Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Breaking the Back of the GOP Base
Townhall.com ^ | November 18, 2011 | Hugh Hewitt

Posted on 11/19/2011 3:30:19 AM PST by Kaslin

There are three "keystone deductions" in the IRS code that matter more than all others to Americans who itemize deductions.

They are keystone deductions because they help the middle and upper middle class and they promote extraordinarily important social policies which have long been at the center of the traditional values held by most Americans.

The first is the deduction for contributions to qualified charities, such as hospitals, high schools and colleges, charities serving everyone from children to the homless to the old and infirm, and of course churches of every denomination.

The second keystone deduction allows homeowners with mortgages to deduct the interest on that mortgage from their income before calculating the ta they owe. This deduction encourages people to buy houses and is in fact a key component of the value of every house in America. The deduction is a valuable part of every home. If it is ended or limited, the value of every house in America falls, even if that home has no mortgage on it. The same downward pressure on home values occurs even if the deduction is only limited for some houses or some owners --say second houses or homes costing more than $500,000. The housing market doesn't distinguish between who owns what, but cares mostly about what buyers are willing to pay, and a lower or eliminated deduction means fewer buyers which means falling house values.

The third deduction allows taxpayers to deduct from their income before calculating their federal tax all the state and local taxes they paid in the previous year. Americans in high tax states, already staggering along under punitive tax regimes, would be smashed by any limit on this deduction. Some would call such a move a last straw, and leave the already reeling states like California, but most would simply be trapped where their jobs and (suddenly less valuable) homes are, paying higher and higher taxes.

Thus a Pennsylvania family of six with two kids in college, with a mortgage that has been refinanced to help pay tuition, but which still makes a tithe to their church is looking at a triple whammy tax hike if these deductions go away or are limited. So would millions of other Americans.

Which is why reaction ranged from shock to anger when two Republicans on the so-called Supercommittee proposed attacking those very deductions this week. Pennsylvania's Senator Pat Toomey and Texas Congressman Jeb Hensarling, both credentialed conservatives, stunned their center-right supporters and Republicans across the country by proposing a plan to raise hundreds of millions of dollars of new revenues financed by the assault on these keystone deductions.

The AP's Stephen Ohlemacher described the Toomey-Hensarling ta hikes this way:

A GOP plan to raise taxes by $290 billion over the next decade would limit deductions for mortgage interest, charitable donations and state and local taxes as part of a deficit-reduction deal. Some workers could also see their employer-provided health benefits taxed for the first time, though aides cautioned that the plan is still fluid....

The top income tax rate would fall from 35 percent to 28 percent, and the bottom rate would drop from 10 percent to 8 percent. The rates in between would be reduced as well. A GOP congressional aide said the plan is designed to raise taxes on households in the top two tax brackets. That would affect individuals making more than $174,400 and married couples making more than $212,300.

The plan has already split the Congressional GOP, but its dire consequences are just beginning to be felt across the country. I have spent much of this week's radio shows talking to experts and callers about the Toomey-Hensarling tax hikes, and while an occasional supporter will speak in favor of all or part of its provisions --former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman for example-- the vast majority assailed the plan as bad policy, horrible politics and, crucially, a breach of faith with voters who sent the GOP back to Congress in November 2010 with a mandate to cut spending, not raise taxes and in the process of raising taxes, changes many of the crucial rules by which the country has operated for decades.

On my show Rick Santorum called the proposed package another "Read my lips" moment, harkening back to the promise which the first President Bush made and then disastrously broke in a "big deal" with Democrats 20 years ago.

Callers were fuming. One retired sheriff living in Calfiornia berated me for leading him to contribute to Pat Toomey's 2010 Senate campaign. Many others simply stated they would lose their house to which they were barely hanging on if the deduction was lost. A wise accountant friend laughed at the idea that slashing the charitable deduction wouldn't dramatically impact high income giver's giving. And when contributions fell, so would the services delivered by those groups and employment within the vast not-for-profit sector.

Where could such a horrific idea have come from? Why, from three economists of course, all from the National Bureau, and beloved by the purists at the Wall Street Journal and the Club for Growth.

Good for them. Let them put their plan before the GOP Convention and have it adopted as a platform.

