Blogs » Politcs Plus » The " No Labels Party"



Today, about 1000 people will meet in New York City to hear Mayor Bloomberg kick off the "No Labels" organization. A group determined to reduce the excessive polarization in our politics. I affectionately call them “the mushy center” but I wish them all the success in the world. There is a need for groups like this, who will discuss our nation's problems without an ideological bent. A great example of two people from different parties using the same talking points against each other happened yesterday on Fox News Sunday. Chris Wallace asked Congressman Chris Van Hollen, (D-MD) ": So what do you predict is going to happen? Will the House pass this as it's -- now stands with some changes on the estate tax, or will it simply be voted down? The congressman said" I don't think anyone has put this question to the test. Are Republicans willing to hold up tax relief not just for middle-income Americans but also at the top rates and the whole rest of...When Chris Wallace asked congressman Paul Ryan the same question,Ryan said "And so they're willing to hold up all of the other tax breaks, all of the other tax rates on middle-class families, on small businesses, so they can get this smaller increase in the estate tax."...... There you have it; it's all about the sound bite.

Read more: ryan-chris-van-hollen-talk-policy-politics-justice-stephen-breyer-new-book? page=2#ixzz180IvbFEM

Those that lean right believe the estate tax is double taxation, while those on the left think that it is immoral to give tax cuts to the wealthy, when a majority is struggling in this economy. I don't think the Estate Tax is a good example of double taxation because the person who accumulated the wealth is now deceased. Their heirs will pay the tax if they were not smart enough to set up a bypass trust. Republicans continue to say that the top 2% and the recipients of an estate tax are the small business owners who will commonly employ people to revive this economy. I don't know why the democrats don't challenge that talking point, by letting the Internal Revenue be the sole decider, if the recipient of the tax cut is a small business owner or just another, hedge fund manager. All it takes is a new form showing how many employees the small business has and the gross income of those employees. This would also provide the data that we don’t currently have to prove or disprove that logic. The "No Labels" party can use these results as proof that economic data does not have to be ideological. Arianna Huffington gets upset when pundits talk about the base of political parties, because she rightly says that the media just want a political food fight; rather than answers on how to produce jobs.

I hope the No Labels party; will make an impact because we've had the same ideological fights since the 1929 Great Depression. In 1932, the political parties’ leaders made a so- called bipartisan agreement to impose a national sales tax without input from the American people. They thought a sales tax was proper because as Hudson Motors board Chairman Roy Chapman said" since the lower income brackets paid nothing to the maintenance of the National Government. They were unready for the unprecedented volume of mail that poured into the congressional offices, threatening to unseat those that voted for such a proposal. The sales tax failed in the house 223-153. Democrats and Republicans voted to increase income taxes, surtaxes and estate taxes. This caused the democratic leader Henry Rainey to say" we have made any longer step in the direction of communism than any other country in the world ever made except maybe Russian." President Hoover had his own version of today's TARP. His version was called the "Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC) because the bankers clamored for government action. Chicago's mayor brought a delegation to Washington to get a RFC loan to pay its teachers and city employees. The RFC had no statutory power to make loans to cities, so the request was refused. That provided a platform for the democrats to say that the RFC provided $ 90 million to a bank at the same time denied a smaller amount to a city, so it could pay as teachers and employees. Does all this sound familiar? You have it all, the policies to soak the rich and the poor, a little Red-baiting, government favoring the banks, and taxpayers showing their anger.

The tax package in its current form is not a bipartisan agreement but more of a short term stimulus package; one that maybe a President McCain would have passed as his first priority. A bipartisan bill would have been more like republicans settling for a two percent increase on the top 2%, $2 million exception for the estate tax and the democrats agreeing to a six month extension of unemployment benefits. The Washington Post conservative columnist, Charles Krauthammer, said president Obama pulled a fast one on the GOP by making them complicit in passing the second stimulus, the democrats wanted. On the other side, the liberals are livid because they think the republicans will cut safety net programs to afford the tax cuts for the top 2%. The pundits on “Morning Joe" said if Sarah Palin and Nancy Pelosi are both against the tax package; the president will probably benefit if it passes.

The concept of a “No Labels” party is great but can they get the money, support, and candidates to unseat the two political parties? How long will it take for them to accept a common platform?