The Note: Is Dean preparing to change his position on tax repeal?

[Karmadillo]

Below is an excerpt from today's the Note. Last week, Thomas Oliphant suggested Dean was considering middle class tax relief. It wouldn't be surprising since it would be a hard sell to take away cuts/credits from the middle class. Also, it's pretty clear Kerry is ready to try to take advantage of their respective differences on this issue. Dean may be hesitant to do this since he's getting some scrutiny on changing positions, but if he's going to make a change, it's probably better to do it now rather than later.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/TheNote/TheNote.html

<edit>

The Wall Street Journal's Jackie Calmes reports that Dean "plans a 'tax reform' plan preserving middle-class taxes at current levels. That's a switch from his call to repeal all Bush tax cuts and fund health care. Kerry blasted that as a tax on the middle class."

Here's something we'd add: In his stump speeches nowadays, Dean says that he'd get rid of as many tax cuts "as we can" … auguring a slow move to the position that some middle class tax reductions may have to be kept.

[TLM]

1. Well Dean is in favor of middle class tax reform...

for both individuals and small businesses.

The question is if he'll leave some of the bush tax cuts in place, or repeal them all and later insitute a more reasonable tax cuts and tax credits for small business and the middle class and working poor.

[tjdee]

2. So now, will ALL the Dean supporters think that's wonderful?

I don't want to generalize, but wasn't there just a thread the other day on how Dean wanting to stop ALL the tax cuts was just the wonderfullest thing?

If he does this, I mean... shouldn't you have your policy in place before you announce your policy?

???

[CentristDemocrat]

3. Dean is a saint

:eyes:

[tjdee]

16. I just don't get it.

Maybe I'll try to find that thread.

[Eloriel]

4. And should you rigidly stick to it even when new information

comes along that prompts you to grow your stand on the matter?

There are some -- Krugman, for exampole -- who have said repealing all of it wouldn't be a good idea.

I might personally be disappointed if he does change, but I'll wait to see IF he does and if so, what his new plan is.

Eloriel

[tjdee]

6. What new information is there?

There are PLENTY of people who have said repealing all of it wouldn't be a good idea, in fact Kerry, Edwards, Krugman, on and on and on.

Is there new information I'm unaware of?

What I'd like to know is how Dean is going to reconcile any new plan to what he's been saying for MONTHS now.

Maybe it's premature, seeing as this is just in The Note (but many took the Note to be the gospel truth on From and Reed advising Lieberman and Edwards).

I'm fairly certain his supporters won't care, but I'm almost as certain that Rove will use this (and other misspeakings and positions) to nail Dean to the wall. He is becoming more susceptible to attacks by doing this, and I care only because if he's the nominee I don't want him to lose by doing dumbass things like this, if true.

[sangh0]

13. There is no new info

which is why Eloriel's post contained no new info.

[AP]

18. I've never been elected to office ever, and I knew where I stood on this

issue from the first second I heard about it.

[bearfartinthewoods]

47. "to grow your stand"

riiiight..goood one

[Capn Sunshine]

5. I have a real problem with this "Change=negative" POV

It's as if no one in the cmapaign, most especially the candidate , is allowed to mature, grow, or consider additional information.

SO WHAT if Dean changes any position? Doesn't this show true flexibilty and actual thoughtful consideration? Isn't rigid ideology what gets us into most messes? How is this a bad thing for ANY candidate?

[CentristDemocrat]

7. So it's ok for Kerry then too?

[tjdee]

8. Shouldn't he have thought about that BEFORE releasing a plan?

As Kucinich said--Hello??

One of the major charges against Dean is that he is not ready for the bigtime. Changing a policy position in the middle of a campaign does not help in that regard. Does he have a tin ear? Did the other candidates convince him he was wrong?

It *could* be said that he is trying to shuffle toward the center since he thinks he's going to be the nominee. Or, that he thinks his tax plan isn't popular--hell, why not change it to someone else's?

[Evanstondem]

9. Dean and Taxes

Repealing all of Bush's tax cuts does not prevent Dean, or any other candidate,from introducing new, better targeted tax cuts.

[tjdee]

10. Oh, okay, I kind of get it.

That's a little different from what I was thinking....
but I still maintain that he should have had ONE PLAN at the beginning.

What changed?

