Taxing the public's trust (1/10)

The Bush administration is stretching the truth again to sell its latest tax cut
By Bryan Keefer

On Tuesday, President Bush announced a package of tax cuts that immediately drew harsh criticism from Democrats. The package, which the White House estimates will cost $674 billion over the next ten years (or approximately $925 billion counting increased interest costs, as calculated by the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities), accelerates income tax reductions passed in 2001 and exempts corporate dividends from personal income taxes. Unfortunately, the administration is once again using a number of misleading arguments to rally support for its proposals. (Read the whole column.)

1/10/2003 01:19:12 PM EST |

Demagoguing Pickering (1/10)

By Brendan Nyhan

President Bush's controversial re-nomination of U.S. District Court Judge Charles Pickering for the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has prompted a fiery Democratic response in the wake of the Trent Lott controversy. Pickering, whose first nomination was scuttled by the Senate Judiciary Committee in March 2002 on a party-line vote, has been the subject of a furious debate, including a number of vicious attacks by both sides. Regrettably, several prominent opponents of Pickering are now upping the ante even further.

Capitalizing on the memory of Lott's comments stating that the country would have been better off if former Senator Strom Thurmond, R-SC, had won his pro-segregation campaign for the presidency in 1948, two Senate Democrats have implied that civil rights that Thurmond opposed at the time are under threat if Pickering is confirmed. Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., said, "You're going to have those who favor civil rights on one side, and those who have a lot of explaining to do on the other side." Another leading Democrat, Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts, issued a statement claiming that "Judge Pickering's record reflects a hostility to civil rights and a vision of the Republican Party that reminds Americans of a painful time in our nation's history," tying Pickering's alleged "hostility to civil rights" to the current GOP's "vision" in another apparent Lott reference.

Senator Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., tried a somewhat different approach, simply asserting that Pickering supporters are acting in bad faith and that the White House has renominated him in order to appeal to racial sentiment in whites. "This is not an issue like affirmative action where people of good faith can disagree," he said. "To renominate Judge Pickering, who has not built a distinguished record and is probably best known for intervening on behalf of a convicted cross-burner, shows that Nixon's Southern strategy [of appealing to whites uncomfortable with integration] is alive and well in the White House."

And The New York Times editorial page framed Pickering's nomination as "The Revenge of Trent Lott," depicting a cartoonish and Machiavellian racial scheme by the GOP, which it alleges "winked at Mr. Lott's supporters by having prominent party members stand by him" and is now tacking back in that direction.

Many people have offered fair criticism of Pickering's record as a judge and public figure. Unfortunately, the temptation to demagogue his nomination has proven all too strong in the wake of Lott's resignation.

Update 1/14 11:13 AM EST: On ABC's "This Week" Sunday, Daschle went much farther, echoing Schumer's charges: "I think this [the Pickering nomination] really lays bare the administration's real position on civil rights. This exposes the Southern strategy clearly."

[Email this to a friend] [Subscribe to our email list]

Related links:
-Pickering's race war (Ben Fritz, 3/13/02)

1/10/2003 01:17:12 PM EST |

The dissent smackdown (1/6)

How anti-democratic tactics continue to be used to stifle debate over national security
By Brendan Nyhan

Attacks on dissent related to the war on terrorism and Sept. 11 continued over the holidays with salvos from White House press secretary Ari Fleischer and opponents of Senator Patty Murray, D-WA. More than a year after the 2001 attacks, smear tactics designed to stifle debate about US security policy are still all too common. (Read the whole column.)

1/6/2003 07:50:36 AM EST |

This website is copyright (c) 2001-2005 by Ben Fritz, Bryan Keefer and Brendan Nyhan. Please send letters to the editor for publication to letters@spinsanity.org and private questions or comments to feedback@spinsanity.org.

Comments by YACCS