Vermont's Congressional delegation is correct in its opposition to
extending the tax cuts to the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans. It is
wrong - period. It is wrong from a deficit point of view. It is wrong
from a moral point of view. It is wrong for many reasons - it is bad
policy. It makes no fiscal sense.
But it also makes no sense to link extending tax cuts for millionaires
and billionaires to extending unemployment for the millions of long-term
unemployed Americans who are out of work due to the recession and the
stagnant economy.
The two issues are apples and oranges and don't deserve to be lumped
together like so much political capital for either party to spend or
bargain away.
Taking care of the unemployed needs to be undertaken, much like Medicaid
and Medicare and Social Security need to be funded. Taking care of the
unemployed should be as high a priority as taking care of war refugees
in Afghanistan or earthquake or cholera victims in Haiti.
Discussing whether, if or how to extend or repeal the Bush-era tax cuts
is a separate discussion, a separate argument, a question of balancing
the budget and managing the federal deficit. The cost of extending the
Bush tax cuts far exceeds the costs of extending unemployment for
another 13 months or even 24 months.
We are ill-served by elected officials who allow these two separate
issues to be lumped together so that political compromises get made on
the backs of two million unemployed Americans and their families.
How did these two issues become political footballs and why? Who let
that happen? Why our leaders are even entertaining this type of
compromise is the real moral outrage in this debate.
This is not an either/or question.
{loadnavigation}
