Widgetized Section
Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone
Does The Norquist Tax Pledge Only Apply To The 1%?
According to Grover Norquist and his pledge, once taxes are cut they can never be raised, right? Raising them to previous levels constitute as raising taxes, even closing loopholes, eliminating deductions and carve outs are considered tax increases. That is the reason the super committee failed to compromise and that is why President Obama’s jobs bill is not gaining traction.
Yet these same Republicans who have signed this pledge are willing to allow the payroll tax cut to expire and raise taxes on millions of middle class people by the end of the year. Is this an indication that the Grover Norquist pledge is only applicable to the 1%? Is it that the tax pledge is only geared to the income tax? There seems to be an ambiguous loophole in the tax pledge, don’t you think?
Economists have stated that allowing the payroll tax cut to expire could cost the United States economy up to 400K jobs. This is, first and foremost, proof that customers are the job creators, not the bankers or the elite wealthy 1%. Second this proves that the Republicans are not at all concerned about raising taxes on people, as long as it’s not on the wealthy.
Senator Kyl has stated that the difference is that the payroll tax cut puts pressure on the social security program. On this point he is right, yet he and many Republicans would also object to raising the cap on social security contributions which is currently at 106K.
Raising the cap, so a millionaire is contributing the same percentage of his income as someone in the middle class would make social security solvent for many year into the future. Unfortunately, this is considered a tax hike, once again, because it raises taxes on the wealthy.
At least the GOP is showing their true colors regarding whose side they are on. Unfortunately, it is not on your side, if you are a small business owner or an employee working for a department store.
Image: The Voice Reporter
Related Posts :
There are few human traits that are as despicable as hypocrisy, and very few groups as guilty of practic ...
President Obama has so convincingly won the message war on taxes that according to new Bloomberg poll, n ...
A solemn promise or agreement to do or refrain from doing something that is a formally affirmed statemen ...
With his power evaporating, Grover Norquist responded to the White House's fiscal cliff hardball by thro ...
The act of singling out any individual, or party, for unmerited negative treatment or blame is scapegoat ...
17 Responses to Does The Norquist Tax Pledge Only Apply To The 1%?
Public Service Advertisements
Sean Russell
Dec. 1st, 2011 at 1:15 pm
Duh, of course it only applies to the 1%. They are all that matter. The rest of us are supposed to be thankful they let us live in their country. And we get to pay for it all too.
DogFennel
Dec. 1st, 2011 at 1:25 pm
Grover Norquist and Americans for Tax Reform extract a pledge from conservative members of Congress not to vote for any kind of tax increase on penalty of having that fact publicized to conservative members of the electorate for the purpose of impairing the lawmakers’ chances of reelection. It is amazing to me that members of Congress have allowed themselves to be subjected to such intimidation and outright blackmail for all these years. It is time for it to stop. Members of Congress have to be free to vote their consciences.
Sec. 22-3252 of the D.C. criminal code has an expansive description of the crime of blackmail that reads as follows:
Section 22-3252 Blackmail
(a) A person commits the offense of blackmail, if, with intent to obtain property of another or to cause another to do or refrain from doing any act, that person threatens:
(1) To accuse any person of a crime;
(2) To expose a secret or publicize an asserted fact, whether true or false, tending to subject any person to hatred, contempt, or ridicule; or
(3) To impair the reputation of any person, including a deceased person.
(b) Any person convicted of blackmail shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both.
I say “expansive” because most blackmail statutes only deal with threats that are coupled with demands for money or other property. This one is different because it adds threats made with the intent “to cause another to do or refrain from doing any act.” Moreover, the types of threats proscribed by paragraphs (a) (2) and (3), i.e., threatening to “publicize an asserted fact, whether true or false, tending to subject any person to hatred, contempt, or ridicule” or threatening “impair the reputation of any person,” are precisely the kinds of threats Norquist is making against Republicans in the House and Senate with regard to their conservative constituents.
Consider how many Senators and Representatives have signed the pledge and/or have felt threatened by Norquist’s threat to publicize the names of everyone who declines to sign it. That adds up to a lot of counts (and a large amount of potential fines and jail time), even if a short statute of limitations applies.
The beauty of seeking to prosecute Norquist and his organization for blackmailing Congress is that it does not require Congress to do anything. All that it needed is for a member of Congress (perhaps Sen. Tom Coburn and/or retiring Rep. Barney Frank?) to sign an accusation against Norquist and Americans for Tax Reform or for the D.C. D.A., to get a grand jury to indict him and his organization.
