Smack-dab in the middle of Barry Goldwater's 1964 speech at the GOP convention--the famous one in which he said "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice"--a reporter in the stands looked at his colleagues and exclaimed: "My God! He's going to run as Barry Goldwater!"
Flash forward to today. It seems Bernie Sanders is going to use his new-found insider powers to lead as . . . Bernie Sanders.
The famous socialist votes with Democrats mostly, and caucuses with them often, so he's with the majority these days. He so happens to be the chairman of the United States Senate Budget Committee. Heaven help us.
He ran for the Democratic nomination twice, and was twice defeated, but he thinks his ideas are still winners. He tried to tie the $15 minimum wage to the rescue/stimulus package, but was stymied by the rules of the chamber.
He then tried to punish businesses that didn't pay what he felt is appropriate, but was stymied by the common sense of his peers. The papers say he has another plank in his "pro-worker" platform: He has introduced legislation that would tax corporations that pay their CEOs too much.
What is too much? Bernie Sanders has an answer for that, too: It's 50 times the amount paid the median worker at that company. Why not a factor of 49 or 51 wasn't explained. Perhaps Sen. Sanders considers 50 a nice round number.
This is how a Sen. Bernie Sanders thinks. He has spent two campaigns complaining about income inequality, so if he can't float all boats with a minimum wage increase, the premise of which is debatable, he can at least sink a few battleships to make everybody feel better.
Or, as an option, if those greedy CEOs want to keep their pay as is, they'd have to significantly raise the wages for everybody else in the company. And if that resulted in fewer hires next year, or even layoffs this year, what, Bernie Sanders worry?
"At a time of massive income and wealth inequality, the American people are demanding that large profitable corporations pay their fair share of taxes and treat their employees with the dignity and respect they deserve," Sen. Sanders said. "That is what this legislation will begin to do."
Well, that might be what the legislation intends to do. But you know where the road of best intentions leads to.
There is a lot to unpack in the senator's statement. Such as: Americans are demanding this? We must've missed the protests in the streets demanding the Congress pass a bill requiring corporations limit CEO pay.
Sen. Sanders rails against "large profitable" companies, but whether he is offended by "large" or "profitable" isn't clear. And what is fair share? The administration has already indicated it's going to raise the corporate tax rate and attempt to rescind the Trump tax cuts. Better than ask what is the fair share, maybe the American public should ask who is going to decide what it is? Bernie Sanders?
The papers say that should this proposal pass, it would raise $150 billion over 10 years. Which is a rounding error in this era of trillion-dollar budgets and deficits. But at least it could throw a lot of good people into the unemployment line.
It's hard to cry a river for company bosses who make 50 times what the average worker makes, or more. But the argument shouldn't really be about that, but about who gets to decide? The free market or the government?
Or maybe just Bernie Sanders?