Set a Precedent

I am basically fine with this tax-cuts deal. No, we can't pass a just-the-middle-class tax cut without Republican support; no, Republicans will not support that bill; therefore, realistically, the choice is between "cave on tax cuts, get some additional stimulus/anti-contraction now, and have a chance of passing stuff like DADT repeal etc." against "let all taxes rise and do nothing else for the rest of the lame duck session." I'll pick the former every time. But two points:

1. Let this be a lesson to us liberals: the filibuster must go. Any Senate Democrat who complains about this compromise and then votes against filibuster reform in January is an idiot; the only reason we didn't do the middle-class tax cuts, say, last year was that we need Republican support despite having 58 Senators. Go with Merkley's plan.

2. This would actually be a good occasion on which for liberals to genuinely play a little hardball. Why? Because it is the one issue in the entire world of issues where Republicans have an actual substantive desire. They really, really want to give rich people money. Like, really, really, really. So use that leverage. Have Bernie Sanders, whatever friends he can gather, and the CPC say basically the following:

"Hey, look, we'd be fine with letting everyone's taxes go up, if you can't do better than this. And we don't trust you to let us have our 50-margin votes on DADT and the DREAM Act anyway. So how about this: we'll let you have your tax cuts for the rich but only if we add in a few hundred billion in infrastructure spending, an even bigger payroll tax holiday, and we hold cloture votes on DADT and the DREAM Act before we'll agree to pass the bill."

What do Republicans do if the Democrats say this? Remember, they really want tax cuts for the rich; it's the only thing they care about. And Obama as much as said that he had to give in because the Democrats couldn't hold the line in Congress; he might very well support their efforts to make the deal even better. If Speaker Pelosi, backed by a lot of her caucus, and either 41 Senate Democrats or Harry Reid and a bunch of Senate Democrats would be willing to make that statement as above, I have trouble seeing the Republicans declining. After all, they don't actually give a damn about anything except cutting taxes for the rich. So why not take this opportunity to set a precedent: the liberals can play hardball, too.