Fiscal cliff reveals how dysfunctional Republican nihilism makes US politics

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/01/fiscal-cliff-dysfunctional-republican-nihilism

Version 0 of 1.

So the United States went over the fiscal cliff.

This was about as surprising a development as when the boat sank at the end of Titanic (the movie). Instead, it is yet further evidence of the extraordinary, almost mind-boggling level of dysfunction that exists at the highest level of the US government.

Actually, let me rephrase that: it speaks instead to the extraordinary, almost mind-boggling level of nihilism, stubbornness and hypocrisy that defines the modern Republican party.

Since Republicans won the House of Representatives in 2010, the country has staggered from one pointless fiscal showdown after another. In every case, Congress and the president have repeatedly kicked the can down the road rather than pass legislation that either made serious efforts to right the country's fiscal imbalances, or would stimulate economic growth.

Meanwhile, the US economy continues to underperform; unemployment remains frustratingly high; climate change is worsening; the immigration system is a mess; the nation's infrastructure is still falling apart … and I could go on. In fact, this Congress is the least productive since the 1940s. About 16 months ago, when I wrote my first column for the Guardian, it was titled "The Dysfunction That Lies at the Very Heart of American Politics." Somehow, things have only gotten worse since then – and my expectations for the future are not high.

And virtually this entire situation is the result of Republican intransigence. If you've come looking for false equivalence or a pox on both houses-style argument, you've come to the wrong place. This one is all on the GOP. They've created this crisis; the perpetuated it and then refused to resolve it until the country had basically gone over the fiscal cliff they manufactured.

In fact, because of this singular fact of modern American politics, I am far more sympathetic to President Obama's latest alleged sellout – an agreement to only raise taxes on those making more than $400,000 a year ($450,000 for couples) – than many liberals. The argument made by critics of the president is that he could have simply gone over the cliff and watched all taxes go up and spending be cut. Then, he could have castigated Republicans for raising taxes on all Americans until they relented on passing legislation that upped the tax burden on all those making more than $250,000 a year. That's one possible scenario, but it's one that is based more on wishful thinking than actual reality.

While, granted, it stings to lose out on more potential revenue, what Obama did secure was an extension of unemployment insurance benefits, a continuation of tax provisions like the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), the childcare tax credit and college tuition tax breaks – all of which disproportionately affect the poor and the middle class. Obama also negotiated extensions on an R&D tax credit and a boost in capital gains and dividends tax levies – and he didn't have to give up anything in return on the spending side.

There's no absolutely no guarantee that Republicans would have gone along with any of these stimulative measures in lieu of flexibility from the White House on tax thresholds. So, while it's possible that Obama threw away his leverage by reaching an agreement and compromising on the baseline for tax increases, it's also true that he locked in a series of policy measures he might not have gotten if he done nothing.

Was it worth risking austerity policies that squeeze the middle class simply to lock in even higher tax revenues? Perhaps. People can certainly disagree, and personally, I'm not completely sold on my own rosy take. But when you're dealing with House Republicans, who could have very easily passed a tax cut bill after going over the cliff that ignored EITC or unemployment insurance, or even set the tax threshold at $500,000 and dared Democrats in the Senate to block it, I find it very difficult to criticize the president too harshly.

In the end, Obama went with the bird-in-hand of a certain deal. Arguing that he could have gotten a better agreement had he held out sounds reasonable, but it ignores the potential obstacles in dealing with a political party that has no interest in the plight of working people or the responsibilities that come with running a large country.

And the consider this: about two weeks ago, the left was up in arms over the possibility of benefit cuts to social security and Medicare. None of that happened – the country's social insurance programs will remain largely untouched. At least, for the time being.

In fact, when one looks at the likely deal that will resolve this latest fiscal crisis, it is only further evidence of the GOP's utter hypocrisy on fiscal matters. Consider the major concessions the Republicans got from Obama: a less onerous change in estate taxes, which most directly affect the wealthiest Americans, and a tax break for those making between $250,000 and $400,000.

That's right: we fought this entire battle so Republicans could make it harder for rich people to avoid paying more of their fair share in taxes.

A party that has made deficit reduction its clarion call, and in particular, reducing the size of government spending, appears to have received virtually nothing in the way of major spending cuts in this deal or deficit reduction for that matter. When push came to shove, reducing tax burdens was all that mattered to the GOP.

Of course, this result is neither startling nor unexpected, at least to those who have paid close attention to the Republican party over the last four years. It is ironic that on the 150th anniversary of Lincoln's emancipation proclamation, a party that was formed by courageous slavery abolitionists has become, 150 years later, a party that is courageously fighting to ensure that wealthy Americans do not pay one penny more in taxes.

A refusal to raise taxes of any kind – even those that will go up automatically on 1 January – is a bridge too far for Republicans. (And indeed, by postponing any real action to tackle the deficit, Republicans now get the chance to say they voted for a massive tax cut, rather than voting to increase taxes.)

This singular reality of American politics has overhung the fiscal cliff discussions since election day 2012. Heck, one could even go further back, to the summer of 2011, when Republicans held the economy hostage by refusing to increase the debt limit. Or if you really want, go back to the end of 2010, when the Bush tax cuts were initially extended in return for some stimulus goodies for the White House after Republicans threatened to hold Congress hostage until they got their way.

Last night's spectacle of senators and House representatives huddling in Washington, celebrating New Year's Eve while trying to hammer out a deal to avert the implementation of massive tax increases and spending reductions was simply the conclusion of this two-year psychodrama.

But don't imagine that this is all over: two months from now, we start all over again, when Republicans will almost certainly try to hold the debt ceiling hostage, again, in order to wring the spending concessions out of President Obama that they couldn't get in this go-around.

To put it simply, this is no way to run a functioning democracy. But when you have one political party that has basically surrendered the responsibility of governing the United States, this is the result.