SinghX
Dec. 1st, 2011 at 3:29 pm
Bravo, my friend! Have you sent this piece to Rep Franks or Sen. Coburn (I know he was really hot under the collar about this…)?
DogFennel
Dec. 1st, 2011 at 8:58 pm
Thanks. Rep. Frank doesn’t accept email from out of state citizens. I don’t do snail mail. I don’t know about Coburn. It would carry more weight if people from Massachusetts and Oklahoma forwarded it to them.
CM
Dec. 2nd, 2011 at 1:09 pm
You can get around this my ‘faking’ your address.
Dan the Man
Dec. 2nd, 2011 at 1:21 am
I forwarded the comment to rep. Frank for you, I’m in his district.
Melanmoney
Dec. 2nd, 2011 at 4:39 am
Thank you!!!
Barbara Whipple
Dec. 6th, 2011 at 6:16 pm
Are we ever going to get such a brave congressman (or woman) to actually blow the whistle?
Reynardine
Dec. 1st, 2011 at 1:52 pm
If a pledge to Grover Norquist is paramount over a legislator’s pledge to fulfill his duties to the nation, then Grover Norquist is a foreign sovereign, to whom these legislators owe their primary allegiance. The case could be made that they have divested themselves of U. S. citizenship by so doing, and therefore of their qualifications to hold office.
Shiva (Moderator)
Dec. 1st, 2011 at 5:33 pm
Several Repugnats today said they were not married to the pledge and were on the road to denouncing it. That is all it would take for the entire thing to fall. A few good men.
The news didn’t mention names that I stayed and heard so I don’t know who they are. But I think the thing is going to crack within months
Glen
Dec. 1st, 2011 at 11:35 pm
I’d personally truly recommend you to publish more often.
John P
Dec. 2nd, 2011 at 5:14 pm
“This is, first and foremost, proof that customers are the job creators, not the bankers or the elite wealthy 1%.”
Precisely! The idea that “the wealthy are job creators” is one part of Republican rhetoric that needs to be refuted right away. Having money does not create jobs. Spending money does. As a percentage of income, the less you make, the more you spend. So distributing any funding among the bottom of the income scale will do much more for job creation than at the top.
Kelly Stevens
Dec. 2nd, 2011 at 9:37 pm
Money trickles. It is a myth that it only trickles downward. Twenty years ago the wealthy did create jobs according to the traditional model but today they create Chinese jobs. Giving money to workers in the small amounts generated weekly by a tax cut goes immediately into the local economy with a larger percentage spent on staples largely made or grown in the US.
Shane
Dec. 2nd, 2011 at 6:38 pm
I have never seen so many great points in a comment section in my life. Especially with calls to action. Seriously. Thank you all for posting! I would love to see Norquist get some sort of a check to his power and influence. Did anyone watch the 60 minutes interview on him? That man has one of the largest ego’s I’ve ever seen. He could care less that his “pledge” is doing more harm to this country than good. It’s all about the bottom line to this man… his, and his very rich donors.
sam
Dec. 7th, 2011 at 11:13 am
Norquist is the real Sovereign not the American people. Shame to the puppet GOP politicians who chose to kiss the ring of this 1% bulldog and ignore the hard voices of their electorate.
Citizen kaye
Dec. 8th, 2011 at 10:56 pm
Both Eric Cantor and Norquist have attempted to wrap the pledge as a pledge to their constituents, not to Grover Norquist. That’s quite a stretch. However, it’s a fact the pledge is a pre-requisite for congressmen to get financial and political support from Norquist and his afilliates. John Boehner stating that Grover Norquist is just some “random person” is also a hoot.
The Norquist Pledge supercedes Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution which states that Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes … to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States. The signers of the TPP have in effect pledged to abandon their fiduciary responsibility to the Federal Government, and in doing so have guaranteed insufficient funds to pay the nation’s bills, thus endangering the American people and our nation’s economic stability. I however am a genuine “random person” (not a lobbyist or party member) who created a Reaffirmation Pledge to the Constitution that would clarify Norquist’s signers allegiance to the Constitution “to lay taxes to pay the debts.” So far, no Congressmen have signed my pledge. Perhaps I’m too random of a person.
rocknetroots.blogspot.com...
Julie
Dec. 13th, 2011 at 5:32 pm
All who signed this Grover Norquist pledge over the past 14 years should be charged with treason!