Let them ask Speaker Boehner to amend, republish and then campaign on a revised Pledge to America, because the 2010 version said nothing about these radical measures.

That is the biggest problem with the plan: The new Congress was sent to D.C. to represent the cut spending/shrink government movement in the country, and it instead has produced a secret committee that is hurtling towards a massive tax hike --authored by Republicans!

Some Republicans argue it is either this or the automatic "sequestration" built into last summer's debt ceiling deal which would hammer defense spending with an unimaginable $600 billion in more cuts on top of the hundreds of billions already unwisely slashed from DoD's funding.

But the sequestration doesn't take effect until 2013, and there is an election between now and then which could empower a new president, with a new GOP majority in the Senate working alongside a the GOP majority in the House, to actually reform entitlements and control spending without raising taxes or slashing defense.

If the GOP that is already inside the Beltway embraces tax hikes, especially this ruinous trio of deeply damaging hikes, the message will be clear to many millions of voters: You cannot trust Republicans who promise to cut spending and keep a lid on taxes.

Not even for one year.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Editorial; Government
KEYWORDS: deductions; irs; rino4nogrowth; rinos4taxes; rinosvsamerica; taxcode; taxes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-74 next last

1 posted on 11/19/2011 3:30:19 AM PST by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

It must be in the drinking water, that’s the only way to explain it.


2 posted on 11/19/2011 3:37:13 AM PST by SatinDoll (NO FOREIGN NATIONALS AS U.S.A. PRESIDENT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Increasing taxes on the American people is not the way to grow the party, let alone the economy in a recession.

If the GOP hasn’t learned that by now, then its learned nothing.


3 posted on 11/19/2011 3:41:19 AM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

Close the Departments of Education and Energy. Cut every other agency in government by 10 percent. Stop all foreign aid.


4 posted on 11/19/2011 3:47:26 AM PST by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I know Pat Toomey.

This is a public relations move to show that the GOP was willing to go along with “revenue enhancements” but the liberals still would not make a deal.

Toomey and others know the Dems will not take the deal. Instead, John Kerry and others will blame the Republicans on the committee for blocking everything (in keeping with Obama’s campaign theme).

Don’t confuse ideology with playing politics.


5 posted on 11/19/2011 4:10:19 AM PST by Erik Latranyi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Erik Latranyi

Here they go again being snookered. The stupid Republicans selling out the store thinking the libs will reciprocate. What lousy card players or should I use the right term: “traitors,” who are complicit with the Socialists in taxing the hell out of use to destroy our society and economy. Enough is enough.


6 posted on 11/19/2011 4:19:41 AM PST by iontheball
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
It was strategery -- a trial balloon designed to fail. DUms should have called the bluff, because the GOP is going to be able to flood the zone with the plethora of details they were willing to put on the table every time Bobo raises his main raison d'etre for re-election -- which was a horribly awful gambit to begin with from Axelrot and deserves to be rammed right back at 'em.

That said there are only a handful of Congressmen that are both smart enough to make hay and clever enough as extemporaneous speakers to toss said hay over Bobo's head.

7 posted on 11/19/2011 4:20:46 AM PST by StAnDeliver (/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks

“Close the Departments of Education and Energy. Cut every other Agency by 10 percent. Stop all foreign aid.”

The Republican House has the power to do all of these things but it’s leadership lacks either the courage to take a stand or the desire to really stop socialism. It is clear the Democrats have no intention of slowing spending except for the military. They are cleverly framing the debate in a way that forces the Republicans to take the blame if the budget talks fail or force the Republicans to abandon core principles in order to strike a deal. The Democrats are playing to win while the Republican leadership, as usual is playing a defensive game. Unfortunately politics as usual is destroying the nation. So far I haven’t seen that we are better off with a Republican House given the way Boehner is conducting himself. All we seem to have accomplished in 2010 is giving Obama a “Republican Congress” to run against in 2012. I’m beginning to believe the Dems have a winning strategy to retake the House in 2012’ keep the Senate, and return Obama to office.

You can’t win if you don’t fight. I see little fight in the Republicans against a Democrat Party prepared to do anything to control the levers of power.


