Roger Hedgecock, a California radio talk show host, on “Lou Dobbs Tonight” on CNN: “It came down to a situation where the American public realized the Democrats who always want to raise taxes on people didn’t want to particularly pay the taxes on people.”

Sean Hannity on his Fox News Channel talk show: “I guess the reason Democrats want to raise taxes, use class warfare, attack corporations is because they take everyone else’s money and redistribute it. But they themselves don’t pay taxes, so there’s no reason for them to worry about tax increases, right?” [...]

“The challenge for Democrats is that Obama did a good job during the general of convincing voters that his party wasn’t just about raising taxes and spending more money,” said Sara M. Taylor, who was White House political director under President George W. Bush. “Between the stimulus and now the Daschle-Geithner tax problem, all that ground is gone.”

First of all, Sara Taylor has all the credibility of a Nigerian businessman who really really needs your credit card number. Second, apart from the cigarette tax included in the SCHIP bill, Democrats aren’t raising anyone’s taxes, and probably won’t until the economy rebounds, as raising taxes in a recession is the one thing that both conservative and liberal economists realize is a huge blunder. If the point is that Republicans will base a future campaign against a Democratic tax increase by summoning the ghost of Tom Daschle … well, that would probably be weird and ineffective. According to a Rasmussen poll, the take-aways from this week were that most people think Obama’s cabinet is about as ethical/unethical as any previous cabinet, and that a sizable majority of Americans think both parties are full of tax cheats.

If in 2011, Republicans are seriously campaigning against a Democratic tax increase by whining about Tim Geithner, it will be the sign of a deeply unserious party.

• Newt Gingrich spoke at the House Republicans’ retreat “and said that our vote against the stimulus was a very significant vote for Republicans, a potential path back to majority.”

• Republicans want voters to know that their proposed stimulus package — a collection of tax cuts, with no spending — would produce 6.2 million jobs. “The bottom line,” said Camp, “is that it’s twice the jobs for half the price.” TPM’s Elena Schor has pointed out that the 6.2 million figure is a not-wholly-convincing political talking point, based on an inversion of the numbers in Christina Romer’s study about the effects of tax increases during recession.

• Camp is worried about the “dangerous trend” of tax cuts going to people who don’t pay income taxes. “We’re hearing that this is an age of responsibility. Everyone pull an oar, and start paddling. But this is just a transfer payment.” If there are tax cuts they should go to “every American, not just 95 percent of middle-class Americans.”

“Just the amount he owed was a rich person’s salary, according to them,” said Camp. “Them” are, of course, Democrats.

Following Nancy Killefer’s withdrawal from her chief performance officer post, Daschle is now the second Obama nominee to pull out for tax issues this morning.

Daschle’s decision comes on the heels of a New York Times editorial today calling for his withdrawal. “We believe that Mr. Daschle ought to step aside and let the president choose a less-blemished successor,” the Times editorial board wrote.

It’s still unclear whether he’ll serve in his other expected role as so-called “health czar” in the White House. We’ll have more on this as the story develops.

UPDATE 1:03 PM: Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), who led the opposition to Daschle’s nomination, just came on CNN and praised his decision to step aside, calling it “a very good thing that happened to the Obama administration.”

This tax-evasion revelation comes on the heels of similar scandals that have embroiled Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and health czar-designee Tom Daschle. While Killefer’s post is not as high-profile as Geithner’s or Daschle’s, its central focus is fiscal responsibility. A lack of such discipline in Killefer’s personal life would reflect poorly on her integrity for the job.

If her case were an isolated one, she might be able to push through with an apology, as Geithner has and Daschle likely will. But now that a pattern has formed, she appears to be the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back.

She is the second Obama nominee to withdraw her name. New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson gave up his commerce secretary nomination amidst a federal investigation into his dealings with a California financial company contracting with the state government.

UPDATE: From the White House, here’s Killefer’s letter to Obama:

February 3, 2009

Dear Mr. President,

I recognize that your agenda and the duties facing your Chief Performance Officer are urgent. I have also come to realize in the current environment that my personal tax issue of D.C. Unemployment tax could be used to create exactly the kind of distraction and delay those duties must avoid. Because of this I must reluctantly ask you to withdraw my name from consideration.

I am deeply honored to have been selected by you and you have my deep appreciation for your confidence in me. You have my heartfelt support and best wishes for success in all your endeavors.

Respectfully yours,

Nancy Killefer

One firm to watch is Heather Podesta and Partners, run by the sister-in-law of Obama’s transition team co-chair, John Podesta. It’s a new era in Washington, but as Politico puts it, some things don’t change when it comes to money and influence.

Podesta and Partners has clients with a direct stake in the details of the stimulus and other major components of Obama’s near-term agenda and it has close ties to the administration.

From Politico:

Heather Podesta has raised millions of dollars for Democratic candidates and causes, which means she’s on a first-name basis with many of Washington’s power players. She knows Hillary Clinton and Ken Salazar, Obama’s pick to head the Interior Department. Her relationship with [incoming health czar and Health and Human Services Secretary-nominee Tom] Daschle dates back to his days in the Senate. [Politico]

Heather Podesta’s brother-in-law John Podesta founded the liberal think tank, Center for American Progress which, it is worth noting, also employed Daschle at one point.

Health care and health insurance companies are well-represented on Podesta and Partners roster of clients. This year, the firm is lobbying for insurance giant Cigna Corp, as well as HealthSouth and Genoa Healthcare Consulting — among others.

Cigna Corp paid Podesta’s firm $180,000 last year, in part for lobbying on the Wired for Quality Health Act, and other legislation pertaining to national efforts to computerize health records, according to lobbying disclosure records.

