Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Millionaires on Capitol Hill: Please tax me more!
Topic Started: Nov 17 2011, 09:12 AM (320 Views)
Jim Miller
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Why don't they just write a check?

Quote:
 
Millionaires on Capitol Hill: Please tax me more!

WASHINGTON (AP) — Lobbyists for a day, a band of millionaires stormed Capitol Hill on Wednesday to urge Congress to tax them more.

They had a little trouble getting in. It turns out there are procedures, even for the really rich.

But once inside, their message was embraced by liberals and tolerated by some conservatives — including the ideological leader of anti-tax lawmakers, who had some advice for them, too.

"If you think the federal government can spend your money better than you can, then by all means" pay more in taxes than you owe, said Grover Norquist, the head of a group that has gotten almost all congressional Republicans to pledge to vote against tax hikes. The IRS should have a little line on the form where people can donate money to the government, he suggested, "just like the tip line on a restaurant receipt."

One of the millionaires suggested that if Norquist wanted low taxes and less government, "Renounce your American citizenship and move to Somalia where they don't collect any tax."

In the silence left by the private efforts of the "supercommittee" to find $1.2 trillion or more in deficit cuts by Thanksgiving, free advice flowed in public.

And not just any advice: pie-in-the-sky suggestions from those not connected to the talks, mostly to reopen debates that have led nowhere. The millionaires want the panel to raise taxes on people who earn more than $1 million, even though most Republicans are committed against the idea. And 150 House member and senators urged a much bigger debt-and-deficit deal, even as a small-scope agreement is proving elusive.

While they were at it, the lawmakers insisted that bipartisanship was not, in fact, dead.

This group of House members and senators shared a stage and some jokes and signed a letter urging the supercommittee of Republicans and Democrats to find the required $1.2 trillion in cuts — plus about $2.8 trillion more. They all want the panel to avoid triggering automatic cuts as a penalty for failing.

So this uneasy alliance of 150 Republicans and Democrats will vote for whatever deal the supercommittee strikes?

"No," said House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer. "Nobody's going to commit to the deal until they see the deal."

What deal? There is no evidence that one is near, so the millionaires tried to meet with anyone who would meet with them.

The progressive caucus did, eagerly and on-camera. The rest wasn't so easy.

At a basement entrance to the Capitol, a police officer pointed to the name badges that identified each wearer as "Patriotic Millionaire."

"That is not a visitor's badge," the officer said. "Go to the visitors desk and get a visitor's badge."

Off they trudged, a group mostly of men in business-casual clothing toting laptops and umbrellas, to a desk visited by tourists and lobbyists. Badges secured, they headed in.

Lawrence Benenson, vice president of Benenson Capitol Co., ran into freshman Rep. Kristi Noem, R-Idaho, in an elevator.

"I'm with the Patriotic Millionaires and we want to pay more in taxes," he told her.

Noem grinned.

"How much more?" she asked.

Then it was off to meet, not with senators but their staffs — and not in the Capitol but in offices across the street.

Progress was not made, by all accounts.

A meeting with an aide to Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., opened with his aide announcing that the senator believes the wealthy pay more taxes than their fair share, according to one of the millionaires, Matthew Palevsky, a consultant and founder of the Council on Crime Prevention.

"We defined it as not paying our fair share," Palevsky said of the 20-minute chat. "It was clear we were coming from different points of view."

In a meeting with Rep. Ralph Hall, R-Texas, the congressman faux-proposed — apparently — to an aide to the millionaires. She declined.

Then it was off, on a bus not a limo, across town to see Norquist.

Why were they bothering with him?

"That's what I asked this morning," said one of the millionaires, Frank Jernigan, a former senior software engineer for Google.

"It's a media hook," offered another, Guy Saperstein, a retired lawyer and former president of the Sierra Club Foundation.

Such candor is not the norm in these parts.

For his part, Norquist said he was ready for the group with a tongue-in-cheek Torah lesson: Maimonides and his "eight degrees of charity." That's what Norquist says the millionaires are essentially proposing with their tax-me-more pitch. Perhaps there should be a ninth, Norquist suggested.

