The Blue State

Senate Democrats continue to stand firm on Paris Hilton tax

We all know that the Democrats have tried for the last six years to pass a minimum wage hike.  In June, Republicans blocked such legislation from even coming up for a vote.  Now, with the possibility of the Democrats taking back the House and Senate becoming more real, the Republicans are reversing course.  But there's a twist.  Republican Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist unveiled a minimum wage bill that also included a repeal of the estate tax on the richest Americans.  There was some worry that if the Democrats opposed such a measure those inside organized labor would flip out.

But after the Democrats stood firm late last night and rejected the bill, AFL-CIO President John Sweeney understood why it needed to be done:

AFL-CIO President John Sweeney said the proposed estate taxreduction, estimated to cost hundreds of billions of dollars,would have led to cuts in health care, food stamps and othergovernment benefits and "end up hurting the very same peoplethat a minimum wage increase is supposed to help."

Republican Senator Charles Grassley admitted that Bill Frist's legislation was pretty stupid:

"The bottom line is that we bet on the wrong horses,'' saidFinance Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, an Iowa Republican.  "Maybe we should've taken a bet that was more likely to payoff.''

But Bill Frist still tried to spin it as a Democratic Party attack on working Americans:

Frist countered that the failed package was "important to millions ofhard working Americans." And he said the "death tax" on inheritedwealth has meant "90 percent of family businesses do not survive thatthird generation" because they cannot afford the taxes or the cost offinding tax shelters.

Because the Democrats only developed a spine very recently, it doesn't surprise me that Bill Frist thinks he can get away with a comment like that.  It is factually inaccurate that the estate tax, or the death tax as he calls it, causes 90% of third-generation family businesses to go under.  Why?  The estate tax only affects the richest 2% of all American households.  Removing the tax would only increase the division between the wealthiest Americans and everyone else.

Let me put it in perspective.  Thirty years ago, the richest 1% owned one-fifth of America's wealth.  Today, the top-1% own one-third.  Eliminating this estate tax is just part of Bill Frist's effort to empower the already powerful.  Illinois Senator Dick Durbin (D) alluded to the same idea immediately after the vote:

"They (Republicans) can get 6.6 million Americans an increase in theirbasic minimum wage as long as we promised that the fattest of cats inAmerica would get a great big bowl of tax cuts," said Sen. RichardDurbin of Illinois, the second-ranking Democrat in the Senate.

I would like to see the Democrats reintroduce their own minimum wage bill once again, which unlike the Frist legislation does not include a tax cut for people like Paris Hilton.

The minimum wage and Paris Hilton do not go together

The Democrats want to raise the minimum wage.  The Republicans want to repeal the estate tax.  Bill Frist's latest tactic to get the estate tax passed shows just how connected he and his party is to the wealthiest lobbyists on Capitol Hill.  The Senate Majority Leader is telling Democrats that the only way a minimum wage hike will pass the Senate is if a repeal of the estate tax is part of the bill (morphing two unrelated bills into one).  Keep in mind that the estate tax affects only the richest 1% of estates.  And repealing it would add $1 trillion to the National Debt between 2012 and 2021.

In order to satisfy their big donors, the Republicans Senate leadership has been fighting hard for the last few months to do away with the estate tax, or what many refer to as the Paris Hilton tax.  Democratic Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid summed it up best:

"The only road to legislative heaven in this Republican-dominated Congress is to repeal the estate tax," he said.

So what do the Democrats do?  Should they continue to allow themselves to get bullied around by the GOP Senate majority?  Or do they vote it down?  If the Democrats vote against this bill, then the Republicans can come back and say that the Democrats were against the minimum wage being increased.  See the tactic!

I think it's a toss-up either way.  It's hard to support a measure that would add to the National Debt.  On the same token, a few incumbent Democratic Senators up for reelection might be put on the hot seat by their constituents if they oppose a measure that would raise the minimum wage for the first time since 1997.  Regardless, this is a sick tactic on the part of Bill Frist.  You'd think that because Frist is retiring from the Senate this year, he would want to leave with some integrity.
---------------------------------------------------------
Other blogs writing about Bill Frist: Americablog, The Carpetbagger Report, Hotline, Daily Kos, Wonkette, Political Translator, At Home, Not So Humble, Angry Bear, Volunteer Voters, Left Word, Political News.

