Donate Today! Help us help others.

Lynch Coaching

Translate

Wednesday, September 14, 2011

Doublespeak in Washington: It's all in how you say it!



Saphir-Whorf state that "the language you speak determines how you interpret...the world around you."
If you read this story and listen to the audio you will see how public relations and sales generated double-speak (Orwell's "1984") may have convinced both sides in the budget debate, and all of our frozen polarized political city, that they are right and there is no room for compromise.
The same words are meant to fire up the unthinking or rather already loyal forces across the country to support the "my way or the highway" views currently dominating Washington politics.
The following is from NPR's Morning Edition (even "NPR" has been turned into a political phrase generating emotions on both sides):
The budget battle is all about numbers: how much the government takes in, and how much it spends. But it's also a battle over words.
Both sides have put a lot of energy into coming up with new ways of describing old concepts. It's part of the process of selling their ideas to the public.
At the end of the day, the budget battle is political, and both sides choose their words carefully. Democrats, for example, don't like to talk about government spending, which has a bad connotation, so they talk about making investments in the country's future.
Republicans say they want to get rid of the "death tax" — also known as the estate tax.
Both parties are choosing their words carefully in the budget battle. Republicans say they want to get rid of the "death tax" instead of saying estate tax.
EnlargeiStockphoto.com
Both parties are choosing their words carefully in the budget battle. Republicans say they want to get rid of the "death tax" instead of saying estate tax.
In his April 13 speech on the budget, President Obama used a new word of his own. He said he wanted to put a "failsafe" in the budget.
Joe Henchman, the vice president of the Tax Foundation, says he has never heard the word used in that context.
"That would be a new one on me, but of course the same idea gets rebranded many different times," Henchman says.
As it turns out, a failsafe, besides being a 1964 movie about nuclear war, would be one of Obama's ways of keeping spending under control. It would freeze most government spending if the deficit got too big.
Henchman says in that sense, failsafe is something like former Vice President Al Gore's "lockbox" — a device meant to keep politicians from getting their hands on too much of the taxpayers' money.
Len Burman, who worked in the Treasury Department under President Bill Clinton, says these measures are ineffective because Congress can easily override them.
"There are other rules in place in Congress, like the budget rules generally, that Congress often waives so they can do things like pass enormous tax cuts," Burman says.
Meanwhile, Republicans have been doing some rebranding of their own. A few weeks ago, Minnesota congresswoman and Tea Party leader Michelle Bachmann tried to get people to stop warning about a government shutdown. Even if the government were to cut nonessential services, she told Fox News, a lot of government workers would stay on the job.
President Obama is using the word "failsafe" as a way to describe keeping spending under control. It's similar to former Vice President Al Gore's "lockbox," a device meant to keep politicians from getting their hands on too much of taxpayers' money.
EnlargeiStockphoto.com
President Obama is using the word "failsafe" as a way to describe keeping spending under control. It's similar to former Vice President Al Gore's "lockbox," a device meant to keep politicians from getting their hands on too much of taxpayers' money.
"It would be one-fourth that would be furloughed," Bachmann said. "So the government would not shut down — it would slow down."
At the time it looked as though the government might be in for a repeat of the 1995 shutdown, which hadn't come out well for Bachmann's party.
"I guess slowdown sounds less ominous and terrible than a shutdown does, but I don't think that really caught on," Henchman says.
The whole thing became moot when a budget deal was reached, but the budget wars go on.
Obama's speech contained another phrase that seemed equally unfamiliar to a lot of people: "the fourth step in our approach to reduce spending in the tax code."
The president said cutting spending wouldn't be enough. He said he wanted to reduce "spending in the tax code."
On the Daily Show, Jon Stewart wondered whether that was a euphemism for raising taxes: "You managed to talk about a tax hike as a spending reduction. Can we afford that, and the royalty checks you're going to have to send to George Orwell?"
"Spending in the tax code" is not a new phrase — just an especially wonkish one.
Burman, who now teaches public affairs at Syracuse University, says that to achieve policy goals, the government has been offering more and more tax credits over the years. Instead of spending money on housing for the poor, for instance, Washington hands out tax credits to developers.
Burman says doing it this way is a lot less risky politically for lawmakers.
"If you created a new program through a tax credit or reduction, it looks like a tax cut, so you kind of sound like a small government conservative or you're cutting people's taxes, which they like," Burman says. "Whereas, if you run the program through traditional mechanisms, say through HUD or some other government agency, then you're a big government liberal, you're a tax-and-spender."
But Burman says tax credits cost the government $1.2 trillion a year.
For lawmakers, reducing these credits might be less toxic politically than raising taxes. And Burman says that may be one way for the government to move beyond words and really cut the deficit.
 

11 comments:

jcdaniel62 said...

“I’m not going on a diet, I’m going to add calories to my excluded food intake!” - Jon Stewart

jcdaniel comm101 bc550

Mitch Yang said...

I think its critical to tell the difference between euphemism and dysphemism and how congress uses it to manipulate us.

Jessica Pacheco said...

People should learn to see through these Fallacies used by people in power and the world around us in general. Anything can be manipulated to sound better or worse depending on the persons motive.

Anonymous said...

thats all it is now a days, a world full of manipulation. thats why I DO NOT LIKE DEALING WITH POLITICS. EITHER WAY IT GO, THEY STILL MAKE MONEY AND WHAT DO WE MAKE? WHAT ARE THEY DECIDING TO DO ABOUT THIS "DEBATE/COMPROMISE?" I CAN HONESTLY SAY THAT I DO UNDERSTAND POLITICS TOO MUCH EVEN THOUGH I PASSED GOVERNMENT WITH AN A.


-HAVASHA REED
COM 101

Anonymous said...

The government is corrupted and a mess. It discussts me how much they sugar coat things so people what to hear them. Democrats and Republicans never speak about the amount of money they spend because Americans would turn on them. They sneeky and caniving, There horrible.

Jade Morton

Anonymous said...

We live in a corrupted world. I don't understand why the have to be so manipulative.

Chris Jackson

Junyi Zhu said...

It must impact in-state students and U.S citizens a lot. I think they are so manipulative because of human nature-greedy

Anonymous said...

Politics are pathetic. Either side is just trying to sway their audience and manuipulate when ever possible. wheres the real truth in anything these days?

Chynna Greene

Mikel Little (com 101) said...

The goverment should stop waistful spending and simplfy the taxes we pay. 40% of Americans do not pay income taxes. Taking away tax loop holes will not solve the problem. The tax system is a joke and a flat tax that is the same percentage for everyone to pay is the way to go with it. The federal goverment need to be more responsable before raising taxes.

Anonymous said...

The wealthy can afford to pay taxes and should pay more because they make the most from our society. The poor cannot afford things as it is and should be allowed to pay taxes. We refuse to see that one in three Americans is poor and most not by choice (you guys who think it is by choice try and live at that level).

Anonymous said...

Thank god that we buy food and they don't charge tax in Nevada. I'm sure other states do change tax for food.