[blm]

15. You mean like the TARGETED taxcuts the Dems pushed in 2001?

The ones that were targeted to the poor and middle class? The ones that Dean lied about and told audiences that Gephardt, Lieberman, Edwards and Kerry voted FOR Bush's taxcuts for the wealthiest when NONE of them did?
The ones that helped prompt Dean's accuastion that they were "Bushlite"...y'mean THOSE type of targeted taxcuts?

[AP]

38. But if he's staking out his position here: reducing defecit

trumps progressive taxation.

Why would he stake out this position only to legislate differently?

I think you're trying to say, 'trust his character, rather than what he says.' That's how Bush ran. I think it's a terrible way to run a campaign.

[AP]

19. I think the real problem for Dean is that he runs the risk

of appearing to be very fiscally conservative to the point of being willing to tip the balance in favor of Wall St, and big business, yet he's trying to run as a progressive. So he'll talk progressively, but covertly he wants to do things that help the bond brokers and IBM.

The real risk here for his candidacy is that he knew all along the implication of progressive taxation, and wanted to do Wall St a favor (the same one they ask of Argentina, and Brazil and Venezuela -- raise taxes on the middle class to pay off your debts which boost profits for Wall St), but as soon as he thinks that his progressive base might actually understand how conservative it is to be against progressive taxation, he then tells them what they want to hear. It makes you wonder where his alliances are, and what he's promising big business.

The problem is not that Dean might have needed more information to do the liberal thing. The problem is that he might have needed more information to see if the people he needs to vote for him were going to see through the charade and call him on the issue.

And when he does change his position, he knows his supporters will say, but he really cares about progressivism because it's in his character.

Say what?

[sandnsea]

55. Or BEFORE calling the other candidates 'Bush-lite'?

That's the annoying part to me.

[sangh0]

14. What additonal information?

It's as if no one in the cmapaign, most especially the candidate , is allowed to mature, grow, or consider additional information.

And the time to mature and grow is BEFORE you decide to run for President of the United States. He's not running for "U.S. Adolescent"

[Capn Sunshine]

22. But you say once in the race, stop all thought?

Stop any process of arriving at conclusions? Stop, freeze everything, because you're a candidate, who stepped up to speak against Bush?

Just stop all dialog. Stop all political compromise.Stop everything; you're a candidate now.FREEZE!

No wonder elections are so traumatic for some.

[sangh0]

24. What's the new information?

We keep hearing about how new conclusions are justified by new info, but no one can say what new info is driving this shift.

I've known from Day 1 what my position on taxes is. I don't have to keep shifting it. So why is Dean still shifting? Does he not have enough information and experience to make a sound decision, or is still learning the ropes?

The Presidency needs more than on-the-job training. The last time a pResident, namely Bush*, "grew into" the job, we ended up invading two nations in two years.

[tjdee]

42. Is the 'new information' Krugman's piece?

Is that what they're talking about?

[AP]

44. Perhaps, being on-message for Dean is being 100% against Bush

and they made a calculation that she stay on the anti-Bush message, rather than acknowledg the progressive taxation angle. When they got the new information that most liberals are way on board with progressive taxation and find it more important than being against Bush 100%, they're going to shift position.

To me, that's looking it in a light that's most favorable for Dean. The light least favorable is that he's just not a board with a fair apportionment of the tax burden.

[sangha]

58. NO!! Krugman has nothing to do with it

Krugman's name only came up because CWebster couldn't point to any "new info", and instead of being honest about, s/he just made up some stuff about Dean's getting advice from Krugman.

[ModerateMiddle]

52. I know what has changed

Kerry's argument against repealing ALL of the cuts is resonating.

[AP]

39. You have to be in total control of your meta-message from day 1

If your metamessage is, "I'm evolving, and I'll take advice from experts" so be it. Take your lumps if you get knocked for it.

However, I don't think that's the message here. I think Dean's message is, "I'll say whatever I need to do to get the angry white liberals in my camp, and I'm going to give Wall St what they want, unless the liberals figure out that that means I might be a little to conservative, and then I'll back down slightly, and find some other way to help Wall St which doesn't jeopardize my liberal base." Or, "I'm a socal liberal and a fiscal conservative, unless my fiscal conservativism jeopardizes my liberal base -- in which case I'll back pedal."

