Norquist hearts McCain.
By on Mar 21st, 2008 at 1:00 pm
Norquist hearts McCain.
In 2005, anti-tax crusader Grover Norquist said John McCain was a “tax-increasing Bolshevik.” Now Grover is singing a different tune, lauding McCain for having embraced the Americans for Tax Reform’s “entire agenda.” A new report analyzing McCain’s tax plan shows why Norquist is so happy: McCain would double the Bush tax cuts. Read more at the TP Wonk Room.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
I want these endorsements to keep piling. McCain’s candidacy is on schedule to drown in the bathtub. And look, it’s dragging itself there.
March 21st, 2008 at 1:06 pmOh my, the super uber rich corporate fascists are just gonna love McSame, or is that McBushonsteriods?
Bush/Cheney
March 21st, 2008 at 1:06 pmHague Trials ‘09
The next president should check for any suspicious swiss bank accounts under the name “Nazi”. Likely, it will turn out to be Norquist.
March 21st, 2008 at 1:08 pmThat’s the problem with Amurca, it’s not deep enough in debt.
March 21st, 2008 at 1:08 pmAh hell, Grover just loves him because McCain flopped over this morning and gave him a big sloppy kiss — on his “no tax” ass.
March 21st, 2008 at 1:09 pmOh marvelous. A vote for McCain is a vote for four more years of a wildly hemorrhaging budget. I find it absolutely remarkable that there are so many Americans who think that tax cuts are just great, that lots of spending on war is just great, and still think this will add up to a balanced budget somehow.
March 21st, 2008 at 1:09 pmmissmolly,
those americans you speak of think that at somepoint the debt counter will roll over to zero, like the odometer on your car.
March 21st, 2008 at 1:13 pmOne influential Bush critic — this one a Republican — appeared ready to vote against another Bush tax-cut plan. “It is middle-income Americans that have kept our economy afloat by buying houses and automobiles,” said Sen. John McCain of Arizona on MSNBC’s “Hardball.” “I believe that they deserve the majority of the break, not the higher-income level of Americans.” Salon
Flip
March 21st, 2008 at 1:14 pmFlop
Good quote, Zooey!
March 21st, 2008 at 1:24 pmDo you folks know about the fair tax.
March 21st, 2008 at 1:29 pmWonder why companies go outside the use. Maybe high taxes.
March 21st, 2008 at 1:35 pmThe inherently UNFAIR tax? Yeah, I know about it.
Wrong, VA Voter, corporations go outside this country because of PROFIT.
March 21st, 2008 at 1:39 pmThe inherently UNFAIR tax? Yeah, I know about it.
Wrong, VA Voter, corporations go outside this country because of PROFIT.
Recommend (0) | Report Abuse
How is it “unfair?” And Yes, if you don’t have to pay high taxes in another country, move. Why now lower the rate and see about making it provitable to stay in the US?
March 21st, 2008 at 1:44 pmVA Voter Says:
March 21st, 2008 at 1:35 pm
Wonder why companies go outside the use. Maybe high taxes.
Is this a guessing game? Because the answer is: low wages.
Why stay in the US and pay people a living wage when you can move to a Third World country and pay them pennies?
March 21st, 2008 at 1:46 pmVA Voter wants the USA to become a third-world, starving, backwards country, like VA already is. then she’ll feel comfortable, instead of screwed.
March 21st, 2008 at 1:53 pmVA Voter Says:
March 21st, 2008 at 1:44 pm
How is it “unfair?” And Yes, if you don’t have to pay high taxes in another country, move. Why now lower the rate and see about making it provitable to stay in the US?
You’re pushing this thing, and haven’t researched it’s downfalls? Jeebus…
Here’s one: Corporations — they’re not taxed fairly now, and they’ll be even less fairly taxed under your fantasy system.
You go find another one!
March 21st, 2008 at 1:57 pmUnspinning the “fair tax”.
March 21st, 2008 at 1:58 pmThanks, gummitch. I’ve been looking for something like that!
March 21st, 2008 at 2:06 pmGrover’s only worry might be the evidence in the 750,000 Abramoff documents collected by the Senate’s Indian Affairs Committee.
Grover (and most Republicans in Washington) would be in trouble if those files were ever released, but they can sleep well because John McCain has made sure they won’t ever be released.
