20 years ago, members of Congress signed the following pledge from the Americans for Tax Reform:
I, _______________, pledge to the taxpayers of the _____ district of the state of__________, and to the American people that I will:
ONE, oppose any and all efforts to increase the marginal income tax rates for individuals and/or businesses; and
TWO, oppose any net reduction or elimination of deductions and credits, unless matched dollar for dollar by further reducing tax rates.
Evidently, Obama’s promises aren’t the only ones that come with expiration dates.
Foxnews.com reports
New York Rep. Peter King and Sen. Lindsey Graham said Sunday they would break the pledge and accept tax changes to generate more revenue to curb the trillion-dollar federal deficit.
Their statements followed a similar one Thursday by Georgia Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss.
“I agree entirely with Saxby Chambliss,” King said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “A pledge you signed 20 years ago, 18 years ago, is for that Congress. … The world has changed, and the economic situation is different.”
The New York congressman said he was opposed to tax increases but that “everything should be on the table” when President Obama, House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid try to broker a deal.
“I’m not going to prejudge it, and I’m just saying we should not be taking ironclad positions,” King added. “I have faith that John Boehner can put together a good package.”
Should Congress and the White House fail to reach an agreement, a $500 billion mix of federal cuts and unrelated tax increases would kick in January 2 — the result of lawmakers failing to reach a more measure approached to cutting the deficit and keeping the country from going over the so-called “fiscal cliff.”
The across-the-board cuts to the federal budget would equal more than $1 trillion over the next 10 years.
Graham has suggested earlier that he would be open to changes in taxes but repeated Sunday only if Democrats are willing to cut federal spending by scaling back entitlement programs like Medicare and Social Security.
“I will violate the pledge, long story short, for the good of the country, only if Democrats will do entitlement reform,” he said on ABC’s “This Week.”
He also said the only pledge that should be made when the country is trillions in debt is to “avoid becoming Greece.”
“Republicans should put revenue on the table,” he continued. “We don’t generate enough revenue.”
However, Graham said he agrees with pledge champion Grover Norquist that tax rates should not be increases and instead suggested generating revenue through capping tax deductions.
Indiana Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin, on the same show, acknowledged that his party needs to “bring entitlement reform into the conversation.”
When Politicians like Lindsey Graham use the word “revenue”, it positively chaps my hindquarters.
It’s not “revenue”, Sen. Graham! It is Americans’ hard-earned wages ,which you want to tax the stew out of, in order to continue to fund the out-of-control leviathan known as the United States Federal Government.
The term “fiscal cliff” refers to
A combination of expiring tax cuts and across-the-board government spending cuts scheduled to become effective Dec. 31, 2012. The idea behind the fiscal cliff was that if the federal government allowed these two events to proceed as planned, they would have a detrimental effect on an already shaky economy, perhaps sending it back into an official recession as it cut household incomes, increased unemployment rates and undermined consumer and investor confidence. At the same time, it was predicted that going over the fiscal cliff would significantly reduce the federal budget deficit.
Grover Norquist, the head of Americans for Tax Reform, summarizes the situation thusly:
Obama’s present demand is that the top two marginal tax rates be increased to 39.6 percent plus the 3.8 percent Obamacare tax surcharge for a top rate of 43.4 percent. The death tax would also jump back to 55 percent, capital gains tax would jump from 15 percent to 23.8 percent, and the tax on dividends would increase from 15 percent to 39.6 percent.
Speaker John Boehner is calling for extending all of the Bush tax cuts for all income groups.
Boehner notes that there are 11 million businesses that pay taxes at the individual level. Obama, on the other hand, is demanding that more than half of small business income be taxed at 43.4 percent rather than today’s 35 percent. This would be a body blow to job creation.
If Obama follows through on his threat and refuses to extend the Bush tax cuts, then there would be an automatic $500 billion tax increase beginning January 1, 2013, that would total $5 trillion over the decade.
…Here’s the thing
Now Obama is trying to conflate these two issues: the automatic tax hike that takes place unless the present rates are not extended as they were two years ago and the automatic spending cuts. They are of course very different. The tax hikes would hurt the economy. The spending cuts would reduce the Obama debt machine and strengthen the economy.
So far, both House Speaker Boehner and Senate Republican Mitch McConnell have both said they would not support any increase in marginal tax rates. They have said they are open to more revenues from economic growth. One fear is that taxes could be raised by limiting tax deductions for home mortgages, health insurance, charitable giving and state and local taxes to raise a great deal of money from taxpayers without technically increasing marginal tax rates.
This would be a bad idea one, because those tax hikes would be instead of spending restraint and second, because reducing deductions now in order to spend more money makes tax reform much more difficult later.
Some had hoped that President Obama would focus on job creation and back off his high tax/stimulus spending agenda that has so damaged the economy. It does appear that four years of failure have taught him nothing.
Obama has not put on the table any specific entitlement reforms and is demanding a total of $1.6 trillion in tax hikes. He is all tax hikes and no spending restraint. Nothing has changed in four years.
Obama, and every politician who decides to jump on his socialist bandwagon and raise taxes during the horrible economic conditions the American Taxpaxers are facing, are playing fast and loose with Americans’ money.
In the business world, that is called poor investing at best, and a con game at worst.
I tell you what, Sen. Graham. Why don’t you and the rest of Hussein Obama’s 40 thieves fix your own fiscal house first, and tighten your own belts, before you force hard-working Americans to pay more taxes to keep you all in the lifestyle to which you have become accustomed.
It’s called being a “good steward” and a “public servant”.
Terms you folks up on Capital Hill seem to have forgotten in the past 20 years, since you signed that pledge.
Until He comes,
KJ
*sigh*
SSDD…wonderful
LikeLike
The status quo, “I wasn’t elected to make sound fiscal decisions!!! Now, where’s my cocktail?!?”…
LikeLike
They put Bernie Maddoff in jail for life for essentially doing the same thing. Taking one persons money for a promise and giving it to someone else instead and then acting like it was the first persons fault for agreeing to give the money to them in the first place.
I hear that idiot white house press secretary talk about a “balanced approach” to deficit reduction but the only thing that I have heard him talk about is taxing the wealthy more. Just what the he** are they talking about cutting?
They need a big ax and some big targets: GREEN ENERGY SUBSIDIES, EPA, FOREIGN AID, ANY PAYMENTS TO ILLEGALS, GOV. SUBSIDIES TO THE ARTS, FUTURE PENSIONS FOR GOV WORKERS ( give them 401k’s), ALL GOV EMPLOYEE UNIONS!
OBAMA CARE!!
LikeLike