No Change of Horses

In 1864, when President Abraham Lincoln was at his most unpopular and running for re-election, his campaign slogan was “Don’t change horses in the middle of the stream.” Whether you think invoking Lincoln here is appropriate or not, it appears the country has decided to hang on to Mr. Obama for another four years.

Even for Obama-haters, there are certain advantages to this situation. There’s no reasonable cause anymore for congressional Republicans to refuse to deal with him. For the next four, he’s what they’ve got. For Mr. Obama, there’s no reason for political timidity. He doesn’t have to worry about re-election. It opens the door to compromise – a relatively short time before the mid-term election for Congress – where the two parties could actually get something accomplished. President Obama did not win anything resembling a mandate; the Republicans didn’t substantially improve their position in Congress. It’s a wash, so there’s nothing to crow about, and crowing is a waste of time, anyway.

I have some requests for things both sides can work on going forward – after they pull us back from the “fiscal cliff.”

TAX REFORM. Mitt Romney had the germ of a great idea. The issue isn’t just about taxing the rich, which would only be a Band-Aid on top of old Band-Aids. Simplify the tax code! In the end, it will benefit everyone, taking a huge monkey off the backs of individuals and businesses alike. This is one of the keys to dealing with the deficit.

I heard a horror story on NPR this morning about something called the Alternative Minimum Tax, a regulation adopted in the 1980s to make sure wealthy people were paying their fair share of taxes. Apparently, the story said, this regulation was never indexed to inflation, and Congress has to “patch” it each year. If they fail to do so, the AMT could apply to incomes as low as $75,000 – which could mean an instant tax hike as much as 20 percent for the average middle-class family. This is one of the poster children for why the tax system needs to be overhauled – and soon.

IMMIGRATON. Solve this one once and for all. Do the best job you can sealing the borders. Then, come up with a national system that both recognizes realities and is fair to the people who’ve been playing by the rules. Mr. Obama, you promised to deal with this in your first term. You have another opportunity to make good on your promise.

HEALTH CARE. Just because Obamacare is the law, it doesn’t mean Congress and the President have to stop working on this issue. How about tort reform, for one thing? And maybe some real controls on insurance charges?

OTHER STUFF. If there’s time, why not work on getting rid of the Senate filibuster, abolishing the Electoral College, and take a whack at campaign finance reform so we don’t have to endure another election like this one?

These are all very difficult, but they can be solved if elected officials make up their minds to work together to solve them instead of posturing. The President – and the Congress -- have a real opportunity to leave a legacy.

Mr. President, if I may address you directly, enough of the electorate has decided that you are the more effective leader than Mitt Romney. So LEAD already! Get out IN FRONT of issues instead of letting them beat down your door. Put plans on the table before your opponents do. And hold more news conferences -- keep us updated; bring us along with you as you deal with these problems. We just told you we're on your side -- as long as it's the side of getting things done.

Triple COA

Brilliant.

No we see why lawyers get to charge so much. The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling gives both major parties something to crow about – and saves the Court’s reputation at the same time.

With the majority opinion that the individual must buy health insurance or pay a penalty is essentially taxation, and that taxes, of course, are constitutionally OK, saves the health care law. The time and effort President Obama and others spent on getting it passed wasn’t wasted, or so they will be able to say.

But conservatives have argued all along that it’s a not-so-hidden tax, and the only way you avoid it is by buying health insurance from private suppliers. Which means, the only way to get rid of it, the commentators say, is to elect Mitt Romney and make both the House and Senate Republican in the November election. Far from ending the debate on this issue, the Court’s ruling throws a little gasoline on the fire.

According to the reports, the deciding vote on the Court was cast by Chief Justice John Roberts. So now, the court gets to say, see, we’re not the ee-vil reactionaries you’ve been thinking we are (or at least Roberts gets to say that).

I’ve always thought the general principles of the law are a good thing, and that it solves quite a few problems, but not enough. There’s nothing in it about tort reform – and there should be. It remains to be seen how effective the regulations on transparency will be at holding down health care costs. I have my doubts.

For now, though, the Supreme Court’s ruling may not quite be a perfect game, but it’s definitely a political triple play.

Whose Business Is It, Anyway?

I am no fan of Mitt Romney’s, but there’s something unsavory about bullying candidates for office into releasing their tax returns. I don’t know exactly where this began, but it should be recognized that candidates have the right to say NO when this demand is made of them.

Where exactly does this end? What’s to stop a candidate from agreeing to submit to an audit – and shaming the rest of the field into so doing? And who gets to do the audit?

Romney’s mealy-mouthed admission that he pays maybe 15 percent on his federal taxes – because the vast majority of his income is from investments – does bring to light the inherent inequalities in the current tax system. Hopefully, the cries for a simplification of tax policy, and a reduction of its use for social engineering purposes, will register with our representatives in Washington (we should live so long) – but this is another program I’m not interested in debating here, at least today.

But I wish he would have said, when the demand was made of him, “I’ll think about it, but it’s really none of your business.”

If this is such a big deal, maybe there should be legislation REQUIRING all those who run for public office to release their latest tax returns. At least it would level the playing field and call a halt to this political dance.

These days, thanks to Zaba, Intelius, etc., you can find an awful lot about any individual just by paying the freight and doing one of those “premium” searches. The media – at least those who can afford it – should do that with all candidates running for local offices.

As for Mr. Romney, he would do much better in these debates if he actually answered a question now and then – but again, that’s another program.