« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Sen. Coburn Didn’t Lie, But Grover Norquist’s Credibility Continues to Die.

Senator Tom Coburn !!!!!LIED HIS WAY INTO OFFICE!!!!! He made a deal with the Iniquitous Dick Durbin and joined his “Gang of Six”! He violated his pledge to Americans for Tax Reform, by even frequenting the same Senate Lavatory as these evil malefactors. He must be shamed. He will be stopped. And if you agree with any of the blither written above, you are about as useful to the Republican Party as the corrupt and oleaginous Grover Norquist.

Grover Norquist heads up Americans for Tax Reform. This organization purports to stand for a flatter, lower, more transparent tax system. Tom Coburn has signed off on two attempts to lower tax rates, yet simultaneously eliminate popular tax deductions. This should make Grover Norquist go turn handsprings in his back yard. The rates are lower, and with the various niche deductions being eliminated, the system would become a lot easier to figure and harder for the rich and well-connected to game.

This, I believe, is the cause of much of Grover Norquist’s angst over Senator Coburn. A flatter simplified, tax system would bring in more revenue; even at lower tax rates. In Norquist’s mind, greater revenue = higher taxes. In other words, if we hit the Laffer Curve at just the proper inflection point, you could hypothetically lop 5% off the rate and get called a lying-liar by Grover Norquist for hiking taxes.

I’m convinced that Norquist has forgotten two things when he assails Senator Coburn’s political honor. Taxpayer behavior impacts the level of taxation efficiency in an inverse direction to the marginal rates and in direct proportion to tax code complexity. Also, the Republican Party does not yet control the US Senate.

A totally flat tax would be the most efficient revenue mechanism available to a government that taxed income. It would simply describe moneys derived from certain activities such as working, investing, saving or cheating really well at poker as income. The taxpayer would multiply this sum-total income by xx percent and send it in.

If the rate xx was too great, people who already had a lot of cash would bother far less with wasting their time tracking investments or working. Tax-’Em-To-Deathers forget that every hour worked has an opportunity cost. A flatter tax system would be a lot easier to live with, unless you’ve spent much time and money gaming the current system. Organizations which have bought themselves favors from Barack Obama; to get taxed like GE or Google, will tend to cheer Norquist on against Coburn.

Norquist should be forced to watch the old Schoolhouse Rock editions on how bills become laws in the US Congress. He claims to aggressively favor Paul Ryan’s plan for reducing the national debt. Good for him. It has made it as far as it can go in a complete and utter vacuum. The Ryan Plan was a piece of budgetary legislation set forth in the House of Representatives where it passed.

What Norquist has forgotten is that the Senate is a unique and independent part of a bi-cameral legislature. It is controlled by the opposing political party. The opposing political party is not in favor of cutting any spending at all. They will do so only grudgingly and in return for negotiated favors.

When Norquist says that all Republican Senators that work with Dick Durbin are LIARS!!, he is stating that he would like to see the Senate fail to pass a budget in FY2011. Should the Senate fail to pass a budget, then the Ryan Plan will die on the vine. There needs to be a Senate Budgetary Bill that can be reconciled with the House Budgetary Bill before anything can land on President Barack Obama’s desk for signature.

The Ryan Proposal, for all its strengths and political value, still remains a bill on Capitol Hill until the Senate puts a budget into the hopper for reconciliation. That’s not because Tom Coburn is a LIAR!!! That’s just how the Constitution was written.

Thus, Senator Coburn is not a nefarious traitor for attempting to push out a Senate budget. He wants to start to compromise on something that is between $3Tr and $6Tr less debt-laden than the laughable PresBud that Barack Obama submitted. What Coburn Ok’ed is what the simple, flat tax, which Grover Norquist’s organization claims to advocate on behalf of, looks like. Norquist, not Coburn looks dishonest when he changes the gravamen of his arguments.

Get Alerts

COMMENTS

  • Marcus_Traianus

    I’ll go with definition “number 2″ of “gang”. That includes the part about “engaging in delinquent behavior”.

    If Coburn can’t work within the confines of his own caucus and support the Ryan plan, then maybe he should hang it up.

    Nothing good ever came from one of these gangs.

    • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

      the Ryan Plan gets effectively pocket-vetoed. If other GOPers attach Ryan to Conrad’s budget resolution, Coburn can and should vote for it. The problem here is that the Senate sees no reason to want any other budget than the one that was passed in 2009. They have to be dragged by their necks into passing one at all. Until they do, no aspect of Ryan’s proposal has any chance of becoming law at all.