This isn't an issue of taking advice and changing opinion. Or maybe he doesn't really understand progressive taxation. In which case, I'm not sure he ever will. But I suspect this is actually a case of weighing what business wants and what's good for the middle and working class, and then tipping the scales in favor of Wall St and big business. Isn't that sort of how he governed in VT?

[JNelson6563]

36. Agreed Cap'n

BTW, quite a day in Treasuries, no? Zowie!!

Julie

[fla nocount]

11. Please don't crawfish on me Howard.

I'd almost have to line up behind "Big Sugar" Daddy Graham if you did. The tax schedule before the coup had produced a surplus....put it back, it works.

[unfrigginreal]

12. I don't expect a change at all...

he'll repeal the Bush tax cuts and THEN introduce his own tax cut package that will be targeted to lower and middle income folks.

As I've said before, we can't be the anti-tax cut party, we just have to mold them to where they'll do the most good for most Americans.

[AP]

21. This attitude, which I've seen in many defenses of Dean

reminds me of how right wingers defended Bush. Bush said don't listen to what I'm saying, judge me by my character. People said he wouldn't do that, he's a good guy.

Why is Dean's character the defense? I don't know what kind of guy he is. But I know what he says. He said that he's for defecit reduction at all costs and that progressive taxations isn't a priority.

[AP]

17. Didn't Dean figure out where he stood on progressive taxation when

he was practicing for the Presidency by being Governor all those years?

Shouldn't he have figured this out by now?

[tjdee]

20. Thank you for getting the point.

The point is not his actual plan, but why he's changing it (again, if true). It'll be interesting to see how this plays across the board.

[blm]

61. He cut taxes across the board

in Vermont. He's not one for the Democratic principle of progressive taxes.

[quinnox]

23. I predicted this a few days ago

I said Dean would change his stance on this, because Kerry and other Dems could use it to hurt Dean.

I could of sworn Dean once said he wasn't in favor of repealing all the tax cuts in the first place at a debate I watched, so I was surprised when I heard he had a position of repealing all the cuts.

[ModerateMiddle]

53. he said

we can't afford to do what we need to do unless we repeal ALL of the tax cuts. He said Kerry was lying to people saying he could do what he wanted to do without repealing all of the cuts.

He is definitely changing course. I am of course happy that he has, if he has the potential to be president, because his previous position had the potential to be disasterous.

But it IS a change, and if he's going to go gung ho on one position, attack others for differing, and then change his position to be more like the one he attacked, he's GOING to get called on it. Rightfully so.

[CWebster]

25. It doesn't bother me that he is flexible enough

to risk adjusting his position if his intent to do so isn't a brazen sell-out or compromise.

Has Kerry been able to assess his position on Iraq and correct his previous stand with any real integrity or courage?

[AP]

26. But how do you respond to my post 19?

And maybe the sell-out was being opposed to progressive taxation in the first place, and now he's just being forced to acknowledge that democrats know about and understand the issue. In other words, he misjudged how well Democrats understood how regressive taxation is a sell-out to Wall St and big business/wealthy individuals.

[CWebster]

31. Maybe the Bush taxcuts are just fiscally unsound-

disasterous,and Dean was emphasising that they were foolish - didn't really benefit the economy or many households, but were a bold-faced moneygrab for the top rung while throwing a one time bone to most everyone else. meanwhile everything else gos up---property taxes, state and local taxes, user fees and costs...
Why does it have to be a plot against the people who are somehow blind to the fact that they are being hoodwinked?

Once I saw that loud boisterous guy from one of the cable news financial programs on the Hardball show. He said the taxcuts don't do a damn thing but increase the bottomline for Home Depot or Wallmart for a month--just like the tax rebates, and then it goes right back to shit again. After he said that, there was this long silence, like everyone was holding their breath because someone actually uttered the words.

Its a ruse.

[AP]

37. This issue has given the candidates a chance to stake out their tax policy

concerns. Now, remember, the middle class tax breaks were in there at the insistance of the Dems and were probably the reason the bill got any support at all (and they may have even known that Bush's bill would inexorably lead to this point, and this debate).

Regardless, this situaion has now given the candidates a chance to ellucidate there position on the defecit vs fair tax burden issue. Dean has clearly chosen to place himself on the more conservative, Wall St-friendly end of this axis, whereas Edwards and Kerry are at the Keynsian, more liberal, more Clintonian end of the spectrum.

