"So tonight I propose one more step that I would rather not propose. I ask the most fortunate among us, those citizens earning over $100,000 per year, for one year, to pay an additional one percent on the income they receive"
About this Quote
A politician’s favorite magic trick is to make a tax hike sound like a reluctant act of conscience. Daniels opens with staged reluctance - “one more step that I would rather not propose” - a line designed to pre-bake credibility. He’s not taxing you because he wants to; he’s taxing you because reality forced his hand. That rhetorical posture matters in American politics, where the moral burden often falls not on the deficit but on the person suggesting a new revenue stream.
The specificity does a lot of work. “Tonight” frames the ask as urgent and time-bound, a response to present strain rather than a philosophical shift. “For one year” is the pressure valve: a temporary surcharge, not a structural expansion of government. Daniels is signaling to anti-tax voters and donors that this is containment, not conversion.
Then comes the carefully chosen villain-who-isn’t-a-villain: “the most fortunate among us.” It’s a soft redistribution pitch without the class-war language. Yet the threshold - $100,000 - is telling. It sounds like “the rich” in many places and like “upper-middle” in others, letting the proposal read as tough-minded or modest depending on the audience. The one percent itself is similarly calibrated: big enough to claim shared sacrifice, small enough to minimize revolt.
The subtext is coalition management. Daniels is trying to purchase political permission: ask just a little, from a group framed as able and patriotic, for a short time, so everyone else doesn’t have to face bigger cuts or broader taxes.
The specificity does a lot of work. “Tonight” frames the ask as urgent and time-bound, a response to present strain rather than a philosophical shift. “For one year” is the pressure valve: a temporary surcharge, not a structural expansion of government. Daniels is signaling to anti-tax voters and donors that this is containment, not conversion.
Then comes the carefully chosen villain-who-isn’t-a-villain: “the most fortunate among us.” It’s a soft redistribution pitch without the class-war language. Yet the threshold - $100,000 - is telling. It sounds like “the rich” in many places and like “upper-middle” in others, letting the proposal read as tough-minded or modest depending on the audience. The one percent itself is similarly calibrated: big enough to claim shared sacrifice, small enough to minimize revolt.
The subtext is coalition management. Daniels is trying to purchase political permission: ask just a little, from a group framed as able and patriotic, for a short time, so everyone else doesn’t have to face bigger cuts or broader taxes.
Quote Details
| Topic | Money |
|---|
More Quotes by Mitch
Add to List