Sen. McCain is Surpressing the 750,000 pages of Abramoff’s documents. I’m not at all surprised that Grover Norquist has changed his opinion of Sen. McCain.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/2/23/03912/3990/390/462347
March 21st, 2008 at 2:25 pmAs the US was built by the Middle Class of both parties I guess Republicans who aren’t in the 2 per cent Rich group don’t mine losing their jobs and homes as they vote for McCain. Norquist should have been in jail years ago but like the White House he is still stealing and committing crimes. As Karl Rove brings out the racism and hate it will truly be an interesting election.
March 21st, 2008 at 2:41 pmI’ve asked this before.I’ve asked this before. What’s wrong with bring home my entire paycheck, Not paying any more for goods and services, and still fully funding the government? Why do you folks love the insanely complicated tax system? Why punish people for being successful? Why punish employers for having people work for them?
March 21st, 2008 at 2:47 pmWhy do you folks love the insanely complicated tax system?
The pages of tax code have just about Doubled since Bush took office. For most folks, the tax code is not complicated. Working people get taxes taken out of their paychecks, and get a refund in April.
March 21st, 2008 at 3:08 pmWhat IS COMPLICATED is the mountain of DEDUCTIONS, LOOPHOLES, and TAX BREAKS put in the code by congress to reward their constituents.
Passing the fair tax gets rid of the loopholes and tax breaks.
March 21st, 2008 at 3:14 pmVA Voter Says:
March 21st, 2008 at 2:47 pm
I’ve asked this before. What’s wrong with bring home my entire paycheck, Not paying any more for goods and services, and still fully funding the government?
_______________________________________
You’re right, you’ve asked this before. But it’s a question like “why is the moon made of green cheese?” — it presumes something not generally believed to be true, making the question impossible to answer until the presumtion is changed.
Perhaps if you can explain the part about “not paying any more for goods and services” when the whole point of the tax is to ramp up sales tax while doing away with the graduated income tax, your question can be answered.
Oh — and while you’re at it, you might also explain how the “still fully funding the government” will come to be when the models used to determine what the sales tax rate will have to be to reach current revenue levels will assume today’s level of consumer spending, and once the tax is applied, consumer spending will drop.
March 21st, 2008 at 3:16 pmPassing the fair tax would result in a huge transfer of wealth from the poor and working classes to the well off.
Fix that, and I’ll consider a National Sales Tax.
March 21st, 2008 at 3:16 pmBadger Says:
March 21st, 2008 at 3:08 pm
Working people get taxes taken out of their paychecks, and get a refund in April.
________
Under the fair tax you get your entire paycheck. So instead of giving the government an interest free loan, you would be able to use the money you earned as you see fit. You can save it. Spend it. Spread it on your bed and roll around in it.
March 21st, 2008 at 3:20 pmBadger Says:
March 21st, 2008 at 3:16 pm
Passing the fair tax would result in a huge transfer of wealth from the poor and working classes to the well off.
Fix that, and I’ll consider a National Sales Tax.
________
Nothing to fix. Under the fair tax, the working class takes home the money the government used takes from them. They don’t pay any more for goods and services. And with the prebate the poor are covered for essential items.
March 21st, 2008 at 3:26 pmmissmolly Says:
March 21st, 2008 at 3:16 pm
Perhaps if you can explain the part about “not paying any more for goods and services” when the whole point of the tax is to ramp up sales tax while doing away with the graduated income tax, your question can be answered.
________
The end price of any consumer good already has embedded taxes included. The corporate taxes, employment taxes, and whatever else is taxed to make, transport, and market the goods. Now by removing all of those taxes the end cost of the idem drops. And replaced on the back end.
March 21st, 2008 at 3:31 pmVA Voter –
Keep reading #24 over and over again.
While you’re generally on-topic, you’ve irrelevantly raised these questions in previous threads, and they were debunked. And while it’s very sweet for you to care about the enriching the richness of the rich, may I ask you to please stop clogging the threads?
There’s no chance in hell of passing the fair tax, even if, by some off-chance, Barack Obama started endorsing it. It’s a volitale revenue model and people need services and protections provided to them guaranteed.