The $825 billion stimulus package unveiled last week includes $20 billion to computerize medical records, the first step in Obama’s plan to digitize all healthcare records within the next five years.

As a health insurance company, Cigna has a strong interest in the details of the online record plan.

Obama officially named former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) as his choice for secretary of health and human services and director of the new White House Office of Health Reform. Obama also announced that Jeanne Lambrew, who, like Daschle, works on health care issues at the Center for American Progress, will serve as deputy director of the new office.

Obama pledged to make health care reform a top priority of the new administration. From his prepared remarks:

The time has come – this year, in this new Administration – to modernize our health care system for the twenty-first century; to reduce costs for families and businesses; and to finally provide affordable, accessible health care for every American.

The president-elect rebuffed critics who would argue that the current economic crisis should trump health care reform as a national priority by linking the two issues.

Right now, small businesses across America are laying people off or shutting their doors for good because of rising health care costs. And some of the largest corporations in America – including major American car makers – are struggling to compete with foreign companies unburdened by these costs. Instead of investing in research and development, instead of expanding and creating new jobs, our companies are pouring more and more money into a health care system that is failing too many families.

So let’s be clear: if we want to overcome our economic challenges, we must also finally address our health care challenge.

Daschle, wearing a pair of bright red, round glasses — much to the amusement of some in the TWI office — singled out skyrocketing health care costs the number of uninsured Americans as two as two principle targets of reform and made the connection between the financial and health care crises even more directly.

Addressing our heath care challenges will not only mean healthier and longer lives for millions, it will also make American companies more competitive, address the cause of more than half of all of our personal bankruptcies and foreclosures, and help pull our economy out of its current tailspin.

Daschle vowed to bring Americans into the reform process and share their ideas by utilizing the transition’s Change.gov Website as a forum for hosting online discussions on health care policy, some of which Daschle would personally participate in.

With increased Democratic control of both houses of Congress, and Democratic Congressional leaders like Sen. Ted Kennedy eager to tackle the issue, the chances of success in addressing the health care reform seem much more likely than under the past administration.

When asked by a reporter why he did not personally call for Blagojevich to step down, a move Obama’s staff yesterday said he supports, Obama criticized the “tradition where people view politics as a business,” before saying he hopes the governor will resign.

I do not think that the governor, at this point, can effectively serve the people of Illinois. The legislature is going down to Springfield to make a determination as to how to resolve this issue. I think they’re going to come to the same conclusion. I hope that the governor himself comes to the conclusion that he can no longer effectively serve, and he does resign.

Obama reaffirmed that he had not spoken to Blagojevich about the appointment to fill his vacated Senate seat and pledged to provide details of all contact his transition staff had with Blagojevich’s office in the coming days.

I had no contact with the governor’s office. I did not speak to the governor about these issues, that I know for certain. What I want to do is to gather all the facts about any staff contacts that may have taken place between the transition office and the governor’s office, and we’ll have those in the next few days and we’ll present them. But what I’m absolutely certain about is that our office had no involvement in any deal-making around my Senate seat. That, I’m absolutely certain of, and that would be a violation of everything this campaign has been about. That’s not how we do business.

Obama also said he has not been contacted by federal investigators on the matter.

While Obama addressed the issue more forcefully than he has to date, chattering about “What did Obama know?” which is already mostly limited to Republican circles and the conservative blogosphere, will likely persist at least until the transition releases information about any meetings with the governor’s staff.

The appointment, if confirmed, suggests Obama is serious about making health care reform a top priority. Daschle, now a professor at Georgetown University and distinguished fellow at the Center for American Policy, has long been an advocate for comprehensively overhauling the nation’s existing private health care system. Daschle published a book on the topic recently. In a piece for The Huffington Post earlier this year, Daschle outlined his proposal to create a Federal Health Board, modeled after the Federal Reserve Board.

Just as the Federal Reserve ensures certain standards, transparency and performance for our banking industry, the Fed Health would ensure harmonization across public programs of health-care protocols, benefits, and transparency. Ultimately, the Fed Health would offer a public framework within which a private health-care system could operate more effectively and efficiently.

The Fed Health could help reduce administrative costs. Roughly 30 cents of every dollar in health care is spent on administration rather than health benefits. Our administrative costs, on a per capita basis, are seven times higher than that of our peer nations. Each state has their own system for Medicaid and insurance regulation. We have different health-care systems for active duty military members versus veterans. And private insurers spend billions trying to enroll the healthy and avoid the sick. A Federal Health Board that sets evidence-based standards for benefits and quality for federal programs and insurance will lower this complexity and thus costs.

The Fed Health could also promote quality and save money by making the health-care system more transparent. Today, the lack of transparency in the system makes it virtually impossible for people to grasp what they are paying for and who provides them with the best care. This shroud of secrecy allows for wildly different prices for similar quality care. For example, a Pennsylvania report on heart surgery found hospitals with similar outcomes charge from $20,000 to $100,000. The Board, by ensuring transparency, would increase competition based on price and quality rather than cream skimming and cost sharing.

Additionally, the Fed Health could set standards for quality and coverage, promoting best practices and identifying the trade-offs on services. It would use information on the comparative clinical and cost effectiveness of different treatment options to set standards for Federal programs. The Congressional Budget Office recently credited this idea with the potential to produce substantial system-wide savings.

Whether Obama intends to integrate Daschle’s Federal Health Board into his existing plan to reduce health care costs remains to be seen. But the pick should allay the fears of conservatives that Obama intends to replace the existing infrastructure with a “socialized,” government-funded and run health care system.