Boxer v. Fong

Tom Lehman uswa12 at lorainccc.edu
Wed Oct 28 04:21:06 PST 1998


Dear Brad,

I feel your pain.

Sincerely & Fraternally, Tom Lehman

Brad De Long wrote:


> Some time ago there was a question asked on this list: why should someone
> care whether California returned Barbara Boxer or Matthew Fong to the
> United States Senate next January? I would hope that recent news reports
> would have answered this question, and that everyone on this list would
> agree that we would prefer state power to be wielded by a social democrat
> like Barbara Boxer than by someone like Matthew Fong, who thinks that a
> good use of money is to give $50,000 to the Reverend Sheldon, who seeks to
> send those who perform abortions to the electric chair and to "quarantine"
> those infected with HIV.
>
> MATT FONG TAX PROPOSAL: EFFECT ON NON-ELDERLY MARRIED COUPLES (20%) MAKING
> LESS THAN $28000 A YEAR (FEI CONCEPT): AVERAGE TAX INCREASE OF $1930
>
> But this morning--thanks to the whispers of Max Sawicky in the Corridors of
> Power--I went down to the residential neigborhood of Glen Park in the
> southern half of San Francisco to help argue for a different set of reasons
> to return Boxer rather than Fong. I went to what I was told was a "typical
> San Francisco middle-class house," to be part of a Barbara Boxer campaign
> event: an attack on Matthew Fong's "flat tax" proposals.
>
> MATT FONG TAX PROPOSAL: EFFECT ON NON-ELDERLY MARRIED COUPLES (20%) MAKING
> BETWEEN $28000 AND $49000 A YEAR (FEI CONCEPT): AVERAGE TAX INCREASE OF
> $1140
>
> About ten aides, ten photographers, ten reporters, Senator Boxer, former
> Senator Bradley, California Comptroller Connell, a stray Fong aide, and me
> converge on this typical middle-class house--costing perhaps $300,000. It
> is located two blocks from each of two freeways, and hard to find because
> the freeways tend to carry you past it.
>
> We are introduced to the charming preschool daughters, and to the
> homeowners: he's a lawyer, she's a psychotherapist. They've lived in the
> house for six years. "Since when are households where both partners have
> post-graduate degrees middle-class?" "Brad, the middle-class is anyone
> making less than $200,000 a year: make less than $200,000 a year, and
> you're a working family."
>
> MATT FONG TAX PROPOSAL: EFFECT ON NON-ELDERLY MARRIED COUPLES (20%) MAKING
> BETWEEN $49000 AND $70000 A YEAR (FEI CONCEPT): AVERAGE TAX INCREASE OF
> $2450
>
> Senator Boxer introduces the typical American middle-class homeowners. They
> say that they are just scraping by given their high mortgage and the high
> cost of living in San Francisco. "How big is the house?" "I don't know,
> maybe 1800 square feet." He goes on to say that the Fong plan would
> increase his taxes by $3000 a year, and that would make it very hard for
> them to live in San Francisco. "Who's he a lawyer for?" "He's a good guy: a
> HUD civil rights attorney."
>
> MATT FONG TAX PROPOSAL: EFFECT ON NON-ELDERLY MARRIED COUPLES (20%) MAKING
> BETWEEN $70000 AND $100000 A YEAR (FEI CONCEPT): AVERAGE TAX INCREASE OF
> $3750
>
> Senator Boxer introduces Senator Bradley. A photographer catches me chewing
> on my pen. Senator Bradley gives a nicely polished five-minute speech on
> the Earned Income Tax Credit, on how the Fong tax plan would eliminate it,
> and how this would be a very bad thing. Senator Boxer introduces
> Comptroller Connell. She says that the Fong plan raises taxes on the middle
> class. She says that this is not just the conclusion of left-wing
> think-tanks, but of the professional tax policy staff of California's
> equivalent of the IRS, the Franchise Tax Board.
>
> MATT FONG TAX PROPOSAL: EFFECT ON NON-ELDERLY MARRIED COUPLES (15%) MAKING
> BETWEEN $100000 AND $193000 A YEAR (FEI CONCEPT): AVERAGE TAX INCREASE OF
> $3830
>
> Senator Boxer introduces... me. I say that the Fong tax cannot both reduce
> taxes on the middle class and do what a flat tax is designed to do--deliver