In addition to all of the above, software makes it fun to file a tax return, and it’s produced many good jobs in the accounting industry (i.e., Sarbanes-Oxley).
March 21st, 2008 at 3:32 pmIn fact, I’m thinking about majoring in either Accounting or Computer Engineering.
March 21st, 2008 at 3:35 pmVA Voter Says:
March 21st, 2008 at 3:26 pm
Nothing to fix. Under the fair tax, the working class takes home the money the government used takes from them. They don’t pay any more for goods and services. And with the prebate the poor are covered for essential items.
_____________________________________________
Um…you still haven’t explained how a national sales tax means that we “don’t pay any more for goods and services.”
Even if you follow the Neal Boortz philosophy that about 22% of an item for sale is hidden taxes (corporate taxes, employer social security taxes, etc.), and assume that the cost of goods and services will go down 22% because of the absence of these taxes, you have to understand that the Fair Tax has to come up with a revenue dollar for every one it takes away. Models have shown that just to make up for the lost personal income tax, the sales tax would have to be 30% to 34%. Add to that the 22% in corporate hidden taxes that have vanished — the Fair Tax will have to make up for that, too. Now, add to that the cost of the prebate program — that will cost many billions of dollars and will have to be made up in taxes. Yes, manufacturers and retailers can afford to drop the price of their wares, but the sales tax will more than offset that.
March 21st, 2008 at 3:38 pmmissmolly Says:
March 21st, 2008 at 3:16 pm
Oh — and while you’re at it, you might also explain how the “still fully funding the government” will come to be when the models used to determine what the sales tax rate will have to be to reach current revenue levels will assume today’s level of consumer spending, and once the tax is applied, consumer spending will drop.
_______________________
Why do you assume consumer spending will drop after people bring home more money?
March 21st, 2008 at 3:41 pmFrom jerome a paris’s diary
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/3/15/85833/3545/803/477181
“IN the Bush economy, growth happened, but did not trickle down to the middle classes, let alone the poor. Thanks to wage stagnation, made possible by the threats of outsourcing and offshorisation, and by the demonisation, emasculation or dismantlement of regulations and institutions (like unions) protecting workers, the fruits of growth have been captured by a very few – and this has been hidden because consumption was propped up by readily available debt and the apparently growing virtual wealth of homeowners.”
With the rapid rise in prices for the things that families NEED, there will be less saving, more spending, and very little rolling around on the bed with money.
March 21st, 2008 at 3:43 pmVA Voter Says:
March 21st, 2008 at 3:41 pm
Why do you assume consumer spending will drop after people bring home more money?
________________________________
Simple. For people who are on fixed incomes, low incomes, or in other situations where they currently pay little or no taxes, they won’t be seeing that much more money. Oh, the prebate will help them buy essentials, but their disposable income won’t go as far. As they buy less, the drop in consumer spending will result in less tax revenue, which will cause tax hikes to maintain revenue. And more tax hikes will just intensify the problem, leading to a vicious circle.
Looking at the other end of the spectrum, the rich will be bringing home a LOT more money, but it’s doubtful that their spending will rise by a similar amount. They’ll spend what they need to in order to make their lives comfortable, but the rest will go into bank accounts or investments.
And another big factor is that a whopping sales tax will create one heck of a black market in goods and services, bypassing the tax system completely and causing yet another drop in above-board consumer spending.
March 21st, 2008 at 3:53 pmAgain, you are just assuming people will stop spending.
March 21st, 2008 at 4:21 pmVA Voter,
March 21st, 2008 at 4:59 pmHow ya been? I haven’t seen you around with that tiresome fair tax stuff for a while. I have asked before and not gotten much responce. In your opinion if this is such a fine idea, why do you think it never goes anywhere? Thanks
What the hell kind of parent names their kid Grover?
March 21st, 2008 at 5:13 pmWhen it comes to the Bush deficit taxcuts, John Sydney McCain III was against them before he was for them!
If he lets Willard Romney run as his Veep we can have double Bush deficit taxcuts plus double Gitmo!
That’s doubleplus good!
March 21st, 2008 at 5:42 pmdbadass Says:
March 21st, 2008 at 4:59 pm
VA Voter,
How ya been? I haven’t seen you around with that tiresome fair tax stuff for a while. I have asked before and not gotten much responce. In your opinion if this is such a fine idea, why do you think it never goes anywhere? Thanks
_________________________
The fair tax takes power away from the federal government. Politicians don’t like having less power.