Now, I think that if Dean changes his position it will only be because he's afraid that lots of the progressives whose support he counted upon had a better understanding of this issue than he presumed.

Tax policy is definitely one of the hardest to understand issues out there (and in my mind THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE there is). If you are willing to tip the scales in favor of business, and want to still appeal to progressives (and especially, social issue liberals), you might think you can get away with not being on the liberal side of this issue. Now, if too many of those social progressives do have an understanding of math and economics, you might have to find some other obscure issue on which you can appeal to business, while sacrificing the tax issue (at least in one very narrow respect) to the cause of houlding your progressive coalition together. (For example, maybe you can say that a two-tiered cap gains rate isn't wise, hoping that people don't realize how that helps the middle class and hurts the rich and big business.)

[sangh0]

28. Adjusted to what?

What is he adjusting to? Bush*'s tax plan has been public knowledge for years now, and Dean (assumedly) look into it and decided he would repeal the whole thing. Now, his opinion seems to have changed, but there is no explanation for the change besides "Dean is flexible"

Why the change in position? If I want flexibility for flexibility's sake, I'll vote for a professional contortionist, unless that's what Dean is becoming.

Has Kerry been able to assess his position on Iraq and correct his previous stand with any real integrity or courage?

Typical! You can't explain Dean's change, so you'll attack other Dems. Try defending your own candidate.

If you can.

[CWebster]

32. Perhaps Krugman advised him differently?

That is what leader do--rely on the expertise of others for advice?

The taxcuts aren't reaping me a hugh rebate, but if someone I respected, someone well-versed on the subject, whose motives were fair and honest were to bring a different perspective on the issue---Maybe it would be of a greater benefit to others who had greater financial burdens, then I would want to be able to change.

[tjdee]

34. A reporter advised him differently?

He now follows the advice of a reporter on his tax plan? Didn't he employ economists before, before he announced his tax plan? As AP says, didn't he already have experience balancing the budget as he likes to tell us over and over again?

Of course, this isn't certain yet, but oy.

[ModerateMiddle]

54. To be fair

if he changed his mind based on input from Krugman, that's fair. Krugman, in addition to be a well respected columnist, is also a very well respected economist.

But you have a point about whether or not he employed economists PRIOR to developing his economic plan. My guess is that his position was based more on an "Anything but Bush" ideal - If Bush did it, it needs to be undone. There are aspects to the tax cuts that the Dems got put in.

[AP]

56. Why are people so willing to project thought processes and imagine

scenarios vis Dean?

[sangha]

59. kplongco, Dean did NOT get advice from Krugman

CWebster just made that up in order to avoid admitting that Dean has no new info

[sangh0]

40. Then why did he wait so long

to ask Krugman? And how confident are you with the promises and positions of a man who changes his opinions after listening to one man (Krugman) MONTHS AFTER he has already made those promises?

And why do you have to speculate about Dean's consulting with Krugman? Is it a fact, or are you just making it up as you go along.

but if someone I respected, someone well-versed on the subject, whose motives were fair and honest were to bring a different perspective on the issue---Maybe it would be of a greater benefit to others who had greater financial burdens, then I would want to be able to change.

Shouldn't Dean have consulted those "well-versed" and "respected" people BEFORE he announced his (temporary) opinion?

[AP]

41. Suggesting Dean is consulting Krugman is rhetorical trick

Krugman gets a lot of respect here. So you state a supposition of a connection with Dean as if it were fact. If pressed, you say that you only meant that Dean read Krugman's comments on www.liberaloasis.com, and not that he was actually consulting one on one.

[sangha]

60. I know. CWebster is lying

.

[tjdee]

33. How would we know his intent?

Obviously, a shift in his tax policy would indicate at the very least compromise. Or else why change?

How would we know his intent anyway? Can Kerry supporters say that his "intent" was honorable with regard to the war issue? You're not a Kerry supporter, so of course you question his integrity and courage--look for that to be questioned of Dean if indeed he shifts on tax policy.

[bearfartinthewoods]

62. jeeeze...

why try an attempt to divert the discussion. if you want to discuss Kerry, start a thread.

it would be better though, if you'd concentrate on promoting your own candidate since he's the subject of this thread.

