A year ago, former President George W. Bush’s income tax cuts for all brackets were due to expire on December 31. Republicans had President Barack Obama and Congressional Democrats on the defensive, not wanting to be seen as raising taxes in a tough economy. Now the tables are turned as a payroll tax cut benefiting all wage earners will expire at the end of the year unless Congress acts otherwise. Democrats in Washington and around the country see this issue as a political winner.

Last week the U.S. Senate defeated two more proposals for extending the payroll tax cut. Meanwhile, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and the Iowa Democratic Party used the controversy to create bad publicity for Representative Tom Latham (IA-04) and Representative Steve King (IA-05).

After the Senate defeated two payroll tax extension proposals on December 1, Democratic leaders somewhat revised what they are calling the “Middle Class Tax Cuts Act of 2011.” The new bill would cut the payroll tax for employees from 4.2 percent to 3.1 percent, with an extra tax on incomes over $1 million compensating for lost revenue. The total cost of the new Democratic proposal was a bit less than the earlier version, but a motion to proceed with considering it received only 50 votes in favor and 48 against on December 8, far short of the 60 needed to overcome a Republican filibuster. Senator Tom Harkin voted for that motion, as did almost all the Democrats present. Chuck Grassley voted no, along with all but one Senate Republican.

A little later on December 8, Senate Republicans called for a motion to proceed with considering their own payroll tax extension bill. They didn’t change the text of their bill, which would compensate for lost revenue by reducing the federal workforce and freezing pay for federal employees for three more years. The motion to proceed with the GOP bill went down by a 22 to 76 vote (roll call). Grassley was one of the 22 Republicans to support the measure. He had voted to consider that bill on December 1, when Senators defeated a motion to proceed by a similarly lopsided margin.

President Obama is using this unresolved controversy to depict himself as defender of the middle class. He cited the payroll tax extension in a major speech about the economy on December 6, in his weekly radio address on December 10, and during an interview broadcast on the CBS show “60 Minutes” this weekend.

Leading Republicans don’t want to be seen as letting taxes go up on the middle class. The GOP’s top two presidential candidates, Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney, both expressed support for a payroll tax extension during Saturday night’s debate in Des Moines. House Republican leaders introduced a new payroll tax extension bill on Friday, which will probably come to a vote tomorrow.

Meanwhile, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee started placing robocalls about this issue in 10 Republican-held U.S. House districts on December 9. One of the targets is Tom Latham, who now represents IA-04 but will run against Democrat Leonard Boswell in the redrawn IA-03 next year. I have not heard the robocall, but a DCCC press release provided this transcript:

Did you know that Congressman Tom Latham is trying to leave town for the holidays without extending your payroll tax cut?  That means 1.7 million middle class folks in Iowa will get a $1,000 tax increase.

House Republicans are willing to leave for the holidays and force a $1,000 payroll tax increase on 160 million middle class Americans, while fighting for billionaires and Big Oil.

Please press 1 to be connected to Congressman Tom Latham and tell him that it is unacceptable to leave Washington for the holidays and raise your taxes.

I’m intrigued that the DCCC isn’t running these calls against Representative Steve King, who now represents the fifth district but will seek re-election in the new IA-04 against Democrat Christie Vilsack. Last week King spoke out against extending the payroll tax cut, saying that doing so would undermine Social Security. The Iowa Democratic Party went after King in this December 9 press release:

Social Security chief rebuts Steve King’s only argument against payroll tax cut extension

Will King drop his opposition and support the middle class?

DES MOINES – Just days after Congressman Steve King cited concerns about Social Security solvency as his reason for opposing an extension of the payroll tax cut, Social Security’s chief actuary says it will have no effect on the program.

On Wednesday, King misled Iowans in an interview, saying an extension of the payroll tax cut would impact Social Security’s solvency.

“With the Social Security administration’s support for an extension of the payroll tax cut, will Congressman King do the right thing and support the extension?” asked Iowa Democratic Party Chairwoman Sue Dvorsky. “Or, will he continue to oppose working families by refusing to extend the cut and give working families an extra $1,500 in their pocket?”

“It’s time for Steve King to work for Iowa instead of standing in the way of this important tax cut for working families,” added Dvorsky.

When the House votes on payroll tax cut legislation this week, I expect Latham to support the GOP leadership’s approach. King is likely to be among the Republicans voting no. His close ally Michele Bachmann made the case against the payroll tax cut during Saturday night’s presidential debate.

Share any relevant thoughts in this thread.

UPDATE: Christie Vilsack focused on King’s opposition to a payroll tax extension in a December 12 fundraising e-mail.