      • Diogenes314

        …in exchange for eliminating deductions the Senate RINOs have their Dem counterparts agreeing to cut tax rates.

        Okay, I forgot what the bad part was again.

        • http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

          The bad news is that Democrats do not feel bound by the deals they negotiate with the Republicans. Evidence includes Mr. Obama and the czars, Tip O’Neil and his promise to Reagan, etc…. Unless the deal is part of the same bill, the Democrats will fail to live up to their own bargain.

          Let us get the tax cuts first and then we can eliminate the deductions.

          • Diogenes314
          • http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

            I have now began to wonder if the Republicans are smart enough or bold enough to do both at the same time. In the past, they have been more than willing to take the Democrat’s word and then receive nothing in return.

          • Diogenes314

            Getting the Senate Dems to agree to tax cuts-they obviously don’t know what they’re doing.

          • http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

            I think it is wonderful if Coburn and company can get the Dems to agree on tax cuts. However, I would not trust the lying Dems further than I could kick them with my bad knee. They have lied to much to simply take their word for it.

            If Coburn can get the tax cuts into law along with the simplification of the tax code, then good for him. If he gives the Dems what they want without getting more than a promise on tax cuts, then he is a patsy.

            Trying reading the entire post before attempting to pick a fight. My whole point is not about Coburn but about the willingness of the Dems to lie through their teeth.

          • Diogenes314

            I have now began to wonder if the Republicans are smart enough or bold enough to do both at the same time. In the past, they have been more than willing to take the Democrat?s word and then receive nothing in return.

            Yes, Reagan got suckered. And he learned from his mistake the next time around. The point is that you seem to presume that neither Senators Coburn or Chambliss or Crapo have a basic knowledge of history or the nature of their colleagues. I think that in light of the type of progress they made, they could be given the benefit of the doubt at being minimally knowledgeable and intelligent.

            Of course, if your “take the Democrat?s word and then receive nothing in return” comment is a reference to the recent 2011 budget deal, that PC meme is patently false. But I have no interest in rehashing all of that-refer to the Karl Rove clip in the thread dedicated to his being ‘not very smart’.

          • http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

            While you continue to crow about how smart Coburn and the most recent bipartisan gang is at negotiating, the proof will be in the final bill. We will see if they have learned from the past or if they will continue to play the patsy. “Progress” is a fine thing but means nothing – absolutely nothing – if the final bill does not include tax cuts.

            As to the recent 2011 budget deal, no one can realistically play that off as a solid victory for the GOP. The actual deal came nowhere close to the rhetoric. The claims made by the GOP leadership about the deal border on the delusional.

          • Diogenes314

            And in the meantime they deserve the benefit of the doubt. Going on the presumption that the entire GOP Senate knows less about the Democratic party’s ideology and recent history than 99% of Red State is a tad condescending.

            And by condescending I mean stupid.

          • http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

            Why do the Republicans in the Senate deserve the benefit of the doubt? Is it the RINO leadership? The anti-Tea Party message and actions? Or the persistent inability to play hardball?

            Giving the GOP establishment the benefit of the doubt is what got us all in trouble in the first place. Did we not hear the same plea before the new drug benefit? The move for amnesty? The Harriet Miers nomination?

            Condescending, yes you bet I condescend to people who sell out their principles for votes. They work for me.

            As to stupid, you follow blindly along if you want to do so but I refuse to give the benefit of the doubt to a group that has continually abused my trust.

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            Democrats history, but the issue is that they are willing to overlook it and many Redstate posters aren’t.

          • Diogenes314

            You are basing this on the last time they were in power? There has been a pretty significant change in makeup since 2006 (14 seats lost followed by 6 gained if I recall), the uniformitarian presumption that this is the same old Senate is debatable and remains to be seen. And the effect of a POTUS who was dedicated to being too much of a uniter, not enough of a divider back then shouldn’t be minimized.

            Plus there is an exceptional situation at this point in time with 23 Democrats up for election and only 10 Republicans. There is a matter of leverage that most minority parties don’t have, especially since all but one of our races (Mass) is a relatively safe one.

            As far as the other poster claiming they are all anti-tea party RINOs-I guess his bias is clear. Personally I’m just willing to wait and see. Based on Coburn’s actions, words and track record, I will give him the benefit of the doubt.

            But to each his own.

          • http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

            Here is where you missed the point.

