Death Taxes and Tea Parties
It will come as no surprise to my Ricochet friends that I'm, occasionally, a RINO Squish. Our own Mark Steyn has called me that to my face, followed by a sad shake of the head and a sigh that says, What's wrong with him?
Further, it's no surprise that in the great Mike Murphy v. Many Members of Ricochet debates, I've been persuaded, mostly, to be on the soggy old conventional side that thinks that a sure thing -- even a RINO sure thing -- is better than a candidate with, um, issues.
But let's not litigate that stuff all over again. I post now because I'm starting to see the point behind the anger and the fervent cries of No Compromise!
Here's why:
Apparently, the Senate Republicans are already compromising on death taxes. From Phil Kerpen over at NRO:
On taxes, Republicans have held to the strongest position politically and economically: no hikes on anyone while the economy remains fragile. They have correctly argued that major tax hikes on capital investment and small-business income would depress the business activity and job creation that our economy needs. It’s a significant mistake, therefore, that the Senate Republicans’ tax proposal fails to extend all of the current tax rates.
Specifically, their proposal, which establishes their opening position for negotiations, allows one of the most hated taxes of all, the federal death (or “estate”) tax — which, under the phase-out plan put in place by the 2001 tax cuts, finally reached zero this year after 92 years — to return next year at a 35 percent rate for assets above $5 million. That’s better than the 55 percent rate preferred by Democrats on assets above $1 million, which will automatically return next year under current law, but it’s a far cry from a full repeal.
He titles his post GOP to Roll Over on Death Taxes. And he's right. It does seem like a rollover. And oddly timed, too, because however you read the polls, the GOP will have a stronger and more influential hand come November. The Death Tax punishes hard work, simple as that. The GOP should be against it, simple as that. As Kerpen sums up:
The death tax punishes virtue and rewards vice. It tells older Americans: “You can’t take it with you, and you can’t leave it to your kids.” So it discourages the traditional American virtues of hard work and thrift, savings, and investment, while it encourages lavish, reckless consumption.
The bottom line is that the death tax is wrong. Advocates of economic freedom shouldn’t be afraid to say so and fight for full repeal.
So why the drive to compromise? Maybe those O'Donnell supporters have a point.
- Comment (14)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments :
Sep '10
Re: Death Taxes and Tea Parties
There is no Mark Steyn there is only Claire. Raymond Shaw, I mean Claire Berlinski, is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.
May '10
Re: Death Taxes and Tea Parties
It takes a big man to admit when he's wrong, Rob. I'm currently giving you a standing ovation. ;-)
Jul '10
Re: Death Taxes and Tea Parties
Maybe, Rob. Maybe.
Jun '10
Re: Death Taxes and Tea Parties
You can be a conservative in good standing without getting into the social issues, but you can't be a real conservative unless you believe that today's government, especially the federal government, is way too big and spends way too much money. And it matters little whether the bloat is "paid for." If I weigh 600 lbs, it doesn't matter if I paid cash for the food, or put it on my credit card. At 600 lbs, I'm going to be a continuing burden on someone. As Dennis Prager says, "the bigger the government, the smaller the citizen." Meaning, those decisions that you turn over to the government, you never get back.
Re: Death Taxes and Tea Parties
Well, thanks Felicia. But I'm still on the squishy fence about the specifics of the Delaware race. But I do understand the impatience with the GOP leadership. I mean, really -- if you can't line up for a repeal of the death tax, what good are you?
May '10
Re: Death Taxes and Tea Parties
I think Long just had an epiphany. Perhaps there is hope for him.
When that Arlen Specter poster comes off the bedroom wall we'll know for sure.
May '10
Re: Death Taxes and Tea Parties
It more than a "roll over", its a lousy negotiating stance. Why open with a compromised position? This makes no sense a dozen ways.
Kerpin doesn't tell us what the Senate GOP rationale is for such a proposal. Have they any? Is there some massive quid pro quo demanded of the majority? What terrible pressure are they under that they need to start backing down? Are they so hawkish on the deficit that they are now willing to raise taxes?
All teasing about RINO proclivities aside, this is really about bloody stupid gameplay. One common complaint against term-limits, and support for long-term incumbents, is that they have such wonderful experience in the legislative power struggle. If so, where is it?
