Democrats may have finally found a gold mine.
Frank Luntz – the mastermind behind such phrases as No Child Left Behind, Healthy Forests and Clear Skies – has written a 160-page memo directing Republicans how to frame issues for the 2006 midterm elections.
The problem for Luntz is that the memo wasn’t meant to be released publicly.
The memo is a treasure chest not only of Republican strategy, but pointing out how much of the Republicans’ talk is pure spin.
The very first paragraph of Luntz’s memo paints the situation perfectly and asks the same question Democrats have been asking since November – “So how does a President with a national job approval rating hovering at 50 percent, an economy that lost more than a million jobs over his first four years in office, a war that has cost more than 1,000 American lives and counting, $50 a barrel for oil, and a national mood that is downright sour still secure more than enough votes to win re-election?”
Remember, this is one of the leading Republican strategists speaking, not me.
He answers his own question with one word – credibility. Luntz says Bush had it and Kerry didn’t, and that Republicans need to keep it.
The first major policy key that Luntz comes up with in his memo is to link the economy and 9/11. He writes that the American people just don’t buy the idea that Bush’s tax cuts are helping the economy. So how can Republicans talk about the economy? If there are any economic problems, blame it on 9/11.
Also, since the tax cuts are no longer seen as positive, how do you sell making them permanent? Easy. Instead of saying that making the cuts permanent is good, say that rolling back the tax cuts would be catastrophic.
Also, Luntz says that the “latest employment figures” are bad for Republicans and shouldn’t be used. In fact, Luntz essentially tells Republicans to completely ignore the current state on the economy and to totally focus on what they can do for the future economy.
Of course, this completely ignores the fact that by 2006, Republicans would have controlled every branch of the government for six years and are probably responsible for the current state of the economy.
Luntz also tells Republicans to shy away from calling for more tax cuts. What they find is that people love the idea of tax simplification, because most people automatically assume that simpler taxes mean fewer taxes.
Of course, writing a check for $20,000 to the government every year is simpler, but it doesn’t mean you pay less.
Luntz says that the biggest key word in dealing with selling proposals to people is “common sense.” If you keep pushing that something is “common sense” then it makes anyone who opposes that measure look like that they don’t have common sense, are crazy, or are elitist.
Part of this “common sense” scheme includes talking about governmental spending. Luntz says that most people actually don’t complain about how much in taxes they are paying, but instead complain about how their tax money is spent.
So the solution is to spend money better, right?
Nope, Luntz says that the only solution is to not pay the money in taxes in the first place.
Luntz also tells to tell Republican to redefine what fair taxation is.
Currently, the tax system is progressive. If you make more money, you still have more money after taxes.
Someone who makes $500,000 a year and pays one-third of his or her income in taxes is still better off than someone who makes $50,000 a year and pays no taxes.
In reality, a person making $500,000 won’t pay that much to the federal government and someone making $50,000 will pay something.
Luntz wants Republicans to try to flip this idea of fairness. He wants Republicans to say that those who are successful are in fact entitled to be taxed no more, or possibly even less, than those who make less money. “Why punish people for being successful?” he asks.
Of course this is ignoring the idea that their reward is the fact that they’re making more money. Earning more money is the reward, not the thing to be rewarded.
This is only the start of his memo. In fact, this is only about 65 pages into a 160-page memo, but it gives one a good example of how Republicans have been and will continue to frame issues in the public debate.

Author