8 posted on 11/19/2011 4:23:31 AM PST by Soul of the South (When times are tough the tough get going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks

“Close the Departments of Education and Energy. Cut every other Agency by 10 percent. Stop all foreign aid.”

The Republican House has the power to do all of these things but it’s leadership lacks either the courage to take a stand or the desire to really stop socialism. It is clear the Democrats have no intention of slowing spending except for the military. They are cleverly framing the debate in a way that forces the Republicans to take the blame if the budget talks fail or force the Republicans to abandon core principles in order to strike a deal. The Democrats are playing to win while the Republican leadership, as usual is playing a defensive game. Unfortunately politics as usual is destroying the nation. So far I haven’t seen that we are better off with a Republican House given the way Boehner is conducting himself. All we seem to have accomplished in 2010 is giving Obama a “Republican Congress” to run against in 2012. I’m beginning to believe the Dems have a winning strategy to retake the House in 2012’ keep the Senate, and return Obama to office.

You can’t win if you don’t fight. I see little fight in the Republicans against a Democrat Party prepared to do anything to control the levers of power.


9 posted on 11/19/2011 4:23:31 AM PST by Soul of the South (When times are tough the tough get going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I guess this is coming from the Supercommittee, but I wouldn’t worry about it right now.

The Super-Commottee was formed to fail anyway, so it won’t come from there.

The whole idea was unConstitutional and stupid to begin with.


10 posted on 11/19/2011 4:23:42 AM PST by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

they must want CWII


11 posted on 11/19/2011 4:27:57 AM PST by tgusa (gun control: deep breath, sight alignment, squeeze the trigger .......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Well, I am suprised it came from Republicans, but I am not surprised at this move. Cpmmunists always wipe out the middle class. That’s just what Communists do.


12 posted on 11/19/2011 4:31:25 AM PST by Paperdoll (On the cutting edge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

a vote for GOP is a vote for progressives

the DNC and the GOP are the problem. progressives run them both


13 posted on 11/19/2011 4:32:52 AM PST by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: StAnDeliver
This is why the ‘class warfare’ works so well for the RATS, even the majority of Republicans aren't willing to go along with tax reform if it effects them.

That only leaves the very poor and very rich in small enough groups to heap the cuts on. We all know which of those two it is acceptable to attack.

That is why I think that only a flat tax with a high personal exemption has any chance of ever passing.

14 posted on 11/19/2011 4:34:46 AM PST by Beagle8U (Free Republic -- One stop shopping ....... It's the Conservative Super WalMart for news .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: sten
a vote for GOP is a vote for progressives

So, for whom would you vote?

15 posted on 11/19/2011 4:40:18 AM PST by foxfield (Sarah Palin, America's "girl next door".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

The mortgage deduction should only be there for mortgages below $500K. There already is a terrific incentive for people to buy homes - - mortgage interest at 4%.

When we built our home ourselves - as in manual labor - in the 80’s, the mortgage rate was 13 1/2%. We never made enough money to qualify for a deduction. As soon as rates dropped we refinanced down to 11 1/2%, then 9%. We wound up paying off the $25K in less than 20 years. In that time we had two sons at Penn State, but they lived at home and went to a satellite campus for the first two years and worked summers and got their degrees with student loans that amounted to the price of a small car at that time - - $6 and $8K and paid them off. One is now a Ph. D. and the other a PE and PLS.


16 posted on 11/19/2011 4:43:39 AM PST by finnsheep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Erik Latranyi
Instead, John Kerry and others will blame the Republicans on the committee for blocking everything (in keeping with Obama’s campaign theme).

Of course, it's never their fault. Last night on his show Bill O'Reilly showed a clip with Barney Frank blaming the Republicans for the Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac scandal

17 posted on 11/19/2011 4:43:46 AM PST by Kaslin (Acronym for OBAMA: One Big Ass Mistake America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

Remember the other day, when some of us were in a big disagreement over whether this was a tax increase, or just increased revenues through lowering overall taxes but cutting out “loopholes” so more could not get out of paying their “fair share”?