> enormous tax reductions to the rich, and wipe out the federal government as
> an engine of income redistribution. I say that anyone who thinks that you
> can combine a flat tax with a middle-class tax cut thinks that 2+2=5. I say
> my job as an economist is to tell people that 2+2=4, not 5. That's why it's
> called the Dismal Science, after all.
>
> MATT FONG TAX PROPOSAL: EFFECT ON NON-ELDERLY MARRIED COUPLES (4%) MAKING
> BETWEEN $193000 AND $445000 A YEAR (FEI CONCEPT): AVERAGE TAX DECREASE OF
> $10290
>
> Senator Boxer doesn't introduce anyone. Senator Boxer talks about how she
> has fought for a strong economy, a low unemployment rate, a high rate of
> investment and productivity growth, and middle-class tax cuts for those
> working families who play by the rules. Senator Boxer talks about how Matt
> Fong seeks massive tax cuts for the rich, and is out of the mainstream of
> America. I think that Senator Bradley's egalitarian preferences are weaker
> than Senator Boxer's, but that her situation is somewhat desperate.
>
> MATT FONG TAX PROPOSAL: EFFECT ON NON-ELDERLY MARRIED COUPLES (1%) MAKING
> MORE THAN $445000 A YEAR (FEI CONCEPT): AVERAGE TAX DECREASE OF $145610
>
> Senator Boxer asks for questions. A reporter asks a question about the
> Reverend Sheldon, Matt Fong's $50,000 donation to the Reverend Sheldon, the
> Reverend Sheldon's plan to quarantine the HIV-infected, and Matt Fong's
> signing of a ultimatum presented to him by the Log Cabin Republicans.
> Senator Boxer answers the question well, and calls for questions about *tax
> policy*. A reporter asks a question about the Reverend Sheldon, Matt
> Fong's $50,000 donation to the Reverend Sheldon, the Reverend Sheldon's
> plan to quarantine the HIV-infected, and Matt Fong's signing of a ultimatum
> presented to him by the Log Cabin Republicans. Senator Boxer answers the
> question well, and calls for questions about *tax* *policy* *while* *she*
> *has* *all* *these* *experts* *here*. She praises Senator Bradley, who
> spent sixteen years on the Senate Finance committee and was the architect
> of the only true tax code simplification we have had since World War II.
>
> A reporter asks a question about the Reverend Sheldon, Matt Fong's $50,000
> donation to the Reverend Sheldon, the Reverend Sheldon's plan to quarantine
> the HIV-infected, and Matt Fong's signing of a ultimatum presented to him
> by the Log Cabin Republicans. Senator Boxer answers the question well, and
> calls for questions about *tax* *policy*.
>
> The reporters are silent.
>
> Senator Boxer thanks them for coming. The reporters and their photographers
> start to leave.
>
> What does it say about American politics that the entire media finds
> proposals to massively shift the distribution of income toward the rich to
> be... boring? It's not that the corporate multinational masters of the
> media excise discussions of income distribution from articles. It's not
> that legions of paid supply-side snake-oil salesmen have brainwashed
> reporters into believing that every time you cut marginal tax rates you
> raise tax revenues.
>
> It's just that your average reporter finds talk about who and how much
> government policy enriches... boring.
>
> "The big things the federal government does are war and peace and taxing
> and spending," I said to the departing reporters. "Tax law changes and the
> shape of the budget are much more important. Senators move real money
> around, and buy real weapons. They only have a tangential effect on how
> tolerant American society is." "Of course you think tax law changes are
> important. You're an economist."
>
> Senator Boxer, Senator Bradley, Comptroller Connell, and their aides get in
> their vans and start their drive to Sacramento, where they will repeat the
> performance in two hours in front of a different group of reporters and
> photographers.
>
> Brad DeLong



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list