Re: Death Taxes and Tea Parties
Rob, I've been squishy, too, because let's face it, some of the non-RINO candidates, well they give me the willies. But looking back at when the GOP ruled Congress, spending only got worse. It was compromise, compromise, compromise. So what's the point in electing RINOS. If Congress is going to run our economy into the ground, I don't want it to be a bi-partisan effort. I want to blame the other guys.
And G.A. Dean, you're so right. What a stupid opening bid. And the experience of which you speak? It's in compromising principles.
Jul '10
Re: Death Taxes and Tea Parties
From the standpoint of negotiation, they’ve begun with only themselves at the table.
Negotiation is the same as selling - and what you're selling is a justification for your position. So let’s see them try selling this one!
First rule in negotiation: Always come to the table from a position of strength. They broke this one at the starting gate.
Second: Establishing a back-off position prior to the start of the negotiation always leaves you (usually way) south of that mark when in fact your original position was sound and worth defending – and winnable if done creatively. Here, they started with a compromise which is already south of that mark.
As an old international negotiator I cringe as I read the latest “compromise,” watching them break one rule after another. Sure, it’s politics. But that doesn’t mean the rules of that game are suspended at the door. And it is a game – chess comes to mind. They’ve got to start thinking better strategy.
(BTW International experience may look great on a resume. Better still, at the end of the day one can sit at the bar and lie with the best of them.)
Jul '10
Re: Death Taxes and Tea Parties
This is exactly why RINOs are dangerous. A RINO will view Estate Taxes as a technical issue (in good faith, by the way). They are a negotiating point.
To a well grounded conservative, it is a profound moral point. The deceased has already paid taxes on that income. To allow the government to take it away again at death is to invade - to pillage - the family's honestly earned property. That is wrong. Just wrong.
To be pulled away from that position by cruel necessity is one thing. To toss it overboard as a starting concesion in unconscionable.
Aug '10
Re: Death Taxes and Tea Parties
And that same sense of "wrongness" must ramify through all of one's positions, and that is why etoiledunord is missing the high mark here:
The question for you, etoiledunord, is how much restoration of health in this national "patient" do you chose to aim for? Shoot for the best unless you are truly faced with a patient reliably diagnosed as in the end-of-life stage. What you (dismissively?) call "social issues," are really economic issues writ large. Ignoring those issues--or chosing wrongly--is gonna bite you, no, it's going to bite us all! Mr. Long's thread is probably not the place to deal with this point at length--I have a mental post-it note to look forward to an enjoyable exchange on this down the road.
May '10
Re: Death Taxes and Tea Parties
Howard Johnson is right! If, by Howard Johnson, you mean GA Dean. As Dame Peggy wrote, we should at least compromise at the 18-inch mark on the yardstick. Rather than opening with an offer of 18, compromising at 24, and claiming it could've been worse. Yeesh. Apparently these guys didn't get the memo.
Hey Rob, any youtube clips of Red Eye to share for those of us in the Real America? They've been really slacking on getting those things up for about the past month. Used to be up within a couple of days, and now you're lucky if they post every couple of weeks. I blame heroin.
Jul '10
Re: Death Taxes and Tea Parties
There is a profundity I've always held to be the problem with RINO's.
.
Your Enemy Can NEVER Betray You.
.
Only a friend or ally holds your trust, and therefore only they can betray you.
.
The Republicans had better understand this. Thus far, they have engaged in two betrayals in the last week alone. First they have rewarded Write Me In Murkowski with maintenance of her position, and now they are rolling over on a critical point of taxation.
Do they really want to deflate the enthusiasm advantage they have going into November?
I think I have a new slogan for the Tea Parties;
“God save me from my friends - I can protect myself from my enemies.”
Jul '10
Re: Death Taxes and Tea Parties
One more applicable point on negotiation. Years ago I ran across an article written by a Japanese gentleman who was describing American negotiators. One of the points he made I always used when teaching the subject – and would also press home to my negotiating team prior to any discussions at the table.
Said he, "It's very impolite to begin any serious negotiations with Americans until all of their back-off positions have been revealed."
Unfortunately, too often as a way of appearing to the general public as willing to compromise (bah!), bits of strategy are “leaked” to the media. Yep, revealing back-off positions before they’re even at the table. Way to go, RINOs!
Anyone know how to get a memo to them? Because, like it or not, they will have committee seniority regardless of who is elected this fall.