Bill Frist fools Iowans on health care

In his last year as Senate Majority Leader, Bill Frist took a trip to Iowa over the weekend as he pondered a possible 2008 presidential bid.  The doctor-turned-Republican Senator focused on the affordability of health care, which he considers to be his number one strength.

While speaking in front of Iowans, he claimed to be an advocate of lower health care costs:

"If we can't address that (health care) thataffects our global competitiveness ... we are in real trouble," Fristsaid at a forum on the topic with several prominent physicians andhealth care executives and Iowa GOP House candidate Mike Whalen.

Bill Frist, as is the case with others in politics, correctly relates health care costs to our ability to compete in that sector worldwide.

But if the Iowans who attended that speech took a good look at Bill Frist's health care record in the Senate, then they probably would have had looks of disgust on their faces while listening to him.  Back in 1996, Frist opposed medical savings accounts.  In 1999, Frist voted against a bill that would have guaranteed a patient's bill of rights.  In 2000, he voted no on a bill that would have established a prescription drug program through the Medicare Health Insurance Program.  In 2005, Frist even opposed a measure to allow the government to negotiate with drug manufacturers to ensure the best possible prices for consumers.  And just this year, as seniors groups nationwide begged the President to have the Medicare enrollment deadline extended, Frist opposed it.

Even though he consistently votes against the interests of patients, he does stick his neck out for other lawmakers.  In October of 2004, he used his Senate office as a make-shift clinic to give his colleagues flu shots.  This was during the same year that the country faced a severe shortage of flu vaccines.

As most of us know, part of the problem with health care costs being so high is that median wages are so low.  I bet you know where I am going with this one!  Frist opposes a minimum wage increase, while at the same time advocating for a repeal of the estate tax that only impacts the richest 0.5% of the country.

So please, if you are a health care voter, please think twice before listening to this man spin his record on health care.  It is a dismal one!

---------------------------------------------------

Other blogs writing about the Republicans and their record on Health Care: Entertainment News, This side of the railroad tracks, The Examined Life, Dos Centavos, The Future was Yesterday, Democratic Governors Association, Steve Sailer Sucks, Politics in Mudville, Cato-at-Liberty, State of the Division, Confined Space, Equality for Feingold.

Friday Editorial: GOP flip-flops on minimum wage increase

Throw aside all the GOP pandering that has already taken place this summer -- gay marriage, the estate tax, flag burning, guns without safety locks, the pledge, and most recently the vote on abortion.  Just disregard all of that.  We all know that the Republicans are in a bit of a pickle.  All this is to be expected.

None of the above though even compares to the GOP flip-flop on minimum wage.  One month ago, the effort by the Democrats to loosen the strain on the middle class by raising the minimum wage for the first time since 1997 was blocked by the Republicans.  Well, okay -- if that is what the Republicans believe in, then they had better stand behind it.

One month later, Republicans are wishing they never blocked it.  Voters are upset, and moderate Republicans in the Northeast facing close reelection battles are worried.  That is why, according to Friday's New York Times, the GOP now appear as though they will write their own minimum wage bill and pass it either today or on Monday.

Obviously all of us are for that.  But what I don't understand is why the Democrats have yet to hold the Republicans' feet to the fire on this flip-flop?  Either the Republicans are pro-worker or they are anti-worker -- they can't be both.  It's actually very simple.  The Republicans have already shown that they are more interested in running a national campaign this year that is based on phobias (i.e. the gay marriage issue) and not on worker-related issues that impact real families.  While they should vote 'yes' on this bill, they cannot just sit around and say to themselves, "Well, we're done with this issue."  No, we're not done.  Minimum wage increases should be on at least 20 state ballots across the country.  This is about more than just maximizing turnout.  It's about showing those middle-of-the-road voters what we stand for, and previewing to all Americans what Congress would look like under a Democratic majority.
----------------------------------------------------
Other blogs writing about this issue: Rock Netroots, Give Up Blog, The Liberty Papers, E-Activism, Uncommon Sense, Progressive Minds, Political News, The Most Important Blog, Poverty News Blog.

