Maybe there is something to John Edwards’ “Two Americas” conceit after all. Except the warring factions aren’t the haves and have-nots. They are what Steven Malanga calls tax eaters and tax payers. And the two see the world very differently. See this revealing excerpt from today’s WSJ Political Diary (subscription required).
Pollster Scott Rasmussen uses several questions to break down voters demographically, but one of his most original tweaks is to differentiate between those voters he calls the “Political Class” and those he calls “Mainstream Americans.” The “Political Class,” representing about 14% of the electorate, tend to express “trust” in political leaders while rejecting suggestions that government is its own special interest and often works with big business against consumers. In contrast, “Mainstream Americans” represent about 75% of the voting public and identify with or lean toward a more populist skepticism about the intentions and actions of political leaders.
Striking is how the two groups divide on the question of repealing ObamaCare. “Mainstream Americans” support repeal by an overwhelming 73%, while the numbers are almost exactly reversed among the “Political Class,” 72% of whom oppose repeal.
Posted in Philosophy, Political Animals, Public Choice
Tagged government, john edwards, mainstream americans, new new left, obamacare, political class, Public Choice, repeal, steven malanga, tax eaters, taxpayers, two americas, two americas speech, wall street journal, wsj, wsj political diary
One reason Democrats were so upset about losing their 60th Senate seat was that it would make it easier for Republicans to obstruct legislation.
Fair enough. But the revived possibility of a filibuster may turn out to be the least of their worries.
Sen. Richard Shelby, an Alabama Republican, has placed a hold on more than 70 of President Obama’s nominees.
His motivations are not partisan. He wants money. A lot of it. If Democrats simply throw a few billion federal dollars at his home state, he promises to release his holds.
Basically, Sen. Shelby is requesting a wealth transfer from federal taxpayers – that’s you and me – to politically favored groups in Alabama. Presumably the earmarks would make him look good to Alabama voters. Sen. Shelby is up for re-election this November. Who doesn’t like free goodies? Vote for Shelby!
But they aren’t free. The money to pay for them has to come from somewhere – us. Let us mince no words, then. Sen. Shelby is a thief. What a shame that such stealing is perfectly legal.