Third Way in struggle for the Democratic Party’s soul
Third Way in struggle for the Democratic Partys soulNoah Bierman
Boston Globe, OCTOBER 06, 2014
Fast forward a decade: The philosophy, sketched out privately at the Boston office of Brown Rudnick,
is now at the center of an intense struggle for the soul of the Democratic Party.
Third Way, backed by Wall Street titans, corporate money, and congressional allies, is publicly warning against divisive soak-the-rich politics voiced by populist Democrats. Its target: Elizabeth Warren, the Massachusetts senator whose rise to power two years ago helped galvanize Democratic grass roots against Wall Street and pushed the issue of income inequality to the forefront.
Two-thirds of its 31 trustees have held senior leadership positions in investment funds or big banks or served in some other capacity on Wall Street.
Third Way leaders are extremely sensitive to questions and criticism about their sources of funding. The real issue, Third Way says, is that harsh populist positions and rhetoric are damaging the Democratic Party.
It goes back to what Bill Clinton said, which is You cant love the job and hate the job creators, said Matt Bennett, Third Ways vice president for public affairs and one of its cofounders. Vilification of industry isnt helping Democrats.
Their overarching emphasis is on solidifying political support among the middle class. Where they differ from many Democrats is how they plan to appeal to the vast middle: reduce deficits and cut spending growth on such entitlements as Social Security and Medicare.
They insist on deficit reduction and entitlement cuts as conditions for key tax hikes on the wealthy.
Raising taxes is absolutely essential, but it is not sufficient from our perspective, Cowan said in an interview, in which he also said the group advocated strongly for Obamas health care law and the deal that ended the fiscal cliff, both of which included tax hikes on the wealthy.
If the Democratic Party stands only for raising taxes on the wealthy, not for actually making entitlement reforms and other spending cuts, he said, then the other half of the equation will never happen.
The battle over money and influence has now moved to the 2016 presidential election, and the competition between parties for the financial favors of Wall Street executives will be fierce.
Though Third Ways salvo against Warren in The Wall Street Journal became a seminal moment in its fight against Democratic populism, the group is now very sensitive about the topic and will not even discuss why they chose to wage it.
Robert Reich, Clintons former labor secretary, who has become a leading Wall Street critic, argued that there are several issues Democrats are unwilling to tackle because of Wall Streets grip on the party including tax breaks for hedge fund managers, transaction taxes for high-speed traders, limits on the size of banks, and income tax rates for high earners.
At some point it becomes a Faustian bargain, he said. The financial dependence on Wall Street effectively ties the hands of the Democratic Party.
But moderate Democrats worry the party is doomed to lose general elections if candidates are perceived as antibusiness in an effort to win over activists on the hard left.
That really has never generated a hell of a lot of support on Election Day, Daley said.
Really interesting article from last year about the Third Way think tank and their place in the Democratic party. It's easy to forget that when Occupy Wall Street erupted in 2011, the national conversation was about austerity and cuts to social insurance programs. The arc of history has turned against this philosophy to the point that there's not a single candidate that can run in the Democratic primary espousing this political point of view.
Is anyone on the "left" proposing cuts to social security? Is anyone arguing against raising taxes on the wealthy much less tying tax increases to austerity?
It's a very different landscape than it was a few years ago.
cprise
(8,445 posts)The party needs to start asking NOW if they want to repeat that performance in 2016 with another raft of Clinton-ites.
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)Bless their brave hearts. This ^ together with recent UK & Canadian lurches leftward all could all
add up to much better outcomes in 2016 for American workers, middle class, the poor, as
well Millenials and PoC.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)only one candidate saying that social security is in no way responsible for the deficit.
Democratic candidates need to be more vocal in their support of "entitlements". If you are not in favor of lifting the cap you are essentially in favor of cuts. Let's make that clear right now.
I could not have a lower opinion of Third Way. However I have discovered I'm not allowed to call them Nazis or Fascists.
elleng
(130,870 posts)by MARTIN OMALLEY for the Concord Monitor - Oct 20, 2015
'Last week, the 65 million Americans who depend on Social Security were dealt a devastating blow. For only the third time since 1975, there will no cost-of-living raise in their benefits for the next year pushing millions of seniors closer to the brink of poverty.
As more families feel the financial squeeze from rising inequality, rising health care premiums and rising property taxes, many of our leaders are shrugging their shoulders and lamenting, Theres nothing we can do about it. I beg to differ.
As Democrats, it is time to stand up for our values and call for the expansion of Social Security for all beneficiaries. Thats why Ive released a robust Social Security plan that will help increase the number of Americans with adequate retirement savings by 50 percent, within eight years.
We can afford to expand benefits. We simply need to make the system fairer and more progressive. Right now, the payroll taxes that fund Social Security are capped so they only apply to the first $118,500 of a workers income. This essentially means that millionaires stop paying into Social Security in mid-February, while middle-class workers contribute a portion of their wages all year.
I believe that the wealthiest among us can afford to contribute a little bit more to keep vulnerable Americans out of poverty. As part of my plan, I propose lifting the payroll cap for the highest earners, starting at income above $250,000. In this way, only wealthier Americans would be asked to pay additional payroll taxes and ensure the system endures for future generations.
Further, my plan would increase the minimum Social Security benefit, so that no one who works 30 years will spend their golden years in poverty. I would also reform Social Security to support, rather than penalize, caregiving. Women who take extended time off to care for their families should not receive lower Social Security benefits when they retire.
Together, these and other measures in my plan will answer the Concord Monitors recent call (Monitor editorial, Oct. 14) to action: that we must shore up the long-term solvency of the Social Security system in a way that allows benefits to truly keep up with the real-world cost of living.
I call on every candidate for president to join me in fighting for a more fair Social Security system one that embodies our values, and allows Americans to retire with the dignity they deserve.'
read: https://politics.concordmonitor.com/2015/10/opinion/my-turn-america-can-afford-to-expand-social-security/
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)elleng
(130,870 posts)Chan790
(20,176 posts)That would be a slander against fascists.
Third-Way is lower than whale shit on the bottom of the ocean.