Another unsatisfying story on tax day protestors — Tea Party folk, perhaps, or “conservatives,” whatever that means. The Washington Post did a particularly bad job, I thought (click here).
Why? I grow weary of stories that quote people demanding something without ever asking what that something really is. And by “something,” I mean, “how will that work on the ground?”
So when someone demands smaller government the reporter should say “which government agency, in particular?” If they say “entitlements,” they should say “which entitlements?” and let them pick from a laundry list: Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid, whatever. If they don’t specify, they should be asked to pick: HIghways, Defense, health and human services? Emphasis should be placed on entitlements the complainers receive.
And if they say “a balanced budget” the reporter should say “The Tax Foundation reports that we would have to double our income taxes to balance the budget. Do you favor doubling your taxes?” And if they say no, then they should be asked to find $1 trillion in cuts, this year.
Interestingly, Rep. Rob Bishop is sending out releases lambasting the sunsetting of the Bush tax cuts next year, somehow blaming Obama for this. Why not blame Bush? It was Bush’s slight of hand way of cutting taxes while keeping the lost revenue amounts low (relatively speaking) while conveniently kicking the problem down the road.
Kind of cowardly, you ask me, but now, of course, it’s an “Obama” tax hike.