I was fairly pleased with the local election results. I’d been quite concerned about an income tax that was on the ballot. Only singles making for than 200K and couples making more than 400K would get taxed, but the electorate wisely believed that this was just the state getting its foot in the door. In fact the group most opposed to the tax was households making 60 to 100K. This makes complete sense. People making less than that know they’ll likely never have to pay significant taxes. People making a lot more, such as those taxed by this first salvo, can well afford to pay income taxes. It’s people in the middle group – the largest group – who know they’ll get taxed and who will really feel the tax. It really annoys me that Bill Gates Sr. sponsored this bill. He’s an enormously rich man who will never feel the tax because he has very little income. He should propose a 50% estate tax on those with estates larger than 1 billion or something like that.
Washingtonians also voted to pass a bill requiring a 2/3 majority for the legislature to raise taxes. Initiatives in this state can be overturned by a majority legislature vote after 2 years. This particular bill has pass at least 3 times in past, and then immediately overturned by the tax-hungry legislature after 2 years. Then, the people pass another initiative.
In addition, people pass an initiative that overturned a tax on candy and bottled water. I actually was opposed to that one (and supported keeping the tax), but I’m not sad that it passed. I can understand general objections to a nanny state.
Our Senate race is up in the air. Patty Murray is apparently an earmark queen, according to the Seattle Times. She’s head of the Appropriations Committee, and either leads congress in earmarks, or is very close. I’m generally opposed to this sort of thing, but I feel compelled to vote Democrat at the national level, so I had to vote for her. In her favor, she did vote against the Iraq war, which took real guts.
I’m surprised at the national election results. I can think of two types of people who might have chosen to vote Republican now – or not vote – who voted Democrat two years ago.
1.) Hard-core Dems who are disappointed in Obama
2.) Independents who feel Obama went to far
I feel Obama’s performance in office was entirely predictable, so (1) is silly. What did they think was going to happen? He was going to ride in on his white horse and make the country exactly the way they liked? Congress will not hop to his bidding just because he snaps his fingers. (2) is more understandable, I guess. Perhaps some feel he’s done enough and it’s time to embrace the status quo.
I voted Democrat 2 years ago, and I feel I got just about exactly what I expected. In fact, I was surprised and impressed he managed to pass the health care bill. Our political system is not build for “change.” In general, this is a good thing. It means Obama can’t pass everything he wants, but neither could George Bush. It saves us from extremes and instability.
I agree, I don’t know what people really expected. I’m impressed he managed to pass what he did. Is it perfect? No. Is it a small step in the right direction — I think so.
People are mad. They confuse the declaration of independence with the constitution. They get riled up by news media who spend all of their time telling them who to blame without caring that in reality external forces are to blame because the world doesn’t stand still.
Congress spends most of its time trying to kill time until the next election.
Obama went too far? Too far right maybe because he did not keep his liberal agenda. While talking heads might say Obama is a crazy liberal-socialist, has he done anything that is very liberal? He talked a liberal game during the election, but has he delivered?
* Did the Democrats pass a stimulus package as large as liberal economists Paul Krugman, Joseph Stiglitz and Nouriel Roubini said we needed (Remember it was 40% tax cuts, the largest tax cut in US history) ?
* Did the Democrats pass Cramdown or a WPA-style jobs program?
* Did the Democrats even put a single payer health care plan on the table? Did they fight for a public option? Nope, they passed a George HW Bush style plan.
* Did the Democrats reject the generals’ request to further escalate the war in Afghanistan?
* Did the Democrats shut down Gitmo, secret renditions, or domestic spying?
* Did the Democrats end Don’t Ask Don’t Tell or the Defense Of Marriage Act?
* Did the Democrats even begin to address immigration reform?
* Did the Democrats pass Cap-and-Trade or respond to the BP oil disaster by ending deepwater drilling?
I am realizing both parties run against whomever is in power and then change almost nothing. It is like the Vietman war, everyone ran against it and promised it end it, but once in powered they decide to wait a few years (and of course left it to someone else).
I agree with Karen that elections are becoming about Blame. People do not care about agenda nor can the understand small steps. If things are not right, they scream and blame someone in power, even if the person in power is improving things and those out of power are responsible for the mess. Obama reduced the federal deficit vs Bush’s last year in office (1.41 Trillion vs 1.29 Trillion see: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE69E54M20101016) and the tea-parties elect deficit spending republicans.
Daniel, I couldn’t have said it better…
Daniel, It sounds like you are one of the folks angry at Obama and the Dems for not doing enough.
Did you vote for a Democrat in this last election, or did you decide you’d had enough an abstain?
Do you think the Democrats could have passed single payer health care? Remember, that means all the “blue dogs” would have had to vote for it. I think if Obama had tried to pass single payer health care, nothing would have passed, and the Dems might have lost their majority in the Senate at midterms as well.
The Obama and democrats could have at least fought for some of their liberal promises, instead they became centralists. The Republicans/’blue dogs’ were given input and a lot power, but never forced to give into some of the liberal demands. Republicans were going to brand Obama a tax-n-spend socialists if he fought for the liberal agenda or if he compromised to a centralist agenda. At least fight. I voted mostly Democratic.
This morning I listen to NPR Morning Edition and heard a Texas tea-bagger explaining why the democracts lost and what she wants done. She believed that the stimulus and run-away spending were the reason the Democrats lost. She wanted her new tea-bag representative to cut government spending and get federal government money for expanding her local interstate. uh? The interviewer asked if she knew the stimulus was paying for a lot of interstate building projects. She said it was bad, but her district needed the interstate expansion.
Republicans want to spend, spend, spend and cut taxes. Raising taxes or balancing the budget will be left for the next time Democrats are in control. Then the Republicans will blame the Democrats and use it to regain control.
I certainly agree with you that spending cuts should come BEFORE tax cuts, not after, and that the Republicans just interested in cutting taxes. Neither party shows any interest in balancing the budget as far as I can tell, though more popular interest in the topic may cause both to change their tune. Of course, given the average age in Congress, most of them will be dead before the debt really catches up to us.
If I was dictator, one of the first things I’d do would be implement term limits on Congress.
I find it hard to believe that the tea party will have any real power, but we’ll see I guess. NPR definitely enjoys putting poorly-spoken tea partiers on the air. I’m pretty insulated from that here in Washington. The one tea party candidate in this state (a former football player) got annihilated in the primary.
Neither party is really interested in doing much of anything other than argue with each other. Add to that the fact that the general public is both fickle and impatient. Things are not changing fast enough, therefore they vote Republican instead of Democrat. 2 years or 4 years down the road, things will still not be changing fast enough, and the Democrats will be back in office.
I’m with Daniel. I’m disappointed in Obama. He made a lot of promises during his campaign, and while I of course knew he would not be able to do everything he promised, I thought he would fight harder than he has.
I voted mostly Democrat in this election. Not that it mattered. Our governor won an unprecedented 3rd term (he’s already been in office for 10 years, having taken over when Bush became president in 2000). In my county, every single office that was up for grabs went Republican (quote below from the local newspaper):
“Republicans took control of every county office and gained a majority on Commissioners Court for the first time since the Reconstruction Era after the Civil War when the Union army set up governments in conquered Southern states.
Until Tuesday, Republicans held only the Tax Collector-Assessors Office, one Commissioners Court seat and a few judgeships. When newly elected officials take office, the GOP will control every major county office with the exception of a few judgeships and two seats on Commissioners Court that were not on this year’s ballot.”