Democratic leadership at the time of writing (October 2014) makes me want to weep, because I think that the mid-term political campaigning by Democrats is woefully underpowered. I could be very wrong. Maybe the campaigns are totally doing the right thing, in a subtle way that's quite invisible to me. Here are some issues that I think Democratic campaigners should be shouting about.
Ebola: The republicans cut funding to the CDC. They deserve a good public whippin' for that. Whadda the Democrat leadership do. Nought.
Campaign finance: The Republican supreme court is protecting the plutocrat privilege of buying elections ... we do not need to keep a Republican supreme court.... we want a Senate that will approve democrat judges
Voter suppression: Sigh. This is a great big fat issue, IMHO. Make big noises in the right places (i.e. make calls to census tracts with a lot of people who are being robbed of their right to vote)
Raising the minimum wage: Another great big fat issue. Make big noises in the right places (i.e. make calls to census tracts with a lot of low income people)
Tax breaks for big corporations: Make a lot of noise about this.
Plans to privatize social security: Ditto, big noises.
Obamacare: Make clear the Republican Heritage foundation is the source of the idea, that Mitt Romney implemented the idea, that the Republicans are total hypocrites in opposing what Republicans themselves proposed and themselvers implemented.
Benghazi: Benghazi is old news but Repubicans have made such a continuous stink about it, including Darrell Issa's hearings in the House, that the issue really can be used against Republicans. It needs to be repeated again and again that the republicans cut funding for embassy protection by $300 million. It needs to be pointed out that it is colossal chutzpah to quibble about the way Susan Rice repeated what the CIA had told her, and go on as though she was trying to mislead the public What do our Democratic leaders say? Nothin'. They ought to be jumping up and down and screaming about all of this. And foremost, on the subject of Libya, Democratic campaigners ought to be bragging, saying that we got what we wanted, the overthrow of Muammar Khadafy, at the cost of 4 American lives, that Libya was a great triumph for Obama's intelligent approach, and that the Republicans were guilty of an enormous lie in pretending that Libya was a great defeat because an overly fearless ambassador went and got himself killed, against the advice of a U.S. army general who wanted him to take an armed escort with him. I mean I'm sorry for the ambassador, but we got what we wanted in Libya at incredibly low cost, no boots on the ground.
Income tax cuts, part 1: I think that the chief weapon in the Republican armory, that has kept the party afloat, is convincing the public (a) that Republicans will reduce income taxes more than will Democrats (b) that Republicans will resist raises in federal tax more than will Democrats. The Grover Norquist pledge. I see suburbanite women who would like to preserve the right to terminate unwanted pregnancies, who nevertheless vote Republican because they figure it will mean more money in their pocket, and because they think Republicans will not be stupid enough to really terminate the right to choose.
A very key element in the Republican posture on taxes is that they have succeeded in selling the idea that in the long run, tax cuts will produce greater economic growth than would occur in the absence of the cuts. "Less money to pay government workers means more money in your pocket. We know government never produces jobs. The private sector always does it better. By cutting government we will be stronger." I think the Republicans have been very successful in selling twaddle like this. And it is just that. Twaddle. And for the sake of the 2016 elections the twaddle needs to be thoroughly demolished.
Leading well respected Berkeley economist Brad DeLong featured favorably on Bloomberg business news predicts that the way forward is growing government, not shrinking it.
We have loads of surplus labor. We have loads of underemployed people. We have loads of people doing shitwork like nail salons and dog grooming, at minimum wage. ... The way forward is raise taxes on those who can afford to pay, and spend on really worthy national goals like: medical research; exploration and exploitation of our solar system; hard science research; energy research. This kind of expenditure will improve our technology and raise our standard of living and quality of life.
Remember something, the fastest technological progress occurs when ? Right, when we are in a really ferocious war. Radar. Rockets. Computers. Airplanes. Canned food. Improved ship technology. War is when government aligns our national effort to a very narrow set of goals. Raises taxes. War also is horrible and results in dreadful human misery. But why oh why can we not learn from experience --- that under the right circumstances Government can produce enormous technological change?
Last, let me echo a statement repeatedly issued in an advertisement on MSNBC by Rachel Maddow, that we have had our best economic progress through a partnership between the public and private sector. The private sector is to be nurtured, loved, cherished, and encouraged, as it is a source of immense economic dynamism. It is decentralized. It means that a few private individuals with a good idea can bring into being a brand new product of great value. But let us also remember that the private sector is typically risk averse, and wants projects that will produce rapid return on investment. Government, on the other hand, can initiate projects with paltry short term ROI. but with huge long term return on investment, such as the Hoover Dam, the Panama Canal, the Tennessee Valley Authority, the interstate highway system.
The current crop of Republican leaders absolutely do not seem to understand that good government plus good business is a winning formula. (By "good business" I mean we discourage financial scammery like leveraged buyouts that impose enormous debt on a previously thriving company and high speed trading and exotic financial instruments that do evil things to the economy, and we encourage development of new products, and more efficient production of old products, and we encourage enlightened treatment of employees as outlined in "The Good Company", by my friend Robert H. Girling, and we discourage the dreadful prevailing orthodox notion that the ultimate responsibility of company leadership is to maximize shareholder value while ignoring the interests of other stakeholders.)
Income tax cuts, part 2: I have a strong impression that most people received only slight cuts in their overall federal tax, while some clearly good federal programs were reduced. The cuts in income tax have been secured largely by either firing people or reducing government payrolls, leading to higher unemployment, or closing parks or closing libraries, or reducing maintenance expenditures on federal bridges and highways. "Do you really want a teeny tiny cut in your taxes if it means firing people or federal roads with potholes ?" "How big was your federal tax cut --- $200 ? $500 ? If you earned more than $10 million your tax cut was $xx. If you earned $50 thousand, your tax cut was $yy." (READERS: PLEASE FILL IN THESE BLANKS).
Earned income tax credit: In my state the Republican Governor has cut the earned income tax credit, and at the federal level the EITC /has been reduced/is on the chopping block. The person to be credited with implementing the earned income tax credit is actually a Republican, Richard Milhous Nixon. on the advice of a Democrat, Patrick Daniel Moynihan, following an idea of a reverse income tax by a conservative patron saint, Milton Friedman. The Republican leaders then were much kinder and gentler and more interested in the well being of the American public than the destructive and obstructionist republican leadership we have now.
The national debt: When Republicans were in power circa 2004, running a war in Iraq without raising taxes to pay for it, Mr. Paul Ryan was heard to state that debt does not matter. Fast forward to 2009 and thereafter, and the self same Mr. Ryan was loudly proclaiming that debt was going to drive America off the cliff. Democrats need to remind the public that Republicans have systematically increased the national debt when they are in power (because it allows them to operate with no cuts to popular social programs, thereby increasing their chances of re-election) and have systematically advocated for reducing the debt when Democrats are in the White House (in hopes of defeating Democrats in the next election).
Phoney issue of 501c whatever: Lawrence O'Donnell's words on the subject should be a campaign ad, showing that it's a big fat lie to claim that Republican PACs were being discriminated against.
The Republicans in Congress have ceased to be a loyal opposition any more, who act in the interests of the majority of the public. Instead, under the leadership of guys like John Boehner and Eric Cantor, influenced by the Tea Party, they have become wreckers and saboteurs, who will do anything to defeat Democrats, no matter how destructive to the nation. Remember Mitch McConnell's famous statement circa 2009 that his principal objective over the next few years was to defeat Barack Obama in 2012 ?
It is estimated that Republican shenanigans over raising the debt ceiling in 2013 actually reduced our national GDP growth from about 3% to 2% in year 2013
These are not the only issues.