All In The Family

Tyler,

I'll address your last paragraph first.  Romney's tax plan is the weakest of his 59 points (or however many of the 59 it includes).  And that's why he's not talking about it.  The 25% corporate tax is a good step.  The repatriation of profits is a step in the right direction.  Neither addresses the distortions introduced by the current income tax.  The elimination of taxes on capital gains, dividends and interest ONLY for those making less that $200K is laughable.  As I replied to Ryan, that is just political gimmickry.  No revenue scheme is going to be free of introducing distortions, but there are many who think a consumption tax introduces the least amount of distortions to incentives.  That is not a fringe or uninformed view.  Nor is it delusional.

Cain may be naive that his plan will pass Congress.  I suspect he is savvy enough to know that the particulars, if it should pass, would likely be different than his version.  But, even if it just resembles it, it will be a fundamentally different approach than what we have now.  It will be much flatter and much broader.  Romney's "long term" plan, i.e., Bowles-Simpson has already provoked its own firestorm.  The idea that it could be enacted quickly is likely as big a pipe dream as Cain's 9-9-9.  Even extending the Bush rates (Romney's short term plan) is quite contentious, much less making them "permanent".

Don't mistake my defense of Cain and his plan from demagoguery as being excited about a tax discussion.  As I've told Ryan many times, there is little that government can do to generate economic growth.  Therefore, focus on programs designed to do that generally, or increase employment particularly, is not something I am inclined to view as productive topic for conservatives.  I am interested in what a candidate intends to do to roll back government.  And Romney has some good stuff in his 59 points.  But I don't expect any quick effects from either tax policy changes or regulation relief or reductions in government spending.  I am very sympathetic to the argument that the uncertainty around taxes is inhibiting new investment and employment and that relieving that uncertainty is one thing the government can actively address by making the current rates permanent.  Otherwise, the best tax scheme and regulatory rollback are long term issues that is important, but are a distraction from the fiscal and political problem of entitlements.

On the other hand, there is going to be a huge debate over social security, Medicare/Medicaid.  There will be plenty of class warfare rhetoric on any proposals to reign those in.  And the class warfare crowd will bring taxes into it whether it's on the front burner of our agenda or not.  If there ever was a time to fundamentally address the tax structure, it is now.  Because it will be relevant to addressing spending if for no reason than it being what will bring the opposition to the table.  But long term economic growth and capital allocation will be key to addressing the entitlement time bomb and having a discussion about the best tax policy is worth putting out there.  It may not be as big a distraction as some, including me, might think.  It could well be complementary.

I think it very unfortunate that Romney and his supporters have taken the easy road of discrediting Cain's plan by ad hominem.  Despising his small war chest is petty (and foolish considering how much good Romney's war chest did against underfunded McCain and Huckabee last time).  Writing off his idea of a consumption tax, whether 9-9-9 or Fair Tax, as delusional is hardly the kind of debate we need in the party.  A big chunk of this party is tired of the GOP establishment who have no real vision of conservative government and whose first impulse is to cut a deal.  There is a kind of arrogance in the objections to Cain that reminds folks of that establishment.

--dmac

P.S. it might be wise to not make too much use of imagery like "tar baby" and "mark of Cain", especially when directed at Cain.  Herman Cain would probably not be offended, but you can be sure it will be used against Romney by Democrats who have no love for Cain in order to paint the GOP as racist and to raise Romney's religion as an issue.