Pathetic Parties

We need only look at the payroll tax (Social Security) reduction political theater to see how intellectually and ethically bankrupt the two parties are:

First, the Democrats:  This reduction, which hurt the already hurting Social Security situation, was supposed to be a temporary, economically stimulating measure to put immediately spendable money into the hands of middle and lower class wage earners.  While perhaps not a gimmick in the aggregate, for most people it was gimmicky in their personal situations: per paycheck for most people, it didn’t amount to much (and not least because of the low average wages of most Americans these days).  But the Democrats play loose with figures and play games with appearances.  They trot out people/examples of the difference “$40 every two weeks” would make, and gloss over the fact that most of those that amount of money would make a difference to are NOT getting those amounts in tax reduction (they don’t make the “assumed” $50,000 wage).  They don’t make that amount of money because that is the top end of HOUSEHOLD average income—47% of individuals make less than $27,000 a year.  And now the Democrats, because they want to use it as a cudgel against the Republicans, have been portraying the reduction’s scheduled expiration as a tax HIKE by the Republicans (who did, admittedly, largely oppose it), something that looks bad for the party of no tax increases.   Lost in all this is any real concern for the supposed dear-child of the Democrats: Social Security’s financial viability.  Where is the responsible talk about RESTORING the funding level (which is, really, all the expiration of this temporary measure is)?  And how about Dems admitting that more “priming of the adrenaline pump” for the economy is not working all that well?  Not least because both Democratic and Republican administrations have been using that pump in good times and in bad.  The body is failing.  No concern for that.  Political games and political advantage are more important.

Now, the Republicans: The payroll tax reduction did not much interest them either personally (because they’re not on that system) or with their prime constituents (who get most of their money from dividends and capital gains).  And so they (along with their fuhrer, Grover Norquist) showed their hypocrisy by not only failing to oppose its expiration (which could be portrayed as favoring a tax increase, albeit a tax increase on people they mostly have abandoned), but actively working to kill the reduction .  Loud and insistent they (and Norquist) were when the Bush tax cuts were about to expire—loud and insistent that such a thing would amount to a grievous TAX INCREASE.  And so they held hostage at the time unemployment benefits and other things so that the Democrats and Obama would cave to their demands about the Bush tax cuts (which they did).  Then doing similar hostage holding things this time (apparently at the prompting of TEA party members of the House who are being hypocritical as well) about the payroll tax reduction.  Using a false smokescreen of SAYING they wanted to talk about a year long extension, not 2 months, when it was obvious to all players they had no interest in actually extending things for a year.  And also trying to couple it to a demand about the Keystone XL pipeline, an entirely separate matter (anything important enough to vote on should be voted on separately or never brought up—this is a particularly grievous problem in American politics).  Republicans showed their hypocrisy on this tax reduction largely by their silence: because it affects regular people, not largely them or theirs.  Showing that it’s not even ideology: they only really care about tax cuts for the wealthy.

Are they equally to blame?  Probably not.  The Republicans have been a great deal more twisted in their petty politics and servitude to the 1%.  But are the Democrats a viable alternative, independent of the 1%?  No.  It seems only a sustained, country-wide third party to radically remake over the system can change these ways.  A party that can’t be co-opted by one or both of the other parties.