Bush’s leadership challenge

September 21, 2005

Slowly but surely, little by little, the number of Republicans willing to at least “revisit” the lavish tax cuts passed over the last five years is growing. The question then becomes how quickly — or how successfully — will the rest of the party smack down the very idea.

Yesterday, Treasury Secretary John Snow opened the door slightly, saying “tax cut permanence” may be pushed to the “back burner.” Even more surprisingly, the Washington Post reported this gem:

…White House officials said Snow was accurately reflecting Bush’s intentions.

Adding to the “momentum,” if you want to call it that, was Sen. Judd Gregg’s new-found flexibility on the issue.

The chairman of the Senate Budget Committee refused to rule out increasing taxes yesterday as he and many of his GOP colleagues called for offsets to temper the effect of the next round of federal spending for disaster relief in the Gulf Coast.

“We’ve got two sides to the ledger,” said Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.). “I’m willing to look at a revenue solution … as part of a package.”

Not surprisingly, not everyone is on board with fiscal sanity.

But about 90 minutes [after Treasury Secretary John Snow’s comments], House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) held a news conference in his office and asserted that “we’re not reexamining” the commitment to extend the tax cuts. “That’s not an option,” DeLay said, then, for emphasis, added: “Not an option.”

The fracture is becoming more apparent every day. There’s a reasonable group of Republicans who are willing to at least consider scaling back tax cuts, and there’s an even larger group who are anxious to gut federal spending. Bush, meanwhile, watches from the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, waiting, wondering what he’ll do.

So far, it’s not going well.

Trying to allay mounting concerns, White House budget director Joshua B. Bolten met with Republican senators for an hour after their regular Tuesday lunch. Senators emerged to say they were annoyed by the lack of concrete ideas for paying the Hurricane Katrina bill.

“Very entertaining,” Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said sarcastically as he left the session. “I haven’t heard any specifics from the administration.”

“At least give us some idea” of how to cover the cost, said Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Mont.), who is facing reelection in 2006. “We owe that to the American taxpayer.”

The pushback on Katrina aid, which the White House is also confronting among House Republicans, represents the loudest and most widespread dissent Bush has faced from his own party since it took full control of Congress in 2002.

Sounds like the Republicans need a president who can lead. Too bad they’re stuck with Bush.

They’ll never cancel or roll back a tax cut. It just isn’t in the DNA of the GOP. They’d sooner shut down the government.

  • It is interesting/telling to listen to many of the hurricane victims’ stories that are being presented by various news outlets. Case in point, NPR interviewed a fisherman from St. Bernard Parish this morning. Now, seeing that that Parish voted strongly for Bushco, and knowing the area the fisherman was describing, I would bet dollars to donuts that the gentleman voted for Bush. That area was also populated by very, very many (but not all, of course) who feel there is no good tax and that all taxes should be abolished, as “they (the residents) can take care of themselves and don’t need no government interference and don’t want their money goin’ to no welfare cheats.” Therefore, it was interesting to hear this man squeal and beg for federal assistance, money to be given to him and his friends, for their personal losses and business losses. The man was now a veritable FDR Democrat. And you hear all sorts of similar stories, from throughout LA and MS. Which to me is rather telling. The bottom line is that most of these folks are just plain self-interested and greedy. They want to keep their money if that money is designed or designated to go help others–absolutely no sense of a broader community. But if they themselves need help, all of a sudden everyone and their mother should be helping them out. Cheap and greedy are the overriding factors. Which is why I think the current group of asshats dominating the GOP will always have the upper hand with these folks. They are all cheap and greedy.

  • they can repeal the tax cut if they want, but that extra revenue is still gonna just be given away to halliburton and bechtel in the form of no-bid contracts. especially since it looks like rita will decimate whatever’s left of offshore oil production in the gulf coast.

  • Gee, I wonder what Tom Delay is going to say and do if Rita slams into
    Texas and knocks the hell out of Galveston and Houston. (God forbid that it comes to this). He may be screaming then for more “creative
    solutions” to disaster relief. It’s one thing to blow off Democratic and Black Louisiana. It’s another thing when TEXAS has to suffer.
    He’ll be pulling every string he can. He might even start to see the
    value of pushing back those tax cuts. Can you spell HYPOCRITE?

  • Actually, as tragic as it’d be, the best thing that could happen to American politics is for Texas to be wiped off the fucking map.

    I don’t say that because I hate Texas, or Texans (hell, I lived there for a few years, it was a culture shock but there are some wonderful people there). We really could do without any more big disasters right now, thank you very much.

    But rather because Texans have an annoying habit of it all being ABOUT TEXAS. It’s Texas, Texas, Texas, Texas #1, “don’t mess with Texas”, etc. It is the most parochial place in America; I’ve lived in New York too, and Texas is way more snooty. Remember the old New Yorker cartoon of a huge map of Manhattan with nothing but wasteland beyond the Hudson river? Texans think like that, and then some. Ain’t nothing that matters more than TEXAS. Their brand of nationalism is unique. You could sell anything in Texas by slapping a Texas flag or a map of Texas on the damned thing.

    It’s the only state that was once an independent Republic, and can legally secede from the Union by special condition of their incorporation into it, and people there will remind you of that. What Sicily is to Italy, Texas is to the USA. It’s not really “with” the rest of us. They’re better than us, of course. It’s exceptionalism to the n’th degree.

    Which would not be a problem, just a mildly amusing bravado/swagger and kind of uniquely charming. Except that the oil corporations that run our government– and by extension our planet– are themselves run by Texans who have that deep-seated TEXAS FIRST sub-nationalism. And the Texans in charge of the USA have brought that exceptionalism and “lone cowboy” attitude to the USA, will see some of their backing erode. Watching Shrub and Cheney (both Texas oilmen) scoff at the UN reminds me of how Texans scoff at the feds. Suddenly, after getting pounded by a global-warming storm, Texans may see the federal government as necessary and vital– and maybe even less proud of the oil-burning that is the foundation of their economy.

    So, if the shit hits the fan in Tejas, then the country’s politics will begin a major shift. “Gummint” will be viewed less and less as an evil force, and more as a necessary part of civilisation. Some of the legendary Texas individualism and xenophobia may go away, and a sense of being part of the USA and a participant in the common good may begin to take root in the land of Sam Houston– and Sam Bass. http://www.ci.round-rock.tx.us/planning/rrcollection/mainstreet/sambass/img1.gif

  • It’s the only state that was once an independent Republic, and can legally secede from the Union by special condition of their incorporation

    You mean we could force Texas out of the Union? Why didn’t we think of this before?

    • Comments are closed.