An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

Wherefore Art Thou, Tax Reform?

Bill Bradley has an interesting, if not entirely realistic op-ed in the New York Times this week which seeks to address the virtues of bipartisan spirit in Congress. He does so by drawing parallels between the current health care debate and the landmark tax reform passed in the 80’s by Reagan and a divided Congress. It’s an admirable, if somewhat pie in the sky, nostalgic view.

In 1986, before President Ronald Reagan, a Republican Senate and a Democratic House succeeded in passing landmark tax reform, Washington insiders and the press predicted — as they are doing now — that it would never happen. There are lessons from the 1986 legislative experience that can be applied to health care reform today.

In the end, the tax bill passed because each party got something it wanted: Republicans got a lower marginal tax rate, and Democrats eliminated special-interest loopholes. By adhering to the principles of equity (equal incomes should pay equal taxes) and efficiency (the market is a more efficient allocator of capital than Congress), the bipartisan coalition produced a bill that lowered the top tax rate from 50 percent to 28 percent, eliminated $30 billion annually in loopholes and resulted in the wealthy contributing a higher percentage of income-tax revenues than they had before the reform.

I leave it to you to read the piece and see if the theory has any merit, but it does bring us a stark reminder of election seasons past. What ever happened to comprehensive, sweeping tax reform? When the various candidates for the GOP nomination got up on stage lasts summer, one would have thought that our tax code was the biggest problem facing America (which it very well may be in some ways) and that there were more options for total reform than crows sitting on all the fences of Macom County.

One wanted a flat tax. Another called for a fair tax. Some wanted to do away with the IRS entirely and institute a national consumption tax. Value Added Tax became common terminology for pundits everywhere. Only one thing was certain… our current tax code was a disaster, and something had to be done.

The Democrats were a bit more quiet on the subject, but many of them also admitted that the time for change had come. (In their defense, getting Democrats to talk about the “T word” at all is a bit of a feat, since it raises some sore memories.) But at least they were mulling it over.

Then the economy collapsed. The election ended and Barack Obama was sworn into office. TARP was the battlefield, followed by stimulus questions and then health care. What happened to tax reform? It was the 21st century Lindbergh Baby of American politics.

As we’ve pointed out here before, tax reform is now like the weather. Everyone talks about it (at least when they want something) but nobody seriously wants to do anything about it. Because no matter what you do to improve the efficiency or fairness of the system, you’ll be draining somebody’s rice bowl. And the somebodies in question are very often the deep pockets you’ll need to win your next election.

Tax reform? What tax reform? It’s now just dust in the wind.

  • Ryan
    So the bipartisan coalition produces a bill that cuts taxes so much that the Republican successor has to raise them again? I'm not sure I would want to call that successful.
  • DLS
    Wherefore are thou also, entitlement reform? After all, Obama said it was important.

    [snicker]
  • The Obama administration wants to propose their version of the fair tax...only Conservatives pay taxes
  • Leonidas
    The tradeoff propossed in that argument won't fly. Tort reform is not reallt that much of a concession since many democrats are in favor of it as well, universal healthcare run by the government would be a full scale sellout of Conservative values on the other hand. Not only that, but no way is universal healthcare fiscally neutral as shown in just about every study on the issue. A more realistic bargin would be co-ops as a trade for tort reform with fiscally neutrality being a requirement and written into the law.
  • DLS
    I wonder how much support co-ops really would have. It seems that the Dems have paid little but lip service to it even after the need for damage control began to arise, while the GOP has been working even less than the Dems have on their behalf. (It's a Plan B that never appeared to be seriously on the Dems' agenda and not on the GOP's at all.)

    Rather than any rigged-competition public imitation of an insurer, a more practical and effective thing (which is why it's unlikely) is for the Dems to concentrate instead not only on real reform of the system as it exists now (regulation), but with less controversial things related to the "safety net" concept such as providing vouchers or subsidies to low-income people (with the money comes the chance to attach strings, in addition to regulation), or taking over Medicaid or taking over or providing assistance to states and the equivalent of high-risk pools for automobile (true) insurance.
  • The Republicans were talking about significant changes to the way taxes are paid, but they lost the election.

    The Democrats weren't talking about it much, other than the say that the rich should pay their fair share. They have attempted to implement that incrementally. The latest example is the President's logic about why the rich should not get as big of a tax break for charitable donations as they do now.

    So I guess I disagree with your premise. Why should we have had such high expectations for tax reform?
  • As for Bill Bradley's Op-Ed, it seems to me that this argument could be used by both sides.

    On the Republican side, one could argue that the Democrats aren't giving the Republicans anything they way, which prevents the kind of bipartisanship that was had in the 80s.

    On the Democratic side, one could argue that the Republicans won't be satisfied until they get everything they way, so it's the Republicans that are blocking the bipartisanship.

    The bottom line is: you can't compare this bill will the tax reform bill. Whether the bill is too far left, or too far right, or a perfect compromise is entirely a subjective matter.
  • DLS
    "Why should we have had such high expectations for tax reform?"

    Certainly not with the current clowns that are running wild. With everything, it's low and ever lower.
blog comments powered by Disqus
© 2005-2009 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Enxit Group, LLC