Pro-Worker vs Pro-Phobia

Many bloggers, including this one, felt that the Democrats did not use the minimum wage issue enough in 2004.  This is a concern that almost all working Americans can agree on.  It is not socially divisive like gay marriage, which is the GOP's main issue this election year, yet again.  So if the Republican leadership wants to use their phobia of gay people to help their party maintain control of Congress, then the Democrats can take the morally high road and fight for worker-related issues -- because the minimum wage actually affects how much food many American families can afford to put on the table each evening.

John Edwards is the one politician who is ahead of the curb.  Over the last few weeks, he has been traveling the country joining with labor groups to support the raising of the minimum wage.

Back in Washington, Democrats are beginning to get it.  Rahm Emanuel, Chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, understands how important minimum wage is to his party's hopes of taking back the House.  As a result, the Democrats are stepping up the pressure:

“We are putting some skin in the game,” said Representative RahmEmanuel of Illinois, chairman of the Democratic Congressional CampaignCommittee. “We’re saying that there will be no pay increases forCongress until there’s an increase in the minimum wage. This separatesus from Republicans.”

Ever since Bush entered office, there has been no increase in the $5.15 an hour national minimum wage.

With the House Democrats planning to introduce legislation that would raise the minimum wage, a number of Republicans facing close election battles this fall are caving in.  Expect enough moderate Republicans to jump ship from their party, leading to the passage of the bill in the House.  However, the bill is not expected to pass the Senate, as it was filibustered there by Republicans last month.  But even though the minimum wage legislation will not pass the Legislative Branch this year, it will indeed be on the ballot in a number of states, maximizing the Democratic election turnout a lot more than the phobia agenda will for Republican voters.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Other blogs writing about the Minimum Wage: Northwest Progresive Institute, Two-Headed Monster, State Action Blog.

Democrats not pushing minimum wage issue hard enough

There is often a misconception that Democrats focus on the wrong issues in the run-up to each election.  I would actually argue that the Democrats push the right issues, however they are often much more cautious than Republicans when doing so -- which is the true problem here.

GOP strategists are incredibly talented when it comes to putting yummy frosting on their somewhat homophobic position on gay marriage, and their overly jingoistic stance on flag burning.  You at least have to give those strategists credit for making red meat out of tofu.  Of course, those two positions, if enacted, would neither prevent gay people from privately marrying nor prevent flag burning from taking place.  Yet, the Republican base gets so fired up when those issues are addressed because they are preached with so much passion.

The Democrats have such a great opportunity to rally the base via the minimum wage issue, which unlike the flag burning or gay marriage amendments has a profound impact on families all across this country.  But as usual, the Democrats have yet to use it to light a fire under their base and attract new voters to their party.

If you do not believe me that the minimum wage issue can help the Democrats, consider the following NBC News poll released this month:

I'm going to read you some positions that someone running for Congress could take. For each one, please tell me whether you would be more likely to vote for a candidate for Congress who takes this position, less likely to vote for this candidate, or would it not make a difference to you either way?

Favors adding an amendment to the Constitution that bans flag burning: More Likely - 44%, Less Likely - 27%, No Difference - 27%, Unsure - 2%

Favors adding an amendment to the Constitution that bans gay marriages: More Likely - 37%, Less Likely - 39%, No Difference - 22%, Unsure - 2%

Favors increasing the minimum wage from five dollars and fifteen cents per hour to six dollars and sixty-five cents per hour: More Likely - 54%, Less Likely - 25%, No Difference - 20%, Not Sure - 1%

As you can see, voters care more about minimum wage than both gay marriage and flag burning.  The Democrats need to focus more attention on this issue, and send minimum wage advocates, such as John Edwards, all over the country to campaign for Democratic House and Senate candidates.  They have such a huge opportunity here, and can invoke passion that will resonate with workers all across the country.
------------------------------------------------------------
Other blogs are writing about this issue: Daily Kos, RawBlogXport, The Ford Report, Just Ain't Right, Nye, Fallen Monk, Corporations Create Fascism, The North Texas Liberal, Daughter of Liberty.

