines. The Alternative Minimum Tax, if not adjusted, will affect 28 million more taxpayers next year. The reduction in the payroll tax on Social Security and Medicare will revert back to its higher 6 percent rate and extended unemployment benefits are also set to expire. The debt ceiling has to be increased.
What is so telling is that in the face of all of these major tax deadlines threatening to implode the economy, the epicenter of the negotiations is President Obama’s insistence above all else that the Bush tax rate reductions for the rich expire. It means that a 3.5 percentage point increase in taxes for only about two percent of all taxpayers, which will generate so little revenue ($40 billion a year) it won’t even make a dent in the deficit, is placing a stranglehold on the economy and perpetuating the misery of millions of Americans in economic limbo.
Taxing the rich isn’t a deficit issue at all. Even the Washington Post in a Sunday editorial unintentionally acknowledged the actual numbers—$400 billion over ten years is “far too little to dent the debt.” President Obama, as he has done often times in the past, has diverted our attention and diverted the mission. He has turned a basic legislative challenge into an ideological holy war, throwing down the gauntlet before the infidels and holding the nation, and maybe in this case the world hostage while he presses upon us his vision of “what kind of country we want to live in,” as he said again in Michigan.
We keep crying out for leaders with vision. Well, be careful what you ask for. We have one. The President is, as he was throughout the campaign, focused like a laser on the populist thematics that made him the comeback kid of 2012. They have been embedded in our consciousness– raising up the mystical middle class, redistributing wealth, concentrating power in the regulatory framework of the government, and minimizing the power of social and economic institutions that would naturally challenge the new progressivism, particularly Wall Street.
The vision is so important to the President, governing takes a back seat. Our President doesn’t seem to understand or appreciate the meaning of divided government nor how to govern under it. Nor is he much of a negotiator. He is a visionary on a mission, apparently willing to forsake the economy and the plight of millions for the sake of his vision.
It is the great failing of progressivism and so ironic that those who adhere to it as obsessively as the President actually make their new constituency—the middle class—the collateral damage of their quest. It is the middle class that will pay the heaviest price for indecision and intransigence. The millions waiting on the sidelines for relief are expendable in the short-term for nirvana in the long-term.
Speaker John Boehner, who stands on the other side of the field of battle, is a different kind of leader. He is not an ideologue. He does not poke at windmills. He wants to govern, and is, instinctively, a consensus builder, a doer, not a dreamer. His first act after the election was to put revenues back on the negotiating table. This week he extended that to higher taxes for millionaires. He has demonstrated a willingness to govern.
The Speaker is, however, hamstrung and handcuffed by a parallel universe of ideologues. There are libertarian forces within his party who want nothing less than a government so small and feckless that it could once again be housed in its entirety in the Old Executive Office Building next to the White House, where it was in the latter half of the 19th Century. They, like the President have little time for fiscal policy, budget numbers and legislative process.
So there you have it. The election settled nothing. We are in a constant state of political and legislative stalemate because both progressives and libertarians–as distinguished from conservatives–have the leverage to make philosophical jihad out of every issue from energy production to the color of a hamburger. Everybody is a Founding Father these days. Every issue, every disagreement is reason to fight another revolution against the tyranny of the other side.
We would be on our way to energy independence, better health care, the social integration of an immigrant population, better science and math test scores, cyber-security and economic stability if over the past four years more of our political leaders had been less full of their ideologies and more committed to reasoning together and actually governing. Instead, they only posture as though they were governing.
What we have been told for a quarter of a century is that it takes courage to stand up for principles and fight to the last man for that in which you believe. What we have been shown, but have not yet learned, is that courage comes not so much in defending principles but finding the ways to transform those principles into positive energy and political action that serves the public good. Saying no gets you nowhere.
It cannot be said often enough that principles do not have to be sacrificed on the altar of consensus. Our Founding Fathers saw the way. So did Lincoln. So did Reagan. They all took time out from their crusades and governed. President Obama must do the same, sometime soon.
Editor’s Note: Mike Johnson is a former journalist, who worked on the Ford White House staff and served as press secretary and chief of staff to House Republican Leader Bob Michel, prior to entering the private sector. He is co-author of a book, Surviving Congress, a guide for congressional staff. He is currently a principal with the OB-C Group.