            In the last sentence of my first paragraph in Response #1, I say the exact same thing that you say in your first response to me.

            In the second post, I mention the final outcome. You respond by praising the agreement. But the agreement does not matter unless it is part of the final outcome.

            In the third post, I once again mention the need to turn an agreement into a final outcome. You again praise an agreement and talk of progress.

            Results man! We want results. Not talk of agreements that do not matter or progress. Show us the final product.

  • caboose

    simply does not have any credibility. He voted for that rino Simpsons debt, budget, whatever commission. That was enough said.

    • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

      You’re silly.

      Moe Lane

      PS: Actually, no, you aren’t going to get anything more meaningful as a response; and yes, I do get to be grandly indifferent to whether you like it or not. Just be grateful that you amuse me.

      • junkbondtrader41

        If we ever succeed in eliminating racism, we will no longer have a need for Jackson/Sharpton and the NAACP agitating for equality.

        If we ever succeeded in achieving real tax reform, we will no longer have a need for Norquist and the ATR as the “no tax increase” cops.

        Actually achieving Norquist’s stated goal disrupts a very well-feathered nest he’s made for himself within the movement. His interests are far better served in conjuring up “traitors” than solving the problem.

        I think the analogy is flawless!

  • erp617

    ‘nuf said.

  • Diogenes314

    Spending reductions, lower tax rates and eliminating deductions. The Senate Gang of RINOs plan on the other hand calls for spending reductions, eliminating deductions and lower tax rates.

    I can see where this will cause a problem.

    For the record, Norquist is a corrupt hypocrite and anyone who still buys his schtick is a blithering idiot. To put it politely.

    • Tavern Keeper

      President Reagan’s legacy to make a living, IMO. I can’t judge they guy’s heart but aside from the No Tax pledge (which I also kind of have some problems with . . . anyone can sign a pledge . . . I signed one to not drink in High School . . .) I don’t think his efforts have helped move the GOP right or gain any representation.

    • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

      until they were offered on a silver platter.

      • Tavern Keeper

        He would be out of a job, essentially.

        Sounds a little like a certain Reverend of note, doesn’t it?

        • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

          race baiting poverty pimps on the democrat side? If the problem is solved then they are out of a job.

          • junkbondtrader41

            Here I thought I made a clever reply to Moe with that exact point above, and find out I’ve been scooped :)

  • rightwingmom52

    My first inclination when I hear about any political “gang” that includes Republicans working with Democrats is to scream NO and try to keep my head from exploding. Then I calm down and try to find out what’s going on to see if I can make sense of it. Your diary clarified for me the fact that we have to work within the confines of what is (i.e., # of GOP senators & congressional rules, etc.). While I appreciate our side’s impulse to cringe at “bipartisanship” having been burned too many times before, we must do a better job of educating our voters. I simply do not understand why the politicians on our side can’t seem to do that. Coburn could call a press conference and just read your diary (or at least parts of it) and a lot more people would get it.

    • runner12

      I was very wary of the “Gang of Six” on this issue and to a certain extent I still am. However, if Coburn ( who is my Senator, by the way ), is only agreeing to eliminate frivolous tax deductions and standing firm on not raising tax rates, I am not sure what the problem is.

      Thanks for an informative article RMJ.

  • Tavern Keeper

    BTW. I’ll try to work that in a Words with Friends game.

  • http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

    Eliminating deductions will be hard as the establishment uses such deductions, and the entire tax code, as a means to control social behavior. A flat tax or a more simplified tax code would be more efficient and bring in more revenue but the goal is not just more revenue.

    • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

      the income tax amendment.

      It is a long fight, but who knows? Anything looks possible when our economy finally flames out.

    • acat

      I have a very hard time labeling anything that gives the government the power to coerce citizens to behave a given way as “conservative”…

      Mew

      • http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

        Everyone talks of destroying the ring until it falls within their power to use it. Then the temptation to use it for good is so great that only the most noble can withstand it. They resist because they realize that the power will corrupt even the noblest of causes.

        On another note, did you just call me a kestrel?

        • acat

          I did call you Kestrel, who is a completely separate person.

          I agree entirely regarding the tax code. It is one of the most corrupting parts of D.C. – tempting otherwise perfectly decent republicans (and the odd decent dem) to act in the best interest of government instead of the citizens.

          Erick’s piece today on the other bias in the media highlights the same problem from a different angle.

          Mew

  • Pingback: read more