"Nobody's holding them back" from donating money to the federal government, he said as he prepared for the group's arrival. "They're saying, 'Gee, I'd sure like to write a big check to the federal government, if someone would just stop stopping me.'"
LINK
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Thumper
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Republicans just can't pony up and pay tax.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
tomdrobin
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
The Republicans don't have much choice. If they moderate their position and go along with tax increases their wealthy supporters and Tea Party thugs will not support them, and run replacement stooges against them in the primaries. This is what is wrong with politics in America.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Thumper
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
The Gop has become the party of the "haves".
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Chris
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
It would be illegal for the supercommittee to raise taxes.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pat
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
I laughed when I read this. So let's examine what these so called millionaire patriots have done, but first we have to be clear about the source of the money they want taxed at a higher rate. Congress is exempt from insider trading laws. If you want to become a multi millionaire, there is nothing like some stock tips to get you there in a hurry. Of course this isn't the sole source of their wealth, but for many it makes up the bulk they have accumulated. When tennis shoe toting school teacher Patty Murray was elected to the senate she was not a millionaire. Her luck has changed in that department.

Ok, enough of this tangent. Let me finish my saying that when the source of wealth is a nonstop pipeline to insider information, it's a little easier to agree to higher tax rates. Those of us who did it the old fashion way, have a different way of viewing the government fleecing at the hands of the insider traders in congress.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
tomdrobin
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Chris
Nov 17 2011, 11:17 PM
It would be illegal for the supercommittee to raise taxes.
They could recommend a tax increase to the congress though. All the Republican members have signed the no tax increase pledge. So much for negotiations. We have to pay the bills. The draconian cuts needed to balance the budget would exacerbate the pain of the recession on those hurting the most. And, most likely would slow the recovery. At some point folks will start realizing what it means to them personally and the other shoe will fall. I have no argument with scaling back entitlements. But, it has to be done gradually, while maintaining revenue. This "starve the beast" mentality is not the way to go. You cut revenue (aka taxes) after you have got spending reduced. Not, seriously reduce revenue, and then cry for the cuts.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pat
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
With $ trillions in deficits piling up Tom, the only sensible way forward in an economy as sick as ours, it to cut spending. We can cut back defense by half and still not balance out the spending, so the only logical place left to cut is entitlements. Plus we have the problem of the unfunded prescription drug entitlement that Bush and the corporatist backed cronies in congress passed. And we have the healthcare law that is partially funded to deal with. We're sinking faster than a drunk on a bar stool at 2AM, yet the democrat mantra is to pile all this on the back of the top 1% in wage earners.

If you want revenue, then we need to address the issues that prevent growth in the business sector. American companies pay more in corporate taxes than their competitors. You have to back off expensive environmental regulations that prevent growth in factories, the energy sector, agriculture and apply common sense. Snail darters and owls might be cute (I've never seen one), but are they more important than energy and jobs?

The pledge you speak of by republicans was in place before the dept commission was formed. So it was naive for all involved to believe the congress members would go back on their words.
Edited by Pat, Nov 18 2011, 03:06 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Chris
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
tomdrobin
Nov 18 2011, 02:50 AM
Chris
Nov 17 2011, 11:17 PM
It would be illegal for the supercommittee to raise taxes.
They could recommend a tax increase to the congress though. All the Republican members have signed the no tax increase pledge. So much for negotiations. We have to pay the bills. The draconian cuts needed to balance the budget would exacerbate the pain of the recession on those hurting the most. And, most likely would slow the recovery. At some point folks will start realizing what it means to them personally and the other shoe will fall. I have no argument with scaling back entitlements. But, it has to be done gradually, while maintaining revenue. This "starve the beast" mentality is not the way to go. You cut revenue (aka taxes) after you have got spending reduced. Not, seriously reduce revenue, and then cry for the cuts.
Right, they can't raise taxes, they could make recommendations, but to argue raising taxes to the point of a standstill is merely playing politics. And you're right, those recommendations would be defeated in the current House.

In then end automatic triggers will cut a trillion and a half (iirc) from defense and welfare.

That's good. A step in the right direction. A gradual one.

The question then remains is it enough?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
tomdrobin
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
I don't argue that cutting spending is in order. But, revenue increases have to be part of the package also. Top tax rates of 34% on taxable income and 15% on capital gains are historically low. Taxes after WWII were more than double that. And, I didn't notice any job killing from it. Our corporate tax rates are higher than other countries, but the taxes they end up paying due to exemptions and loopholes is actually much lower. I heard the president of GE on TV say that we should lower the rate to a realistic level and then eliminate expemptions and loopholes, I don't have a problem with that. Of course one of the biggest incentives to reinvest in factories, equipment and people is the tax breaks to avoid paying the higher rates.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Enjoy forums? Start your own community for free.
Learn More · Sign-up for Free
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Fire And Ice General Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Website Traffic Analysis