KEITH OLBERMANN: The New York Times is reporting that there is now a deal between House Republicans and House Democrats on the extension of the payroll-tax cut. As we reported to you last night, the Republicans would cave in on that. But tagged in with this deal, according to the Times, unemployment benefits will be extended as planned and there will not be major cuts in reimbursements to doctors who accept Medicare.
So again, The New York Times reporting at this hour a deal to extend the payroll-tax cut without separating it out from the unemployment benefits and Medicare-cut issues and those two issues falling favorably in the area of the beneficiaries of each.
Meantime, no quote has summed up the Republican mindset when it comes to helping those in need as well as Mitt Romney’s “I’m not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there.”
In our fourth story — according to new polling, a majority of respondents don’t think it is the poor in most need of the safety net, it’s actually the middle class.
The president released his budget plans yesterday, in which he called for a reduction of the deficit by four trillion over ten years. That was not enough for Republicans, who are still calling for the president to gut the entitlement programs. Programs which — as Governor Romney put it — provide a safety net for those in need.
But in the new polling out today, it appears that it is not only the poor in need of help during these difficult times. In fact, 51 percent of respondents said that it was actually the middle class suffering the most during the downturn. Forty-five percent saying it was the poor who were hit the hardest.
The results appearing to fall along class lines. Sixty-two percent of those who earn less than 30 thousand dollars a year saying the poor had been hardest hit. Sixty-two percent of those earning at least 75 thousand a year indicating it was the middle class.
Regardless of which group was the hardest hit, the economic mood of the country is apparently now one of optimism. Gallup’s measure of the U.S. economic confidence has hit its highest point since this time last year, thanks to a 34-point positive gain in just the last five months.
Joining me now is the director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University, author of “The Price of Civilization,” Professor Jeffrey Sachs. Professor, thanks for your time tonight.
JEFFREY SACHS: Good evening, how are you?
OLBERMANN: Read that last optimism number for me. Are there components, besides the recent incremental improvement in unemployment, that should be considered as explaining this?
SACHS: I hope that the optimism is justified. We’ve had some false springs before. The economy is doing a bit better and, as you say, the job numbers look a bit better. Maybe Europe, which was teetering to disaster, is somehow finding its way out of that. And I think in the U.S., we see, for instance, in these congressional moves in the last couple of days, at least a desire on both sides not to go to the brink once again So, the mood is brightening a bit.
I doubt there is going to be a spectacular boom coming in this country coming any time soon, but it’s better than it was a couple of months ago.
OLBERMANN: In the “who got hurt most” polling, is there a headline sort of buried in that stark disagreement of who has been hurt more, that the reality is — 96 percent of Americans agree that people who were not hurt the most are the rich. That this whole argument about defending the very wealthy and making sure they get their tax cuts because they are job creators is bought by literally less than four percent of the American public?
SACHS: I think that probably the most dramatic number we’ve seen in recent months is the census bureau data that shows that one to two Americans now is in a low-income household. That means income that is below two times the poverty level. This is dramatic. What used to be a middle-class society is now a society with a lot of people that are really struggling and, of course, the super rich.
OLBERMANN: There was another number in that National Journal poll. Fifty-three percent of respondents still say the government taxes too much to fund programs for people who can get by without help. Especially in light of the number you just quoted, is there a misconception of who actually is receiving help from the government and how broadly — certainly, in terms of the overall picture, that the mean, perhaps — how broadly the standard of living in the country has dropped in the last 10, 20, 30 years?
SACHS: First of all, a lot of people desperately need help from government just to eat properly right now. So, there is a lot of base-level suffering.
But what alarms me, also, is the fact that core functions of government — in education, in job training, in building infrastructure — those are also being squeezed. As per the agreement reached in the middle of last year by the White House and Congress, to put us on a path in which what we call the discretionary budget — those are the government investments for the future — those are on a quite stark path of decline right now and President Obama’s new budget doesn’t change that in any way.
What it really shows is that these caps on discretionary programs are going to squeeze government to the core. I’m very worried about that, because how are we going to “invest in the future,” as the president says, if we’re cutting back sharply in precisely those areas?
OLBERMANN: To quote you on that, you wrote, “In the budget is actually more grim news for America’s poor and working class. The poorer half of the population does not interest the Washington status quo.” What, specifically, is or is not in the budget that backstops your conclusion?
SACHS: The problem is that we’re on a path now where the so-called caps that were agreed — that are going to limit spending in areas like education, job training, basic infrastructure — are putting us on a trajectory where these programs are going to be increasingly squeezed. Safe water for communities, the Army Corps of Engineers, environment, energy, infrastructure — all of this is shrinking as a share of the national economy. Dramatically, if we keep on the path that has been agreed and part of the president’s budget, as well.
I like certain parts of this budget. Obviously, what the president is recommending is vastly superior to what the Republican opposition is doing, which would absolutely gut core functions of government and gut core support for the poor. The president’s on the right side of this, but not enough to turn around the reality for so many tens of millions of suffering Americans.
OLBERMANN: Professor Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia, the author of “The Price of Civilization,” we thank you greatly for your time tonight, sir.
SACHS: My pleasure. Thank you.
