The vast right-wing conspiracy at work…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59577-2002Dec15.html
As the Bush administration draws up plans to simplify the tax system, it is also refining arguments for why it may be necessary to shift more of the tax load onto lower-income workers.
[…]
The efforts would thrust the administration into a debate that until now has lingered on the fringes of economic policy: Are too few wealthy Americans paying too much in taxes for too many, and should the working poor and middle class be shouldering more of the tax burden?
“The increasing reliance on taxing higher-income households and targeted social preferences at lower incomes stands in the way of moving to a simpler, flatter tax system,” R. Glenn Hubbard, chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, warned at a tax forum at the American Enterprise Institute on Tuesday.
[…]
I’ve been talking with the folks at the Commonweal Institute (http://www.commonwealinstitute.org/) over the past week, reading through their materials, and pondering their core theory: there is a vast right wing conspiracy, co-ordinated by a few wealthy foundations and individuals, to systematically shift American political opinion to the right via an agglomeration of right-wing “think tanks” that specialize in turning radical policy suggestions into easily digested media soundbites. And that the left/liberal/moderate end of the political spectrum has left itself completely helpless in the fact of this, by not sponsoring an equivalent ideological infrastructure.
Examined in this light, the article cited above is a classic example… let’s look at it:
Who is quoted?
R. Glenn Hubbard, chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers (a government advisory board).
He is speaking at the American Enterprise Institute (a conservative think tank that took a hard turn to the right in the 1980’s after criticism that it was too “centrist”). Coincidentally enough: “At the time of his nomination, R. Glenn Hubbard was a visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research.” See the People for the American Way web site at http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=6249 or just look on the AEI web site where he’s still listed: http://www.aei.org/scholars/hubbard.htm
The “scholar” should be put in quotes. By the way, the “National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)” has been the recipient of $10 million dollars in funding from various ultra-right foundations (Bradley, Olin, Scaife and Smith Richardson) according to Media Transparency (http://www.mediatransparency.org), a very useful resource I was turned on to by the Commonweal Institute. See: http://www.mediatransparency.org/recipients/nber.htm for details.
So, let’s log two hits for the American Enterprise Institute, and one for the NBER. Three total for the “vast right wing conspiracy”. Oh yeah, add a bonus point for the AEI not being labeled as a “conservative” or “right wing” think tank.
That’s only the first quote.
Who is quoted next? Outgoing White House economic adviser Lawrence B. Lindsey. Also speaking to the AEI. He contends that the 12.4% payroll tax paid on all income below $85,000 is really a “retirement fund” that is “returned to the taxpayer” and “shouldn’t be counted as a tax”. AGain citing PFAW: Assistant to the President for Economic Policy; Director, National Economic Council – Lawrence B. Lindsey was a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington; see http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=6250 for details. Or just look on the AEI web site, where he’s still listed (as well): http://www.aei.org/scholars/lindsey.htm.
He was also Managing Director of Economic Strategies (http://www.estrats.com/), a consultancy in New York. After peeking at their web site, you begin to see a pattern… the CEO of that organization, George Kendall, cites his involvement with the “Blue Ribbon Commission on Hungary (in collaboration with the Hudson Institute)” and the Global Economic Action Institute.
The Hudson Institute - “The Institute is a hard-right activist think tank that advocates the abolition of government-backed Social Security and an end to corporate income taxes.” (Media Transparency, http://www.mediatransparency.org/recipients/hudson_institute.htm)
The Global Economic Action Institute - “Est 1983 to strengthen the world’s economic system. Robert B Anderson (founding chairman - ex-US Treasury secretary - in 1960 founded Aspin Institute, runs Arco Atlantic Richfield Company. 1986 jailed after being involved in financial fraud scheme involving Unification Church). Eugene J McCarthy (next chair, ex-US senator, trained by Benedictine Order). Sir Robert Muldoon (3rd chair, NZ).” (The Working Class Encyclopedia, http://hammer.prohosting.com/~penz/encycl/g2encyc.htm) … note the connection with the “Unification Church”, which funds the Washington Times.
Let’s chalk up another couple of points for the AEI, one more for the Hudson Institute reference, and three for the “vast right wing conspiracy” in general. Seven so far? At least.
The poor are under taxed and need to pay more to support the government, so the rich can pay less? Kind of an absurd, extremist statement (even the Heritage Foundation [another right-wing think tank… we’ll get to them later] says so, later on in the article) - but one that happens to White House economic policy.
This points up another item that the Commonweal Institute highlights - the right wing’s ongoing campaign to provide intellectual cover and legitimacy for extreme right-wing ideas. Their version of “the big lie” - repeat “the rich are over taxed, the poor are under taxed” often enough, and eventually people will buy it… or, at least, buy that it is an intellectually credible argument.
Are we having fun yet? Let’s tack on another point for solid execution on a standard tactic of the “vast right wing conspiracy” (should I remove the quotes yet?). Now at 8 points and counting…
Let’s move on… to another government functionary. One J.T. Young, whose editorial in the Washington Times lamenting the burden on high income tax payers is quoted (by the way, the WT is a far right newspaper funded by the Rev. Moon of Korea, leader of the “Unification Church” aka “Moonies”). J.T. Young used to be the chief economist for the Republican Policy Committee in the US Senate and has regularly published extremist editorials in the WT (as a quick search on Google will reveal).
