GOP agenda gets bipartisan support

December 15, 2010

• Extension of historically low tax rates for everyone, but especially the rich? Check.
• Extension of historically low 15% top rate on capital gains? Check.
• Huge reduction, from historical rates, in estate taxes for the superrich? Check.
• Extension of unemployment benefits? Not part of the GOP agenda by any means, but conceded by Senate Republicans in putting together the The Reid-McConnell Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization and Job Creation Act of 2010. Senate Republicans had sworn to vote as a bloc against unemployment benefits extension if brought up as a separate bill. So this is usually listed as a win for the Democrats, even though to get it they had to yield to the GOP on almost every other issue. To be fair to the Democrats, everyone expects that, given the way politics is currently waged in the Senate, it only takes 41 votes to block any bill, and the GOP has 42.
• Tacit endorsement of the idea that tax "relief" is the best medicine for a stalled economy? Check.
• Tacit endorsement of the idea that allowing a temporary tax cut to expire constitutes a tax "increase"? Check.
• "Temporary" cut in payroll tax (check back a year from now), soon to be coupled with pressure to cut Social Security benefits? Check.
• Agreement that the federal deficit is a huge problem (at least that part of the deficit attributable to social safety-net programs, if not the part attributable to tax cuts and foreign wars)? Check. With Reid-McConnell on the table, there is a temporary lull in public worrying about the deficit, to be resumed the day after the bill passes. Although deficit reduction has been claimed by Republicans as a core principle, this has so far been mostly talk, not action.
• Retreat on environmental regulations? Check.
• Tacit endorsement of the idea that we can't afford "job-killing" environmental regulations in tough economic times? Check.
• Endorsement of the Republican idea that universal health coverage is best provided by the private sector (even though such coverage is derided by conservatives as "government health care" or "socialism")? Check.
• Continued wars in the middle east? Tough stance against presumed terrorists? Check and check.

Bipartisanship is alive and well in Washington, with Democrats willing to support most of the key principles of the GOP. But bipartisanship only extends so far. One important recent bill that would normally have received broad bipartisan support was defeated by a unified Republican bloc for purely political reasons, without regard for the intrinsic merits of the bill or the interests of constituents:

• Compensation for 9-11 first responders

But don't take this to mean Republicans don't support bipartisanship. Republicans love bipartisanship, as long as it involves compromise by Democrats. Many important Republican-sponsored bills have gotten significant numbers of Democratic votes. For example, the Bush Tax Cuts of 2001 passed with 58 yeas, 46 Republicans and 12 Democrats, with 7 more Democrats present or not voting. However the Bush Tax Cuts of 2003 only got two Democratic votes, finally passing with Vice President Cheney breaking a 50-50 tie. It's interesting to note that the 2003 bill was passed by "reconciliation," meaning that a mere majority vote was sufficient, not the 60-vote supermajority needed to move anything in today's Senate. (But how is it that reconciliation could be invoked for the original 2003 bill, but not the 2010 followup?)