It was amazing, listening to he rank ignorance from some, who kept claiming that this would be a very good thing. That it would reduce our taxes, reduce the deficit and make more pay who were supposedly getting out of it currently. You know, like those who get deductions for mortgage, charity and deductions for State and local taxes.

But more astounding was the fact that these people kept insisting that this was not a tax increase, it was just a way of increasing revenue while at the same time reducing taxes.

This is like cattle, being fattened for the slaughter house, commenting on how good the food is and how much they have to eat.


18 posted on 11/19/2011 4:50:41 AM PST by PSYCHO-FREEP (If you come to a fork in the road, take it........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Wow. Even RINOs like Hewitt are upset.

I have to point out at least one deeply ironic line from this piece:

...Pennsylvania's Senator Pat Toomey and Texas Congressman Jeb Hensarling, both credentialed conservatives...

Which begs three questions:

1. Credentialed by whom?

2. What are these so-called "credentials"?

3. Just what is their definition of "conservative"?

19 posted on 11/19/2011 4:58:43 AM PST by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Eliminating the deductions for state and local taxes would help kill the blue states even faster.... For that matter, since Blue states tend to have higher real-estate prices than red states, capping the home mortgage deduction would disproportionately affect them, too.

I don’t like the idea of a stealth tax increase, but I can see the method to the madness.


20 posted on 11/19/2011 4:59:10 AM PST by I Shall Endure
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Why is their no talk about reducing the “Green Credits”, not the guaranteed loans to the Bundlers which are bad in their own right but tax deductions and credits for solar panels.
For example, a solar company calculators for installations in Albany NY shows for a $44,055 installation the Federal Government will provide tax credits of $13,216, and New York state $12,250 in Energy Grants and $5,000 in state income tax credits. Total government (taxpayer) funded offsets $30,466!!!
It is “Green” which is sucking the air out of the room! One can only imagine what kind of Federal tax credits are being provided to the Corporation for going “Green”.


21 posted on 11/19/2011 5:04:37 AM PST by BilLies (ABCBSNBCNN, NYTimes, WaPOSt , etc., hates your Traditional American guts!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BilLies

Should have noted that the example provided applied to residential installation in Albany, NY. Sorry.


22 posted on 11/19/2011 5:07:03 AM PST by BilLies (ABCBSNBCNN, NYTimes, WaPOSt , etc., hates your Traditional American guts!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
I just sent my Senator {Toomey} a red hot email {not that they care} but told him to hold the line on spending and not to raise revenues. Those pricks get to DC and everyone wants to make a deal. Screw a deal, hold the line and wait for reinforcements in November 2012.

If the pubbies win the Senate, increase the House count and get the obummer out and then don't fix the problem, it will be time to "go to the mats".

Actions will speak for me, and it won't be on the internet.

23 posted on 11/19/2011 5:18:22 AM PST by USS Alaska (Nuke The Terrorist Savages)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Kabuki theater brought to you by the Republicrat party. A third party will guarantee Obama’s reelection, but too many Republicans are willing to lose and stay in minority power than really cut government.
24 posted on 11/19/2011 5:22:16 AM PST by Truth29
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

The Democrat - Republican game at election time is a farce thrown like scraps to the dogs, by the Ruling Elite. It makes no difference which party wins. They’re all good-ol-boy “Progressives” - statists out to control the people, fleece the sheep and milk the family cow.


25 posted on 11/19/2011 5:23:54 AM PST by RoadTest (For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

We should start with Cutting Baseline By 10% and Permanently eliminating 8% automatic Increase annually!


26 posted on 11/19/2011 5:24:18 AM PST by philly-d-kidder (AB-Sheen"The truth is the truth if nobody believes it,a lie is still a lie, everybody believes it")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
I think the charitable deduction should be kept. But IMO the mortgage interest deduction played into the housing bubble by making mortgage interest deductable (and that was compounded when credit card interest no longer became deductible, just home equity loan interest). And state tax deductions? Those are subsidies for living in blue states.

I think a ten-year drawdown of mortgage interest deductions, and a three-year in state interest, is a good idea, when coupled with an effort to zero-sum the net revenue changes by reducing tax rates.

