Civil disagreements with Lynne Varner and Bruce Ramsey, members of the Seattle Times editorial board is a weekly feature of the Ed Cetera blog. Bruce and Lynne often disagree on major issues in our community, state and nation -- Bruce tends more conservative and Lynne more liberal. Today's topic: payroll tax cuts. .

Lynne Varner

Bruce Ramsey

Lynne Varner: Bruce, Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives are playing a game of political chicken with the lives of working Americans. By refusing to approve the Senate's extension of payroll-tax cuts, they've prioritized politics over policy.

Sen. Patty Murray lays out the local impact of political brinkmanship in the House: “House Republicans’ refusal to pass this compromise means that in Washington state over 3.5 million families will see their taxes go up on January 1st by an average of $1,130 next year... 40,000 unemployed Washington workers will lose unemployment insurance in less than two weeks ... and 4,000 Washington state doctors who provide Medicare to seniors and the disabled will lose out on much of the government support that makes that care possible."

Happy holidays!

(Murray's reference to Medicare refers to a portion of the Senate deal postponing a scheduled cut in reimbursement rates for doctors who treat Medicare patients.)

A tip of the glass to Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler, for smartly and bravely crossing party lines to back the extension. She was joined by six other grownups in the House GOP. The freshman from Camas explained her vote with a logic escaping her party: "I know that families in southwest Washington are struggling to make ends meet, and I wanted to eliminate any of their fear that this relief wouldn’t be in place January 1,” Herrera Beutler said in an email relayed through her spokesman to Seattle Times' D.C. correspondent, Kyung M. Song

Nearly the entire Senate -- including almost all of the Republicans -- voted to prevent 160 million working Americans from receiving a tax increase on January 1st.
Democrats & Republicans working together is apparently an alien concept in the House. GOP leaders in the lower chamber say they're not opposed to a payroll tax cut per se, but as bargaining chips go, this one works. This Washington Post article refers to a Republican lawmaker's description of the payroll-tax cut showdown as "high-stakes poker."

President Obama's response to the poker reference was appropriately withering. "He's right about the stakes, but this is not poker. It's not a game. . . . It's not a game for the average family who doesn't have an extra 1,000 bucks to lose. It’s not a game for somebody who’s out there looking for work right now, and might lose his house if unemployment insurance doesn’t come through."

Consumer spending drives the American economy and the GOP's tactics could have a chilling effect.

Bruce Ramsey: Lynne,all political parties like to give away free stuff, and the Democrats are accusing the Republicans of blocking the flow of goodies. What else is new?

Does the Social Security tax cut make sense? People say, "It puts money in the hands of the people, who will spend it." You allude to that when you say, "Consumer spending drives the American economy."

Partly. In restoring growth, investment spending is what matters more. Anyway we got into this recession because people borrowed too much and spent it. I think the drag on the economy is debt, and giving people 2 percent more of their gross pay is not going to do much about that. And if the Social Security system runs short because Congress has cut the tax, the government will have to increase its debt.

I've enjoyed the Social Security tax cut. But is it good policy? It feels like quack medicine, along with the rebates I got under Bush, Clinton and the rest of them. I'd rather the federal government balanced its books.