The Failed Promise to Repeal the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act: A Study in Partisan Politics

In the years since the passage of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), commonly known as the Trump Tax Cuts, a myriad of factors have inhibited the Democrats from successfully repealing the legislation. The primary reasons for this failure include the Democrats' lack of control over key governmental bodies, intractable political allegiance, and the complex and entrenched nature of legislative processes. Herein, we explore these factors in detail, contextualizing why the Democrats, despite numerous promises and a clear majority in certain legislative periods, have ultimately been unable to repeal the TCJA.

Political Control and Legislative Gridlock

The Democrats' failure to repeal the TCJA can be largely attributed to their lack of control over key legislative bodies. Since the implementation of the act, the Democrats have not held a majority in the United States Senate. This is crucial as Senate bills often require a supermajority of 60 votes to overcome a filibuster, a significant barrier that has hindered the Democrats from advancing major legislation during their time in the Senate minority.

In addition, the Democrats have not consistently held a majority in the House of Representatives, although they have had periods of control. During this time, they were able to pass legislation but faced significant opposition from the Republican-controlled Senate and ultimately no action was taken. In instances where one party holds a legislative majority, such as when Democrats controlled both chambers temporarily, the inability to secure 60 Senate votes represented a major roadblock to repeal.

Strategic Intransigence and Partisan Alignment

The reluctance of Republicans to repeal the TCJA can be attributed to a combination of factors, including the personal political identity of Republican lawmakers and the strategic benefits of retaining tax cuts, particularly for their voters. The economic and political context surrounding the TCJA was such that both parties recognized the need for tax reform, leading to bipartisan support. However, once the Republican-controlled government had passed the bill, it took on a different character: budgetary relief for the wealthy. This perception has made it exceedingly difficult for the Democrats to rally support for repeal among a divided electorate and Congress.

Furthermore, the trickle-down economic theory associated with the TCJA has faced substantial criticism. Supporters of the bill argued that tax cuts for the wealthy would stimulate economic growth through increased investment and job creation. However, empirical evidence suggests that this theory has failed to deliver on its promise. Moreover, the Democrats have consistently argued that such tax cuts would lead to increased deficits, and while the majority of Republicans disagree, the persistent failure to repeal the act can be seen as a reflection of the entrenched nature of the bill within Republican party strategy.

Legislative Roadblocks and the Nature of Law

The nature of law and its ability to generate both benefits and dependencies further complicates efforts to repeal such significant legislation. The TCJA, like any substantial piece of legislation, includes numerous provisions designed to benefit various groups and interests. These provisions often serve as political capital for lawmakers, particularly in their home districts, where they have to answer to their constituents. Additionally, the structure of the government includes a complex bureaucracy that benefits from the continuation of existing laws, as changing the status quo can be administratively cumbersome and politically costly.

Another factor is the tendency for bills to become vehicles for special interests. Over the years, the TCJA has become a font for crony capitalism, with individuals and groups finding ways to benefit from it. Revoking the TCJA would shift these benefits, and congressmen and women, faced with the prospect of losing these benefits, may be loath to support repeal. The revolving door between government and industry, where legislators benefit personally and professionally from the continuation of tax laws, further entrenches the status quo.

Historical Context and Legislative Precedents

The 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts provide a historical example of how legislative promises and party loyalty can play out in Congress. When the Democrats denounced these cuts as giveaways to the rich upon their initial passage, their reaction was a strategic move based on their political stance. Similarly, when these cuts expired in 2012, the Democrats' response was also largely driven by political calculations rather than a genuine desire to protect middle-class Americans. Instead, the focus on political gain often leads to continued support for legislation, even when the underlying principles are criticized.

This pattern of legislative stubbornness has its roots in the dynamic nature of political power. When one party is in power, they may introduce and pass legislation deemed beneficial to their base and their ideological principles. Once the other party regains power, they may be unwilling to repeal such legislation simply because it represents a blow to the previous party's position and legacy. Thus, the TCJA, passed under Republican hegemony, remains a lasting testament to the complexities of legislative politics and the challenges of change in the American government.

Conclusion

The Democrats' failure to repeal the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, despite numerous promises and periods of control over Congress, is a reflection of the deeply entrenched nature of partisan politics and the complex legislative landscape in the United States. While the act was initially designed with bipartisan support, its subsequent passage as a budget-busting giveaway to the wealthy has made it a prime target for repeal. However, the combination of political intransigence, entrenched interests, and the strategic calculus of different political alliances has proven too formidable for the Democrats to overcome. As the political landscape continues to shift, the question of whether and when the TCJA will be repealed remains unanswered but, for now, the act remains a potent symbol of the impact of partisan gridlock in American politics.