Those making above $20 million to get 43% of estate tax cut

While Senate Democrats and Republicans were busy debating Iraq yesterday, the House passed a bill that would repeal the estate tax on the richest Americans.  Keep in mind that only 1% of all estates are affected by the tax.  But, although the war in Iraq and gas prices top the minds of most Americans, Republicans feel that celebrities like Paris Hilton deserve to have their taxes lowered.

As the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities shows in the following chart, the estates of those making more than $20 million will get 45% of the tax cut:

                                                                                                                                                                                                    

Table 1:             Change Due to Thomas Estate Tax Proposal in 2011* Relative to Making 2009        Law Permanent
Estate Value	Average Tax Cut	Share of Total Tax Cut
Less than $3.5 million	$0	0%
$3.5 million - $5 million	$291,000	5%
$5 million - $10 million	$729,000	23%
$10 million - $20 million	$1.9 million	29%
Above $20 million	$5.6 million	43%
Total	$1.4 million	100%
Source:Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center.       * Table assumes that capital gains rate remains 15 percent. If it reverted to 20 percent, the distributional picture would change only slightly; see  text.

More than one-third of the already enacted Bush tax cuts go to the wealthiest 1%.  This estate tax cut would cut the rich an even larger break.

Bare with me.  Here come more alarming numbers.  As it stands, the National Debt, otherwise known as the birth tax, is at $8.3 trillion.  In comparison, the Bush tax cuts will cost $3 trillion over the next decade, plus interest.  Add that to the current estate tax cut proposal that would cost $1 trillion, also coming over the next ten years.  All in all, you get a grand total of $4 trillion that will be added to the National Debt over the next decade, not including interest.

Interesting how the GOP will vote to raise their own salaries and cut taxes on the richest Americans, yet vote against raising the minimum wage for the middle class.  Now you know their priorities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Related news on the following blogs: Speedkill, Talking Taxes, Deep Thought, Scatablog, Gone Mild, Republic of Dogs, Half Sigma.

Video: Jon Stewart commentary on GOP blocking of minimum wage

In the wake of the Republicans filibustering the Democratic Party's effort to raise the minimum wage, Jon Stewart of the Daily Show gave a commentary of how mixed up our priorities are:

Click to watch video clip

-------- Partial Transcript --------

STEWART: "The Senate voted not to raise the minimum wage, which for the last nine years has been $5.15 per hour.  So if you're working 40 hours a week, you're making $200 large.  They did vote themselves a pay raise, but they didn't vote to raise the minimum wage...I just want to say good.  I'm glad they didn't do it because, you know, the lower strata of American society has had a free ride for too long."

Down-to-earth sarcasm like that shows just how out of touch Republicans were who voted against the minimum wage amendment, yet voted one week ago to give themselves a pay raise.

The Republican filibuster on working Americans

For the ninth time since 1997, the Republicans in the Senate have blocked efforts by the Democrats to raise the minimum wage.  The vote was 52 to 46 in support of raising the $5.15 per hour national minimum wage.  But the Democrats fell short of the 60 votes needed to prevent a Republican filibuster.

Ironically, this vote against the minimum wage came just one week after Republican Senators voted overwhelmingly in favor of increasing their own wages, as they have done almost every year for the last decade.

Minimum wage vs same sex marriage ban

Republicans are using gay marriage as an election issue, and Democrats will respond by using minimum wage as their election issue.  With both issues being used as a mechanism to rally the bases of each party, it will come down to which way independents want to vote.  As of now, they are trending Democrat.  By a 45% to 35% margin, independents favor Democrats, according to the latest Newsweek Poll.

Also, this election is much different than 2004.  Voters are going to be more interested in issues, like minimum wage, that affects their families each day.  Another way of putting it is, "What is more important to you as a voter: putting food on the table, or preventing homosexuals in Massachusetts from marrying?"  I think voters are smart enough to figure this one out.