SDA #5: Strategic Communication - Changing the Game

Growing up the only democratic voter in a home of staunch, fiscal conservatives (father - lawyer/libertarian, sister-Georgetown grad/HBS grad/worked for Elizabeth Dole/Slade Gordon/George W. Bush/BCG/Google, mother - physician, self-made finance guru) is not an easy place to stand. There is never a dull moment at the dinner table or over email like in the following email chain between my mother and I:

From Mom:

Based on using the actual tax tables (see link below), here are some examples on what the taxes were/are on various amounts of income for both singles and married couples… so let's see if the Bush tax cuts only helped the rich.
> http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html
Taxes under Clinton 1999 Taxes under Bush 2008
Single making 30K – tax $8,400 (28%) Single making 30K – tax $4,500 (15%)
Single making 50K – tax $14,000 (28%) Single making 50K – tax $12,500 (25%)
Single making 75K – tax $23,250 (33%) Single making 75K – tax $18,7 50 (25%)
Married making 60K – tax $16,800 (28%) &n bsp; Married making 60K – tax $9,000 (15%)
Married making 75K – tax $21,000 (28%) Married making 75K – tax $18,750 (25%)
Married making 125K – tax $38,750 (31%) Married making 125K – tax $31,250 (25%)

My Response:
Thanks for this. Of course, I would like to see where the difference went to...I would be fine if my difference meant that we increased health and human services funding or education or I would like to see what got cut from funding during the Bush administration...

Mom's Response:

Also remember, that the President, no matter who he/she is, is dependent on the Congress for funding and appropriations. They are the ones who decide on what gets spent and not. The only power the President has is to 1) suggest spending or not, and 2) veto what Congress puts out there to spend. The problem is when the Congress has great plans for spending but then taxes have to be increased to cover the projects. Even regarding the war, the President only requests money, the Congress has to vote for it.

My response:

Is it not the same for taxes?

Mom's Response:

Yes. The President can propose a tax cut, as Pres. Bush did, and it is up to the Congress and Senate to agree to it. The problem now is that the Pres. (Bush)’s tax cuts will expire in 2010 unless the Congress extends them. Or the new President may push through a rate increase.

Is this a game? Yes. The goal in the family is "how to make Lauren come to her senses" and on my side the goal is to "how to make my family come to their senses" or at least to pose important questions that cause my family to understand that the core reasoning behind each political stance in its pure form makes sense and possibly there is no "right answer..."

Both players are for sure home.

What is the structure of the game? Variable-sum game...maybe one person would consider voting for some dems and some republicans there are many different ballots to cast in for...

Simultaneous game...we will all make our moves on election day.

Repeated game: this game will go on and on getting more intense every 4 years...

What about the email makes this a strategic move...well, my mom was trying to make a point that by voting for a democratic president that we would see tax increases, this is using a warning to influence my decision...the problem is that tax increases are not core issues to me when it comes to my voting preference...using a fiscal argument like this does not warrant me to new action...

Now, on the other hand, I am very sensitive to unemployment, access to healthcare, transportation, housing, and public education. After working in the social sector for many years, I am fully aware that "tax cuts" mean "cuts" to federal funding for social services or "restructuring to make social services more efficient" and "giving more resource allocation responsibility to the state level."

Thus, tax cuts to me are actually a promise to inequality versus to betterment (although I might be able to invest a bit more and actualize more material goods). So, sending me an email regarding tax cuts to influence my votes might not be a good driver and then to make matters worst trying to argue that my presidential vote will correlate to tax cuts but not correlate to cuts in social services funding (this as my mother said being decided on by congress) is easy to refute and actually makes me consider my deeper commitment to voting democrat on all levels...