Colorado Needs a New Politics
Colorado Social Legislation Committee - November 6, 1995
By Jim Gibson

Large majorities of the electorate are disenchanted with both Republicans and Democrats.

Democrats want to take the world back to the New Deal

Republicans want to take us back to the turn of the century

The political system is facing a crisis - the end of the New Deal - the end of traditional liberalism & conservatism.  Both the traditional left & hard right are avoiding the future.

World & Nation is at Sea

Buchanan & Radical Right vs. Ted Kennedy & Traditional Left

Similar to the Democrats in 1994, we will soon hear Republicans saying "We did not get our message out."  Often we did and the voters did not like it

Where the Voters Are in the 1990's      

Voters dislike the unnecessary Polarization

They rightly sense that both political parties serve their special interests

Voters want public solutions

They believe government will make the problems worse

That stalemate is a challenge for both parties

Reasons for a Clinton/Democratic Victory in 1992 and Republicans in 1994

Both messages overcame each party's interest groups; Politics as usual is over

Both messages were bold & innovative but pragmatic & based on mainstream values

Both messages resolved electorate dilemma: Voters personally see and feel economic and social                problems but fear government will make them worse

Interest-Group Politics is Out - Message & Ideas-based Politics that serve the common interests are In.  The Republican budget proposal will take the GOP on the same disastrous trip Democrats took between 1992 & 1994.

EITC
Corporate Welfare
Medicare
Social Issue - Affirmative Action

Robbing the Poor to Subsidize the Rich

In these times of federal budget austerity, we must eliminate special-interest spending subsidies and tax breaks to reduce the federal budget deficit and invest in our future. Not so, according to Congressional Republicans, playing the role of Robin Hood in Reverse.

When the new Republican Congress swept into office last November with promises to balance the federal budget, the chairmen of the House and Senate Budget Committees promised to reduce corporate subsidies.  Unfortunately, another promise has been swept under the rug.

According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, using the Congressional Budget Office's definition of "corporate welfare," House Republicans are actually expanding business tax subsidies by $37 billion over the next seven years.  The GOP proposed to reduce business spending subsidies, but only by $43 billion.

That means federal aid to business will be reduced by only a net $6 billion over seven years, or less than one percent of the total spent on corporate welfare.  To make matters worse, $6 billion of the projected savings are from reduced farm price supports and other programs that may not even materialize.

On average, programs other than Social Security and defense will be cut 17 percent between 1996 and 2002.  If business subsidies were reduced at the same rate, $122 billion would be cut - not a mere $6 billion.

Think of the programs being defended.  Subsidies for ethanol production that mostly go to one corporation.  The Market Promotion Program, which subsidizes the overseas advertising of profitable American firms.  Business entertainment expense deductions, which largely benefit sports teams.  Energy research and development for fossil fuels. A mining law that is 123 years old.  The list goes on and on.

While Republicans are reluctant to get their corporate buddies off the public dole, they are cutting hundreds of billions of dollars from the programs that benefit those truly in need.  To top it off, the bipartisan Joint Tax Committee report confirms that the GOP tax bill unfairly favors the well-to-do.  In fact, while cutting taxes for the rich, the Republican plan raises taxes on families with annual incomes below $30,000.

In 1993, President Clinton raised taxes on the wealthy and reduced them on the working poor.  In 1995, Republicans want to do just the opposite.

Are Republicans really serious about welfare reform?  Clinton's revision and expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit says to the working poor that if you would full-time, year-round, you will not live in poverty.  The Republicans want to step back from a real foundation of welfare reform - making work pay.

This tax increase on the working poor is best explained by their lust for cutting taxes and preserving tax breaks and subsidies for their own constituencies.  This misguided policy sets the working poor against America's better-off - the sort of class warfare the Republicans often accuse Democrats of fomenting.

It is amazing to me that Republicans defend their reluctance to close business tax subsidies because, they contend, that would represent a "tax increase."  I guess a tax increase is in the eyes of the beholder.

Reducing business subsidies and making work pay represent sensible economic and social policies.  It is also a lot fairer.

Medicare

Both parties have transformed Medicare into a game of political football.  The people who depend on Medicare, as the well as the people who pay for it, are anxious, angry and confused.

Republican plans squeeze beneficiaries too hard and are too short on genuine reform.  Democrats have been much too defensive about the status quo and too reluctant to admit that the program must be fundamentally changed in order to survive.

Republicans see Medicare as a cash cow to be milked to keep their promises of deficit and tax reduction.  Democrats see the current costly system as a horse to ride to victory in 1996.

To ensure continued quality of care and control costs, we should be privatizing Medicare.  Let's give people eligible for Medicare a subsidy and let them choose a private health insurance plan from a menu offered by the private sector.  That approach gives older Americans the kind of health care they want and gives them the buying power their numbers deserve.

Those who choose cheaper plans, such as a HMO, will save money for themselves.  Those who prefer fee-for-service will pay more.  Nothing could be fairer than that.

Republicans have fashioned a radical cut in Medicare with a timid reform of its structure.  That is like treating a patient's clogged arteries by reducing the supply of blood.

Too many Democrats fight just to keep the blood flowing.  It is time for both parties to surgically remove the blockages.

Conclusion

Both Democrats and Republicans must recognize that New Deal debate is over. We need a new kind of ideas-based politics for the Information Age, rather than both parties merely serving their own special interests.

Voters in the center and middle-class are politically homeless.  Both parties are overly influenced by their extremes and special interests  

Rather than defending the status quo, both sides must be about new ideas, innovation and reform.  My party must especially become the party of economic opportunity, responsibility, community, & entrepreneurial government

Let me be specific (Contrast New Democrats with old Democrats & Republicans)

That kind of politics can change the country and truly prepare America for the transition from the twilight of the Industrial Age to the dawning of the Information Age.  It will be interesting to see if one or both of parties are up to the challenge.

Because if they or we do not do it, someone else will.