so what next?

[Sava]

Re: so what next?

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


BS. The Democrats have no platform whatsoever. What are you going to actually do now that you have the House and maybe the Senate?

The Democrats (Nancy Pelosi in particular) actually talked about 6 issues they were going to focus on. And Iraq was not one of them. They have a platform. Perhaps you should figure out what it is before making a thread saying they don't have one... or maybe you should have watched the press conference.

I don't know how effective the Dems will be, or if they will do anything productive. But one thing I do know is that they are hungry to execute their policies. They've been waiting for this opportunity to get into power.

As I said, they do have a platform. You just didn't take the time to learn about it.

[Adam Smith]

Overall, I am glad the Democrats won out, because when you screw up as badly as the Republican Party has over the last at least six years you deserve to get thrown out on your ass. This provides me with some confidence that the political system works in a gross sense, even if we still have special interest groups, gerrymandering, etc. It looks like we might be moving toward more regional alliances, though parts of the south and west appear to have become more purple. This is pretty much what the Founding Fathers had in mind to begin with, so I am somewhat confident that we can find a way to make it work. My main regret is that moderate republicans (of which I am one) bore so much of the brunt of this defeat. If there was any justice the conservatives would have got the boot.

Yes, the Democrats had a "Six for '06" platform, but in a segment on NPR (IIRC) yesterday, none of the voters they interviewed had ever heard of it. Not quite the recognition of "Contract With America".

At any rate, of their six points, and withholding judgment on the degree to which they will be able to carry them out,

REAL SECURITY AT HOME AND OVERSEAS
9/11 Commission recommendations should have already been implemented. Focusing on AQ / Bin Laden / Afghanistan also should have been done from the beginning. Recommendations for Iraq are vague, but I largely give the Democrats a pass on this since they are only partially responsible for getting us into this swamp.

BETTER AMERICAN JOBS - BETTER PAY
I hope that this does not translate into stalling trade agreements or outright protectionism. Proposals to raise the minimum wage passed in most (all?) states, and that probably won't be too damaging. However Ohio's proposal, which raised the minimum wage, and indexed it to inflation using the CPI (which overstates inflation) is going to cause some serious job losses.

COLLEGE ACCESS FOR ALL
Not everybody belongs in college, and there are plenty of good jobs in the economy without a college degree. Student loans are subject to widespread repayment abuse, so I see no good reason to lower the interest rates on them. College, particularly at top-end schools, is headed toward the same kind of poor performance we see in the US healthcare market: high price, high quality, lower availability than we would like. As in health care, throwing money at the problem will only make it worse. Fixing the primary education system is a far better solution.

ENERGY INDEPENDENCE - LOWER GAS PRICES
This one is a walking contradiction. The US does not pay the social cost of energy consumption. Any serious attempt at energy independence will require higher gas prices. Studies have shown that fuel economy standards make little if any difference because people just drive more. And we have been through the price gouging story ad nauseum on these boards. There is no grand conspiracy.

AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE - LIFE-SAVING SCIENCE
What we pay for drugs in the US funds a large proportion of global pharmaceutical R&D. Whether we want to have less expensive drugs or, say, a treatment for Alzheimer’s or Parkinson’s 10 years sooner is something we have to decide. Waiving antitrust laws so that groups of states can negotiate with drug companies is a pretty good way to make the market more efficient without wiping out R&D.

RETIREMENT SECURITY AND DIGNITY
I think we're getting into the demagoguery here. For example, Ben Cardin's (Democratic Senator form Maryland) website implies that Social Security does not really need to be fixed. We need to do much better than that. Enacting the bipartisan Social Security Commission recommendations from 10 years ago (raise retirement age for new workers, raise income on which taxes paid, correct over-indexation of CPI) should pretty much cover it, if a deal can be reached.

ISSUES WHICH DID NOT APPEAR IN “SIX FOR ’06”

My local congressman (liberal democrat) lists a whole series of spending programs (no child left behind, college costs, health care, transportation infrastructure) as his most important priorities. Way down a the bottom of the list is “ending fiscal irresponsibility”. While “fiscal responsibility” is mentioned in the prologue to “Six for ‘06”, I am skeptical of the Democratic party’s ability to limit spending in the face of available resources.

Taxes are also an issue. The Democrats will be able to raise taxes twice by doing nothing. First, they can allow Bush’s tax cuts to expire, as Nancy Pelosi has already indicated she would (a least at the top end, if they can arrange that.) This may not be such a bad idea, because taxes come primarily out of our copious consumption, while deficit spending comes mainly out of our meager savings. The other tax increase, which nobody has mentioned yet, is the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT). This is a really complicated tax, but the basic problem is that nobody over a certain income is allowed to deduct state and local taxes from their income tax. Since the income level to which this applies has not changed since 1969, more and more middle income people are paying this tax originally intended solely for high-income tax payers. (Last year the AMT added five percentage points to our tax rate, and we are nowhere near the top bracket.) The Democrats will probably hope this issue goes away, and the republicans will probably not let it.

Lastly, I am concerned about committee assignments. The chairmanships of the House Intelligence and Ways and Means Committees have already been mentioned. John Dingel’s previous autocratic behavior as chairmen of the Energy and Commerce Committee is also cause for concern.

edit: typos

[Arrian]

Thanks for the explanation of the AMT, AS. It seemed like the AMT popped up out of nowhere... and now I understand why.

Your analysis of the Dem platform and other issues... I find myself nodding in agreement a lot. Not always, but mostly.

-Arrian