Let’s tack on a point here for the Washington Times reference. Nine and counting.
Here’s a short biography of JT: http://finance.senate.gov/106-298.htm. From there, we learn that prior to that, he was “Policy Director at Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole’s Better America Foundation”. According to an article published in “The Nation”, archived on the Media Transparency web site at http://www.mediatransparency.org/reprints/bobdolekoch.htm, guess who was the number two financier of said foundation? Charles Koch, chair of Koch Industries, to the tune of $225,000. Dole eventually had to shut the foundation down due to bad PR… and good ole’ JT landed on his feet in the Senate. The Koch Family Foundations are a huge funder of “libertarian” think tanks - in fact, Charlie boy co-founded the Cato Institute in 1977.
Chalk up a point for the Koch brothers here. One of the Commonweal Institute’s main points is that the right-wing nutures it’s rising young stars, makes sure they’re paid well and land on their feet, etc. and funds a vast network of institutions that ensure they’re continually employed. J.T. certainly seems to qualify as a beneficiary. One more point for the “VRWC”. Eleven points and counting folks.
Are we done with the drawing the lines? Don’t count on it.
One more note - the article points out that: “When administration officials pushed the need to create private investment accounts to supplement Social Security, they specifically warned that taxes paid into Social Security would not necessarily be returned unless the system was reformed.”
Another point for the vast right-wing conspiracy - privatizing Social Security is a long term theme with them. So, even as the Bush Administration reverses course, the “VRWC” scores a point by getting their message through. 12 points.
Next quote: William W. Beach, an economist at the Heritage Foundation, a “conservative” (actually far right) think tank. Saying that suggesting Social Security is not a tax is a “dangerous idea”. Note that they don’t label the Heritage Foundation as “conservative” until later in the article.
13 points. At least. The irony of turning first to a right wing think tank for a quote opposing this idea is just unbelieveable.
Note that once they finally get to a “liberal” group, Citizens for Tax Justice, they immediately label it “a tax research group backed by organized labor”.
We’ll give “our side” a point for getting quoted, and a couple more points for getting quotes from a couple of electeds. Although the quotes are pretty tame. So far, it’s 13 to 3 in the right-wing’s favor.
Now, we’ll summarize the final part of the article: Congressman Jim DeMint, a certified member of the extreme right (his Congressional and campaign web sites highlight his 100% approval rating from the Family Research Council [an ultra-right wing fundamentalist Christian organization]) is cited as favoring replacing the federal income tax with a national sales tax.
[…]
DeMint and his allies have called for a national sales tax to replace the income tax. For those below the federal poverty line, sales taxes paid would be refunded, but under the system, at least they will have seen the cost of government, he said. The working poor would accept a higher tax burden because they would be relieved of the need to file a tax return.
DeMint called his ideas “the duck’s feet under the water,” propelling his proposals forward invisibly. Conservative thinkers at the Heritage Foundation and other think tanks have begun expressing similar opinions. Last month, the Wall Street Journal editorial page made waves with an article titled, “The Non-Taxpaying Class.”
[…]
We’ll give the right wing a bunch of points here.
Congresscritter getting quoted: 1 point
Subject of quote: 1 point
Mention of the Heritage Foundation: 1 point
and other “think tanks”: 1 point
Wall Street Journal: 1 point
Washington Post buying the idea that the latter organizations picked it up from the Congresscritter: 2 points
… did I mention that one of the Commonweal Institute’s basic points is that it is the think tanks that supply the electeds with the policy ideas and intellectual ammunition to back them up? And that the right wing very carefully co-ordinates its messages - even to the point of having weekly “briefing” meetings? I doubt this idea originated with the Congressman himself.
O.K., so now we’re at 20-3. That qualifies as a “blow out”.
But we’re not done.
The Commonweal Institute says that there is an “imbalance in the marketplace of ideas”, and that the progressive/liberal/moderate has crippled its ability to affect the dialogue on public policy by failing to create an ideological infrastructure equivalent to the network of right wing think tanks exemplified by the Heritage Foundation, and cites articles by others that say: “The result could be an increasing number of one-sided debates in which the challengers are far outnumbered, if indeed they are heard from at all.” (MediaTransparency.org citing the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy at http://www.mediatransparency.org/national_think_tanks.htm)
Well, I don’t know what else you’d call having the Heritage Foundation essentially debate itself.
Irony of irony, the guy from the Center for Tax Justice echoes the Commonweal Institute’s point, precisely (and, honestly, in quite a patheticly helpless sounding fashion) in the article’s last lines:
[…]
But McIntyre worried that in the marketplace of ideas, the new argument could carry the day.
“I would hope the public would find it repugnant,” he said, “but I suppose you never know.”
Can you say: two point conversion (and game over)?
Final tally, 22-3. The radical right wins overwhelmingly, illustrating in dramatic form the need for an institution like the Commonweal Institute (http://www.commonwealinstitute.org/) that will help develop the type of infrastructure needed to correct this overwhelming imbalance in the marketplace of ideas.
