Not winning their case

In response to the skyrocketing costs of the occupation of Iraq, and the requested $23 billion in additional domestic spending, Democratic representatives David Obey, John Murtha and and Jim McGovern have proposed an additional income tax increase because "it is unfair to pass the cost of the war onto future generations":

"The war will cost future generations billions of dollars in taxes that we're shoving off on them and it is devouring money that could be used to expand their educational opportunities, expand their job training possibilities, attack our long-term energy problems and build stronger communities," Obey said.

The proposed measure will increase taxes on the lower and middle class by 2%, and wealthier people by 12-15%.

Among the many problems with this idea, one of its most glaring flaws is its inability to deter Republican attacks. Immediately after the plan was announced, an RNC spokesman responded: "Americans will reject Democrat [sic] plans to take away their hard-earned dollars."

Unfortunately, that is probably the case. Obey believes that by adding this tax-surcharge, Americans will "stop ignoring what this war is costing American taxpayers and call the president's bluff on fiscal responsibility." But I believe this bill falls short of doing that, and instead appears only to help fund the occupation that is growing more and more unpopular even amongst Republicans.

This action is dependent on the idea that Americans will realize that Bush's spending is out of control. Unfortunately, this assumes that the small minority of Americans who still believe in this invasion will not attribute an increase in taxes to the party they already associate with tax increases.

Basically, it gives those individuals credit for being smarter and more in-tune politically than they probably are. DailyKos supports this bill, and for our sake I hope that if it passes it works as planned, but its goal seems lofty and unattainable, and I believe its message will get lost with its effects.