Mitt Romney, of all people, shows David Cameron a way ahead

Whatever may be said about his difficulties with the Republican base, there’s no doubt that Mitt Romney is a much more formidable candidate in 2012 than he was in 2008. It turns out that having form over course and distance really does matter. And, of course, it helps that he’s running to replace a Democratic, not a Republican, President.

Indeed, Romney’s confidence is such that he’s already testing lines and strategy for the general election. This may yet prove presumptious but, while he’s at it, he’s inadvertently offering some good advice to David Cameron and George Osborne too. Consider this passage (highlighted by Ross Douthat) from the most recent GOP debate in which he defends his plan for a middle-class tax cut against a typically asinine piece of criticism from Newt Gingrich:

Well, the reason for giving a tax break to middle income Americans is that middle income Americans have been the people who have been most hurt by the Obama economy. The reason that you’re seeing protests, as you indicated, on Wall Street and across the country is, middle income Americans are having a hard time making ends meet.

Not only do we have 25 million people out of work, or stopped looking for work, or part-time jobs needing full-time employ, we just saw this week that median income in America has declined by 10 percent during the Obama years. People are having a hard time making ends meet.

And so if I’m going to use precious dollars to reduce taxes, I want to focus on where the people are hurting the most, and that’s the middle class. I’m not worried about rich people. They are doing just fine. The very poor have a safety net, they’re taken care of. But the people in the middle, the hard-working Americans, are the people who need a break, and that is why I focused my tax cut right there.

Emphasis added. This is a words-formula that the Prime Minister and his Chancellor could find useful. Much too much energy has been spent arguing about the 50p rate of tax for the very highest earners. Whether it is revenue neutral or causes a slight loss to the Exchequer is not really the point; what matters is that the Tory obsession with the 50p rate is a gift to Labour. Banging on about tax rates for the wealthiest Britons allows the opposition to paint the Tories as out of touch and much too concerned with helping their richest friends and backers. What about Middle Britain? What indeed!

Every time a Conservative complains about the 50p rate but demonstrates no comparable indignation about the struggles of people earning less than a fifth of what top-rate taxpayers take home each year he or she is doing Labour a favour. You could hardly be more out of touch with ordinary concerns!

Even if the cash equation were different, elementary politics should persuade Conservatives that their energies should best be put to use elsewhere in the tax code. In awkward, austere times it is absurd that so much attention should be paid to the concerns of a tiny minority of taxpayers. Symbols and signals matter because they represent and demonstrate instinctive priorities and the Tory obsession with the 50p rate is exceedingly dangerous, foolish and dreadful politics.