Naysaying Republicans to middle class: Drop dead

Republicans don’t care about the middle class, and if they can’t deliver tax cuts to their wealthy friends and benefactors, then nobody gets relief.

Too harsh? Perhaps, but that charge can now be levied without exaggeration following a couple votes on the Senate floor Wednesday that may be constitutionally questionable, but politically potent.

After Minority Leader Mitch McConnell agreed with Majority Leader Harry Reid not to filibuster, the Senate voted on two bills: One, by McConnell, would have extended all the tax cuts enacted under former President George W. Bush and continued in 2010 by President Barack Obama. That measure failed 45-54, on a mostly party-line vote.

Then Democrats got a vote on their proposal, which would keep the tax cuts for individuals earning $200,000 or less or couples earning $250,000 or less. That version passed, 51-48, with every Republican in the chamber voting no, along with independent Joe Lieberman and Democrat Jim Webb.

That list of naysaying Republicans, by the way, includes Nevada’s other senator, Dean Heller.

One would think Republicans would have reasoned thus: We’re for tax cuts. We think taxes are bad and hurt the economy, thwart job creation and give government too much money to spend. While we’d like to extend them for everyone, that idea failed. So we’ll take half a loaf and continue tax relief for the middle class. One would think the vote would be 100 to zero.

But no.

Instead, every Republican in the chamber said that if they couldn’t have tax relief for people earning more than $200,000 per year, then there would be no tax relief for anybody.

Heller Chief of Staff Stewart Bybee explained, thus: “Senator Heller voted to extend current tax rates across the board including middle class tax relief. He does not believe the constant threat of tax increases is healthy for economic recovery, nor does it create the stability our economy needs to grow. Even if it’s just a politically driven show vote, it has a negative impact on the very people we need to create jobs.”

And what about the rest of the people, to whom Heller could have extended relief and certainty? Apparently, helping them was out of the question so long as we’re not comforting “the very people we need to create jobs.”

Republicans note the bill raises constitutional questions, because Article 1, Section 7 of the U.S. Constitution, specifies that “All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives.” And since this bill will allow the Bush-era tax cuts to expire, it will raise revenue. Democrats reply Republicans didn’t invoke that provisions when passing other revenue-raising bills in the Senate first, including bills to fund the FAA, the transportation bill, the farm bill and the Violence Against Women Act.

Regardless of that constitutional flaw, House Speaker John Boehner said during his weekly news conference that he would bring the Senate bill to the floor, along with a bill similar to McConnell’s, to extend tax cuts for everyone.

Whether either version passes, the genius of the Senate’s action was to bifurcate tax relief for the wealthy and for the middle class.

So long as they were linked in a single proposal, Republicans could credibly claim they supported cuts for both middle-income earners and the more well-off.

But not anymore. Regardless of their reasoning, every person who voted no on the Democratic plan can credibly and accurately be said to have voted against giving tax relief to the middle class.

Remember that, because there’s a nearly 100 percent chance you will see that material again, and very soon.

Steve Sebelius is a Review-Journal political columnist and author of the blog SlashPolitics.com. Follow him on Twitter (@SteveSebelius) or reach him at 387-5276 or SSebelius@reviewjournal.com.