27 posted on 11/19/2011 5:28:32 AM PST by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: foxfield

a non progressive

my candidate is not currently in the race


28 posted on 11/19/2011 5:28:50 AM PST by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Soul of the South

The Republican House ight have the power to do all this, but you are forgetting that we do not have the majority in the Senate. So until we do, there is no chance. Now kwitcherbitchin


29 posted on 11/19/2011 5:43:02 AM PST by Kaslin (Acronym for OBAMA: One Big Ass Mistake America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: PSYCHO-FREEP
But more astounding was the fact that these people kept insisting that this was not a tax increase, it was just a way of increasing revenue while at the same time reducing taxes.

I rarely agree with you but this one time you are correct.

If an individual ends up paying more revenue on the same amount of income, regardless of the rate charged, it is a tax increase.

It happened with the Reagan "tax cuts" in the 80s and it was a tax shift and increase to people with higher incomes, but since most tax payers were not in that group, it lowered their individual payments but it spurred the economy, created 20 million jobs and really increased the number of people that were in the "tax pool" and off of unemployment payments.

I went from no revenue payments to the feds for over 10 years with multiple 6 figure income to paying "my fair share" after the tax rates were reduced but the "exemptions and loop holes" were eliminated.

People can argue about the term "fair" {that's an opinion that depends on what you earn} but regardless of the lower % rate of tax, my tax payments to the feds increased and that wasn't an opinion, it was a fact.

The thing I've never been able to understand, is why the demonRATs, that love to spend, don't want lower rates, which provide more revenue, and they could spend even more.

Intellectually, they have to know that it's true, even if philosophically they oppose the concept of lower rates.

I just don't get that paradox.

30 posted on 11/19/2011 5:43:35 AM PST by USS Alaska (Nuke The Terrorist Savages)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: foxfield
So, for whom would you vote?

Any third party and third party candidate that doesn't have any chance

31 posted on 11/19/2011 5:45:57 AM PST by Kaslin (Acronym for OBAMA: One Big Ass Mistake America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Soul of the South

It takes more than the House to close those agencies. The Senate has to pass it (impossble) and the president must sign the legislation (never will do it). So, what would be needed is a willing senate and a willing president. Only Nov. 2012 can make that happen.


32 posted on 11/19/2011 5:47:13 AM PST by Russ (Repeal the 17th amendment)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
Wow. Even RINOs like Hewitt are upset.

What makes you think he is a RINO? Do you even know what a RINO is?

I am tired of people throwing the word RINO out without knowing what a RINO is. And I don't mean the Republican In Name Only part.

A RINO is someone that votes mostly with the rats. You don't know how Hewitt votes, so you can not call him a RINO

33 posted on 11/19/2011 5:55:00 AM PST by Kaslin (Acronym for OBAMA: One Big Ass Mistake America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: USS Alaska
"The thing I've never been able to understand, is why the demonRATs, that love to spend, don't want lower rates, which provide more revenue, and they could spend even more."

They spend anyway. They want power and control more than more tax revenue. They want more government dependency and the leftist dream of controlling redistribution of wealth.

34 posted on 11/19/2011 6:13:16 AM PST by Truth29
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: I Shall Endure
Eliminating the deductions for state and local taxes would help kill the blue states even faster....

It would "kill" them by encouraging their populations to migrate to the red states, where they would try to "blue-ify" them.

A more general observation: The home mortgage interest deduction is poor economics, as it artificially inflates home prices; but once you've had it for a couple of generations, you can't take it away without the consequences noted in the article. People have made decisions with a major part of their life's savings based on that deduction--if you take it away, you are destroying those savings. Moreover, it would be nice if the government would make up its mind--if it wants to minimize the banking/GNMA/FNMA/FHA disaster, it shouldn't do things which will place further downward pressure on real estate values!

35 posted on 11/19/2011 6:26:53 AM PST by Pearls Before Swine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin; conservativguy99; mazda77; vette6387; freekitty; flat; unkus; SkyPilot; SouthTexas; ...

When one faces a Obama/Pelosi/Reid Death Panel, anyone wonder if their political affiliation will have any bearing on whether or not they get medical care? Anyone out there think it was designed that way?