[dolstein]

27. I guess Joe Lieberman was right after all

Or at least Howard Dean seams to have taken Lieberman's criticism to heart. Of course, I doubt a single Dean supporter will come forward and take back all the nasty things they said about Lieberman for criticizing Dean for wanting to repeal the middle class tax cuts along with the cuts that benefitted the wealthy. Indeed, some Dean supporters have claimed that Lieberman actually SUPPORTS the Bush tax cut, which is an outright lie. Lieberman -- like Kerry, I believe -- wants to roll back all the tax cuts for the wealthy, but wants to keep the cuts that benefit middle and working class Americans in place.

[sangh0]

29. Dean follows Lieberman and Kerry's lead

I'd pay to see that headline!! :=)

[w4rma]

35. Lieberman was wrong on this

…
MISLEADING THE AUDIENCE?

And the Dean campaign issued a statement that said Lieberman had misled the audience by using a paraphrase from the Washington Post story, not a direct quote from Dean.
…
http://www.msnbc.com/news/962135.asp?0cv=CA00

Defining Dean
By Fred Hiatt
Monday, August 25, 2003; Page A17
…
One multilateral institution that might not fare so well in a Dean administration, though, is the World Trade Organization. In what would be a radical departure, China and other countries could get trade deals with the United States only if they adopted "the same labor laws and labor standards and environmental standards" as the United States. Whether or not that demand was consistent with WTO rules? "That's right." With no concession to their relative level of development? "Why should there be? They have the right to have a middle class same as everyone else."
…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40299-2003Aug24.html

[dolstein]

43. I don't see what that has to do with the tax cut

Please stay on topic. Oh, and according to the Slate article, Lieberman wasn't the one who was misleading -- Dean was.

[ModerateMiddle]

57. there is corroboration on that

from Chris Suellentrop, who wrote a fluff piece back in late July. After the debate, Suellentrop posted to Slate:

snip

Dean counters by insisting that trade agreements need mere "international standards," not American standards, on labor and the environment. But that's not what he told the Washington Post (as the Lieberman campaign helpfully points out in its release) on Aug. 25. More important from my perspective, it's the exact opposite of what Dean told me when I rode with him in July on his campaign van in Iowa. When I asked Dean if he meant just general "standards" or "American standards," he insisted that he would demand that other countries adopt the exact same labor, environmental, health, and safety standards as the United States. But the audience wasn't riding with me, and they rally to Dean in his time of need, applauding wildly. Lieberman is left to lamely reply, "That's a reassuring change of position."

snip

http://slate.msn.com/id/2087877/

[quinnox]

30. I just want to point out this isn't certain yet

So all this might be speculation, maybe Dean won't change his position after all.

I am neutral on this myself, because one candidate I favor, Gephardt has the position of repealing all the tax cuts for health care.

I'm not sure which is better, keeping the middle class cuts or doing a comprehensive health care system, I think both sides have merits.

[friendofbenn]

45. dean is a neo-liberal

reagan democrat running to the left early to get support. haha it really is laughable to hear white-collar americans talk about "tax-relief". you already have the most regressive tax-system in the world i:e a virtual flat-tax. no wonder americans are so stupid. where do you think the money for public-education comes from? tax

[killbotfactory]

46. Dean is still working out the numbers.

If he can afford some tax cuts for the middle class or poor, he will do it, but he won't do it at the expense of not funding special ed, homeland security, health care, or balancing the budget. This has been his position for about a year. He wants to get rid of Bush's tax cut and START OVER. If he can't afford tax cuts, then he won't bullshit people into thinking we can have our cake and eat it too.

[AP]

48. Krugman says that the US is in such defecit, the idea of not giving

the middle class these tax breaks to plug holes in the budget is laughable.

The real key is to come up with an economic plan which results in a bigger, better economy.

Krugman also says that the tax code is pretty regressive and could probably stand to be a little more progressive. (all at www.liberaloasis.com)

I say progressive taxation is PART of a plan to grow the economy. I think Keynes, Clinton, LBJ, Kennedy, Truman, FDR and TR would all agree.

[xchrom]

49. changing your mind -- developing your positions

is not news. who cares?

[tjdee]

63. There's that, and then there's changing willy nilly.

Does that mean it's okay for Kerry to go back and forth on the war?

Where do you draw the line?

[Klis]

50. I think he is nt

[burr]

51. Return of the Boll Weevil...

more deadly than the dark side of the force. Eats away at crops and surrounding vegetation. It can be killed off, but then can silently return to do more damage.