March 21st, 2008 at 5:43 pmVA Voter Says:
March 21st, 2008 at 4:21 pm
Again, you are just assuming people will stop spending.
__________________________________________
Yeah. I remember the ill-conceived “luxury tax” on boats, furs, and expensive cars. Just about killed the yacht industry.
When items are more expensive, people will think twice before spending money on them. For those people who are taking home a paycheck that’s bigger percentage-wise than the amount of increase in the sales tax, they will continue spending at the rate they had been, or maybe even a bit more. However, those people whose increase in paycheck is less than the increase in taxed goods, they will spend less.
March 21st, 2008 at 6:20 pmVA Voter Says:
March 21st, 2008 at 5:43 pm
The fair tax takes power away from the federal government. Politicians don’t like having less power.
__________________________________________
I agree with you that politicians don’t like having less power (which is why earmarks will probably always be a way of life for lawmakers), but your assertion that the Fair Tax would take power away from the federal government doesn’t make sense. How does a federal sales tax result in less power than a federal income tax? I would think this would give the federal government a grip on commerce in this country like never before.
March 21st, 2008 at 6:24 pmVA Voter Says:
March 21st, 2008 at 4:21 pm
Again, you are just assuming people will stop spending.
Short response: Consumers would have to spend more for less.
Long response: Reread all of Miss Molly’s posts. Your one-line simple responses are designed to frustrate those who take the time to explain the intricacies to you.
Poor and middle class people have enough on their shoulders. The rich have it good enough.
March 21st, 2008 at 6:29 pmNorquist, the modern-day paleface ripping off the Indians in Mississippi to help his pal Abe Jackamoff, who funneled thousands to the GOP.
March 21st, 2008 at 6:32 pmNorquist compared progressive taxation to the Nazis persecution of Jews. Something about singling one group out for special treatment.
The beast that grew out of control is the Pentagon and he doesn’t have a problem with that.
Grover Norquist grew up in privilege, so he has little understanding for the little guy. He sneers at compassionate conservatism. In Norquist World, you’re on your own, sucka.
The fair tax takes power away from the federal government. Politicians don’t like having less power.
We don’t need a smaller government, with the exception of the oversized pig, being the oversized DoD. What we need is to pull the existing Government out of the murky water and make it more cost efficient.
And that takes competence in a new administration, not drowning anything in the bathtub.
March 21st, 2008 at 6:38 pmDoes anyone think VA Voter realizes Miss Molly whupped his ass?
Nahh, me neither.
March 21st, 2008 at 9:10 pmNot more Nat’l Sales Tax folderol. It’s been shown that a sales tax above ~14% in constant currency units makes black markets worth the risk, thus reducing revenue. Underground economies also destroy social cohesiveness. That should be end of discussion.
Even a brief reading of economics basics will show you that no less an icon than Adam Smith was a staunch proponent of progressive taxation of income. The benefits of a stable and endowed society accrue proportionately with wealth. He was also a critic of inherited wealth. I guess that makes him a Commie.
The problems with America’s tax system include the dearth of brackets at the high end, favored treatment spurring investment decisions, and a lack of tariffs protecting global environs and workers’ rights to collectively bargain. Strange I hear so little re these.
If one is going to advocate for the elimination of corporate income taxes, one must ensure that every Joe doesn’t form himself a corporation, that no corporation is allowed respite from property tax (or other local taxes and fees), and that no government contract may go to a corporation using non-U.S. manufacturing, labor and/or services (nearly impossible today).
Income is income. No preferential treatment for inheritance, dividends, capital gains, churches, whatever. No deductions for anything. Infinite sliding brackets (why should 400K be taxed at the same rate as 400M?). Do these and then maybe we can talk about the corp income tax, which is indeed a hidden sales tax; but remember, its actually a global sales tax for the bigger players, not a national one.
BTW, I realize this will put a lot of tax lawyers out of business, but maybe 1% might advocate for ending one of our great evils – tossing people in prison, and tattooing them forever as pariahs, merely for choosing an unapproved method of altering consciousness.
March 22nd, 2008 at 1:39 pm