36 posted on 11/19/2011 6:31:58 AM PST by ExTexasRedhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Pennsylvania's Senator Pat Toomey and Texas Congressman Jeb Hensarling, both credentialed conservatives...

What the hell does that mean? They are both in Congress...Accredited Grifters might be a more appropriate soubriquet. :)

37 posted on 11/19/2011 6:35:43 AM PST by Mr. Jeeves (CTRL-GALT-DELETE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Russ
It takes more than the House to close those agencies. The Senate has to pass it (impossble) and the president must sign the legislation (never will do it). So, what would be needed is a willing senate and a willing president. Only Nov. 2012 can make that happen.

Nonsense. The Senate and the President can't spend money unless appropriated by the House. Let the House zero out the appropriations for Education, Commerce, Energy, and several other useless departments, then sit there on that position while the Senate and the President huff and puff veto until they're blue in the face. Refuse to budge. SHUT. IT. DOWN.

Sure the media will unleash an unholy assault. They'll do that whatever conservatives do. We have to fight to win.

38 posted on 11/19/2011 6:39:18 AM PST by Spartan79 (I view great cities as pestilential to the morals, the health, and the liberties of man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: ExTexasRedhead; All

” When one faces a Obama/Pelosi/Reid Death Panel, anyone wonder if their political affiliation will have any bearing on whether or not they get medical care? Anyone out there think it was designed that way? “

Exactly !


39 posted on 11/19/2011 6:39:32 AM PST by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

If you don’t understand that hacks like Hewitt are RINOs by now, your ignorance is willful, and there is nothing anyone can say or do that will help you. See ya.


40 posted on 11/19/2011 6:57:07 AM PST by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

Did You Know?

The Current FReepathon Pays For The Current Quarters Expenses?

Now That You Do, Donate And Keep FR Running


41 posted on 11/19/2011 7:18:43 AM PST by DJ MacWoW (America! The wolves are here! What will you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

The public were looking for fiscal responsibility through spending cuts. Our side refused to put the pressure on the left to go along or lose politically
instead we immediately folded multiple times included the McConnell idea to pass the buck to the white house and consistently negotiating from a weak position. Our side could have gotten some things through this Senate if they wanted to, or gained politically. Instead we have this supercommittee.


42 posted on 11/19/2011 7:23:45 AM PST by ilgipper (Everything you get from the government was taken from someone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
All three deductions have pernicious effects.

Gates and Buffett have dodged tens of billions in capital gains liabilities with their foundations - pushing up rates for the rest of us.

Mortgage deductibility encourages households to over-lever - and amplified the effects of the burst of the minority lending bubble.

Deductibilty of state and local taxes is the worst of all - it's a direct subsidy for irresponsible voting.

That last point can be illustrated by a simplified example. Imagine there is a 50% Federal income tax rate and only two states, NH and MA. In republican NH the state income tax rate is 0%, in Democrat MA the rate is 10%. Now imagine there are two taxpayers, one in each state, each making $100k.

Mr NH pays $50k in Federal taxes and takes home $50k, Mr MA pays $10k in MA taxes leaving $90k, of which $45k goes to the Feds and he takes home $100k -$10k -$45k = $45k.

The Feds hence take in $95k which they use to bomb rag-heads somewhere. But, if it weren't for the deductibility of state taxes they could drop the same number of bombs for a Federal tax rate of only 47.5%. I.e. the NH taxpayer is subsidizing the MA taxpayers poor taste in local government to the tune of $2.5k per year.

So why does Mr MA continue to vote Dem? Let's say that for his $10k Mr MA gets free schooling for his kid, While Mr NH has to pay $10k to send his kid to a private school. After expenses then, Mr MA has $45k of disposable income, while Mr NH has only $40k.

Of course in real life most of the MA revenue gets pissed up the wall or into the pocket of the public sector unions, but as long as Mr MA feels he's getting a better quality of life than Mr NH he'll continue to vote D and, thanks to the deductibility of state taxes, Mr NH is forced to subsidize him.

43 posted on 11/19/2011 7:26:37 AM PST by Vide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker

In my opinion, one could surmise that, instead of a concentration camp, those who Big Brother deems “undesirable” will be sent to a hospice center run by Big Bro and/or Big Sis. Sound familiar? Like history repeating itself? Never Again ringing hollow anyone?


