Pumpkin Muffinomics
Dec 21st, 2011 by Kimberly
Every year for the past three years, my office has had a toy drive. My friend Aundria started it, to help her church collect gifts for the Angel Tree project. Angel Tree is a charity that gives presents to kids whose parents are in prison – kids who shouldn’t be punished for their parents’ sins. The people I work with are good folks (you know, at least 90% of the time) so I have no doubt that they’d give generously anyhow, but since I believe in the cause, each year I bribe them with food. If they fill the toy box sufficiently, they receive baked goods when it’s all over. Usually I offer pumpkin muffins, since they seem to be the office favorite. Invariably, the incentive pays off. This year was no exception. Aundria was happy with the amount of stuff in the box by mid-morning on Friday, and four more people dropped off toys after that. By the end of the day, I solemnly informed my boss that our contributions had been deemed pumpkin muffin-worthy.
It amazes me that this works. Really, when you do the math, it shouldn’t. All these folks could buy themselves a pumpkin muffin for $2 or $3 and save themselves $20 or more in toy donations. Granted, the pumpkin muffins available for purchase in the greater Los Angeles area wouldn’t be as tasty as mine, but still. Even mine aren’t worth $25 each. We haven’t done the toy drive without the bakery incentives, so I have no basis for contrast, but I am sure that the prize offered makes people donate more.
Having just finished this yearly exercise, I read the news today that the House rejected a proposal to extend the payroll tax cut. Unrelated, you say? No, I tell you, just proof that our national leaders need some lessons in what I like to call “Pumpkin Muffinomics.”
For months – nay, years – the Republican leadership has touted its love of tax cuts. All tax cuts, of every shape and kind. However, this is the second time that they have held the tax cuts hostage. Over a year ago, before the payroll tax discussion, we witnessed the standoff concerning the possible end of the Bush era tax cuts. These cuts were established with an expiration date. There was no mystery about that. However, by the time the end date approached, the economy had taken a nose-dive and we all wondered how we could get along without them. President Obama wanted to extend the tax cuts for the lower levels, but restore the initial tax levels for people making over $200,000.00. Republican leader John Boehner had previously said that he would vote for that initiative if pressed, but later changed his mind and stood with Senator Mitch McConnell, both saying that it was all or nothing. This approach was a big gamble for them that paid off. All the tax cuts did end up being extended, and the Republicans took back leadership of the House that year.
This flies in the face of the lessons we have learned from the Angel Tree toy drive and its pumpkin muffin lure. That taught us that the offer of a little something you didn’t have before – the devilishly rich and yet angelically light muffin – inspires us to give. Give something to the cause, get a reward. The Republican spokespeople, however, have adopted something of an anti-Muffinomic outlook. Give us what we ask, or else we’ll make sure you lose what you already had.
They appear to be taking the “never mind the muffins, no oatmeal for you either” approach with the payroll tax cut extension as well. A version of the bill, which extends the cuts for two more months, passed the Senate on Saturday. This bill already constituted a compromise between Democrats and Republicans – the latter group had indicated that they wouldn’t pass any bill that didn’t include discussion of the Keystone XL oil pipeline provision. (Full disclosure: I am not a fan of the Keystone pipeline, a 1,700 mile line moving oil sands from Canada to Texas.) So, the current version of the bill included a provision that President Obama must make a decision about the controversial oil delivery system within 60 days.  Now, having gotten their way with the Keystone deal, House Republicans stand firm that they will not accept an extension of less than a year on the payroll tax cuts. (I have to ask, if you love tax cuts so much, why are you willing to let them die? Have you read too much Medea lately?)
In both cases, the approach of the hardline Republicans involved convincing us that the decision was really up to the Democrats. If all of us had to suffer, it was the Democrats’ fault. This makes about as much sense to me as someone breaking into my house and telling me that I get to pick who lives, me or my sister. If I want to live, it will be my fault that my sister dies. In reality, if anyone dies, it will be the fault of the person who chose to invade my home and start threatening people. The Senate version of this payroll tax cut bill discusses only whether or not we will get a cut in the payroll tax for the next two months, and both parties seem to agree that the answer should be yes. The Republicans would like to extend the tax cuts beyond that. There’s nothing in the current Senate bill that stops them from voting to do that later. But still they persist in threatening not to pass the whole thing unless Democrats agree to go back to the negotiating table.
Meanwhile, Democrats have decided that two can play this game. I’ve received several emails exhorting me to write emails to President Obama and Senate Leader Harry Reid, urging them to stand fast against the Republican threats, allowing the payroll cuts to expire if the House doesn’t pass the current legislation. They are convinced that this time, the public will blame the Republicans who started the battle.
Personally, I’d like the bill to pass, but only because it seems to be the least objectionable of my current alternatives. I don’t like the Keystone pipeline, and I really strongly dislike the idea of it being attached to a bill about payroll tax cuts, on which it has no bearing whatsoever. Most of all, however, I object to the fact that everyone in Washington has eschewed Muffinomics for a system of increased hostage-taking. For folks all geared up against terrorism in the airports, they certainly seem to embrace it in their own hallways.  How about this, folks? If you don’t like the bill that the other chamber passes, write one of your own that’s better.  If you offer the country a pumpkin muffin when the other guy doesn’t, the chances of the public standing behind you are much greater.  Instead, we’re asked to choose between who will sabotage our future the least.
Okay, I’m taking a moment to breathe. That’s better.
I realize, in my heart of hearts, that the District of Columbia is never going to offer me a pumpkin muffin, not even the kind they could buy in bulk from Costco. I think this makes them a very bad management team, since most people respond better to the carrot than the stick. Here in America, though, we want to believe that our government works for us. Maybe it’s time we stopped behaving like cowed employees and started acting like the bosses that we aspire to be.
I’ll go first.
Attention Congressional Representatives – if you can manage to pass a bill that you all basically agree on anyway, without bickering about it and threatening to do something that no one in America wants, I will give each of you a pumpkin muffin. All 535 of you, plus your office staff, pages, and security personnel.
If not, Congress, you might want to remember something. Â While we voters don’t take like to take hostages, we can always shoot you down and bury you at the next election.
Kimberly favors the carrot over the stick, and favors the pumpkin over the carrot.