44 posted on 11/19/2011 7:30:49 AM PST by ExTexasRedhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
I'd like to see #2 sunsetted.

The mortgage deduction was partially responsible for the mortgage bubble.

All that would happen is that people would be willing to pay less money for a house.

Unless of course you like seeing housing prices artificially inflated.

45 posted on 11/19/2011 7:39:03 AM PST by E. Pluribus Unum (The enemy of my enemy is my candidate.<sup>®</sup>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Republicans occasionally do take a break from slopping at the trough long enougfh to think about solutions to the problems destroying the country.

Democrats accept the destruction as inevitable and work hard and fast to grab all they can before the end.


46 posted on 11/19/2011 7:45:51 AM PST by Iron Munro (Ben Raines For President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin; All
Conservatives constantly point to Reagan's 1986 tax reforms and how they stimulated the economy, and led to a period of great economic growth. The changes instituted in TEFRA and ERISA were equally as dramatic as Toomey is proposing, and initially caused considerable harm, especially to real estate. People had been making economic decisions ( investments) for years, based upon the tax laws, and in a second..they were all taken away. The real estate market took almost 3 years to recover...shortly after the law was passed, prices dropped almost 20% across the board.

Anyone remember PIGS and PALS..?

I think that Toomey is on the right track, but Hewitt correctly points out how damaging this could be initially. I would like to see a phase in..maybe over 3-4 years..possibly allow people to elect to use the current tax laws for 2 years, and then for the next two..split the difference between the taxes due under the old regs, and the new ones..

47 posted on 11/19/2011 7:47:54 AM PST by ken5050
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

cut the charitable contribution, mortgage and state and local tax deductions AND the IRS and you have a deal. Fair tax....the only way to go


48 posted on 11/19/2011 7:50:38 AM PST by paul51 (11 September 2001 - Never forget)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I understand we don’t have the Senate. The House does not have to approve spending the Senate and President want. Send the Senate appropriations bills for Labor, Agriculture, Education and Energy with reduced spending. the Senate can either approve the bill or not. If the Senate votes against the appropriation because it wants higher spending, the House can say no. The Senate can then either accept a lower spending level or by its failure to approve the bill choose to totally defund the departments because there will be no money appropriated for anything.

Boehner plays into Democrat hands by funding the government through continuing resolutions. He should play hardball and send individual spending bills by departments or agencies to the Senate and President. Make them choose to accept lower spending or defund the agencies. Use the Constitution’s powers instead of playing their game.

Boehner and McConnell are trying to play nice and are losing the PR war and doing nothing to slow spending. Bring government to a stop. They have the power. The Dems have no problem playing hardball. Obama is going to run against an obstructionist do nothing Congress. Why let him control the message? Do something!


49 posted on 11/19/2011 8:05:04 AM PST by Soul of the South (When times are tough the tough get going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: I Shall Endure

“Eliminating the deductions for state and local taxes would help kill the blue states even faster.”

Thanks, I live in a blue state, as do hundreds of millions of other conservatives.

This is a DREADFUL idea and I spent 2 days calling Toomey, et al. to say so.

I spoke with a real twerp at the RNC who ended up telling me that if I myself were not willing to pay higher taxes the military would be decimated and the draft reinstated.

I also called the Club for Growth who told me this would only apply to second homes, which appears to be, shall we say, inaccurate.

Anybody who thinks this is a good idea is detached from reality. Were this to happen we all know how it will play in the long run. Deductions go away, rates go down, rates creep back up, deductions are never restored.

Even if this was some double-dog-dare on Toomey’s part it is still an incredibly stupid idea. They’ve slapped the Tea Party in the face and stabbed us in the back at the same time.

This plus Mitt at the top of the ticket spells DOOM for the Republicans next year.

Do these morons think the sought-after independents want to pay more taxes?

I’ve honestly never been this angry with the Republicans before.

Please makes some calls and let them know what you think. Hewitt is the only one blowing the whistle on this it seems.


50 posted on 11/19/2011 8:26:58 AM PST by jocon307
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-74 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson