Monday, April 30, 2007
Posted by:
John Campbell
at
6:41 PM
One of the first tasks the new chairman of the Ways & Means Committee, Charlie Rangel, has stated he will undertake this Congress is to reform the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT). The tax originated in 1969 to make sure a few hundred taxpayers with high incomes were not able to avoid income taxes through aggressive use of tax deductions. Thirty-eight years later, the tax is now targeting over 25 million taxpayers and it's growing. I find Chairman Rangel's interest and sudden desire to fix the AMT to be quite ironic, especially since for the past 15 years, he and his Democratic colleagues have either been supporting policies that expand the AMT's reach or been obstructing Republican efforts to eliminate it. Just take a look below at their historical record on the matter: -
In 1993, the last time the Democrat's controlled the House, Senate, and Presidency, they raised the AMT rate from 24 percent to a dual rate structure of 26 and 28 percent, and on top of that, they failed to index the increases for inflation. As a result, 30 of the expected 31 million taxpayers (97 percent) will be forced to pay the AMT by 2016 because of the Dem's decision not to index the increase for inflation. -
In 1999, under Republican control, Congress passed a bill to implement a phased repeal of the AMT by this year. It would have proactively ended the problems we are now experiencing. The measure, however, was met with zero support from Senate Democrat's, and a veto pen from President Clinton. If Clinton had not vetoed it, the AMT would be a non-issue today, eradicated for good. Instead, we stand here today looking down the barrel of this problem. So what are Charlie Rangel and the Democrat's proposing? In essence, they want to adopt a "steal from Peter to pay Paul" concept that still violates the original intent of the AMT -- keep a select few taxpayers from avoiding income taxes. Stephen Moore wrote a insightful column in the Wall Street Journal this morning, discussing the details of the Rangel plan. Also, a report released by the Senate Republican Policy Committee does a good job of laying out the general issues at stake.
Thursday, April 26, 2007
Posted by:
John Campbell
at
3:30 PM
I was amused as well as shocked today after reading an article in the San Francisco Chroncile. It reported that Rep. Sam Farr (D-CA) is fuming that his $25 million pork request for spinach growers hurt by last years E. Coli outbreak was removed by the Senate during negotiations on the emergency war spending bill. He was quoted as saying "The sadness is the Senate didn't have the fortitude to stand up for what the House saw as damn good public policy in an emergency.'' Good Policy? With all due respect to my colleague from California, it is not the fault of the American taxpayer that some spinach got contaminated and the growers of this crop ended up losing money. If my colleague was handing out his own money I would say do with it as you wish, best of luck -- but he's not -- this is the peoples money. With that solemn duty comes a responsibility to spend revenue appropriately and prudently. Following the logic of Rep. Farr's argument, means that anytime a business loses money for some unforeseen reason the government then has the responsibility and businesses have the right to expect that they get some form of assistance or handout. Totally untenable, unreasonable, and unfair to the taxpayer. What's more, the emergency war funding bill is supposed to be just that, an emergency war funding bill. Spinach has nothing to do with the war effort in Afghanistan and Iraq. The kind of mentality articulated by Rep. Farr is exactly the kind of mentality we must change in Washington if we are ever going to return fiscal sanity to Congress.
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
Posted by:
John Campbell
at
6:12 PM
This evening, the Democrat's are bringing to the floor their conference report on the emergency war funding bill. As is now well known, the bills passed in the House and the Senate included over $20 billion in unrelated, non-emergency pork and special handouts. In the conference version, much of the same spending remains although some of the more notorious additions were removed like the $74 million for peanut storage and $25 million for shrimp farming. The Democrats, as admitted by Rep. Charlie Rangel of New York, used much of this unrelated spending to buy votes for their "slow bleed" Iraq strategy. But they are also using it as a tool to spend as much of your money as they can without being subject to normal budgetary restrictions. Considering the Dem's campaign rhetoric to restore "fiscal responsibility" in Washington, I cannot help but call their actions for what they are in this case - hypocritical. For example, the war funding bill includes $5.8 billion over eleven years in new entitlement spending without providing a way to pay for it. This means the bill should be subject to the Democrat's highly touted "fiscally responsible" pay-as-you-go rule. But what have they done? The Dem's simply waived the ability of Republicans like me to bring up a point of order and hold them to account. Hmmm. I guess they only stand by pay-go when politically beneficial. This is class act hypocrisy. I hope the American people can see past the hollow rhetoric.
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
Posted by:
John Campbell
at
1:25 PM
On the heels of the announcement this week, by the Social Security and Medicare Trustees, that entitlement spending continues to travel down a path to disaster, I wanted to bring to light some insightful quotes I heard delivered by Ben Bernanke, chairman of the Federal Reserve Board. He made them in February while testifying before my colleagues and I in the House Committee on the Budget. He understands that something must be done soon. I hope the Democrat's will get the memo. "...the United States has entered what is likely to be a long period of demographic transition, the result both of the reduction in fertility that followed the post-World War II baby boom and of ongoing increases in life expectancy...As a consequence of these demographic trends, the number of people of retirement age will grow relative both to the population as a whole and to the number of potential workers. "An important element in ensuring that we leave behind a stronger economy than we inherited, as did virtually all previous generations in this country, will be to move, over time, toward fiscal policies that are sustainable, efficient and equitable across generations. Policies that promote private as well as public saving would also help us to leave a more productive economy to our children and grandchildren." "In the end, the fundamental decision that the Congress, the administration, and the American people must confront is how large a share of the nation's economic resources to devote to federal government programs, including transfer programs such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid....Those members who favor a more expansive role of the government, including more generous benefits payments, must recognize the burden imposed by the additional taxes needed to pay for the higher spending, a burden that includes not only the resources transferred from the private sector but also any adverse economic incentives associated with higher tax rates." "...because of demographic changes and rising medical costs, federal expenditures for entitlement programs are projected to rise sharply over the next few decades. Dealing with the resulting fiscal strains will pose difficult choices for the Congress, the administration and the American people. However, if early and meaningful action is not taken, the U.S. economy could be seriously weakened, with future generations bearing much of the cost." For more info on the need for entitlement reform, check out this post.
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Posted by:
John Campbell
at
2:56 PM
Yesterday, the Social Security and Medicare Trustees issued their annual report on the health of entitlement programs. The figures are now projecting that Social Security will begin paying out more money than it takes in by 2017, and in 2041, the Social Security Trust Fund will be entirely exhausted. The situation facing Medicare is even more dire. It's Hospital Insurance Program is already paying out more than it collects in payroll taxes, and Medicare's entire trust fund reserves will be exhausted in just 12 years -- 2019. But what does this mean to you? Well, if Congress doesn't reform the financing of these programs soon, we will then have to either cut benefits originally promised or raise your taxes. But simply raising taxes will not solve the underlying problem, it will only fuel it. By 2041, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid alone will cost Americans as much as the entire federal government does today. Our children will be forced to pay at least twice today’s level of taxes to only maintain these programs as they are currently structured. These stark figures follow in the wake of the Dem's recently passed budget, which does absolutely nothing to address this looming entitlement crisis. What’s worse, Rep. Pete Stark (D-CA), chairman of the Ways and Means Subcommittee on Health, is even trying to do away with reporting procedures that alert members of Congress and the American people when entitlement spending has reached untenable levels. Since my election to Congress in 2005, I have continually been amazed at how much the Democrat's talk on Capitol Hill about protecting the children, but then stand eerily quiet when it concerns to the large debt, massive tax increases, and reduced prosperity we are going to saddle them with if the unsustainable financing arrangement of entitlements are not reformed. I'll leave you with the sensible words from the Social Security and Medicare Trustees, who aptly appraise what must be done: "The financial difficulties facing Social Security and Medicare pose enormous, but not insurmountable, challenges. The sooner these challenges are addressed, the more varied and less disruptive their solutions can be. We urge the public to engage in informed discussion and policymakers to think creatively about the changing needs and preferences of working and retired Americans. Such a national conversation and timely political action are essential to ensure that Social Security and Medicare continue to play a critical role in the lives of all Americans."
Monday, April 23, 2007
Posted by:
John Campbell
at
2:44 PM
I came across a good editorial today that ran in the Philadelphia Inquirer. It discusses the Democrat's increasing unwillingness to live up to their campaign promises to clean up earmark and ethics rules. Check it out here.
The House Democrats have short memories. Exit polls showed that a key factor that thrust them into power last November was the public's anger at the GOP majority's failure to police itself, as in the page scandal involving former Rep. Mark Foley of Florida.
If disgusted voters conclude that the new boss on Capitol Hill is the same as the old boss, it won't go well for Democrats next time at the polls.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi should spend less time jetting to Syria and more doing what voters put her in her position to do: Clean up Capitol Hill.
Monday, April 23, 2007
Posted by:
John Campbell
at
11:54 AM
Last Thursday, I wrote a post that provided a telling example of how unwilling the Democrats are to even entertain the idea of spending accountability. During their time in the majority, they have shown an innate ability to question and investigate just about everything going on in Washington, except the prudent use taxpayer dollars. On the heals of this, a report has been released by the Mercatus Center of George Mason University that shows 87 percent of federal appropriations, $2.18 trillion, are going to government agencies that score "below satisfactory." Not surprisingly, the worst scoring agency in the federal government - the Department of Housing and Urban Development - will probably see one of the greatest, if not the greatest, increase in spending this year under the new Democratic majority. To view the report, click here.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Posted by:
John Campbell
at
5:01 PM
Today, the House is going to vote on a bill making Washington, D.C.'s "delegate" into a full fledged voting member of the House. In order to continue the balance between Republicans and Democrats, this bill gives another seat to the State of Utah. Therefore, it would increase the size of the House by two to 437 members. Because the bill requires new funding for the two new members and corresponding staff, under the Pay-Go rules passed by the Democrat's last January, they have to find a way to pay for this increase. Now, all the Democrats needed to do was find a relatively modest $2.5 million in wasteful spending in the budget and direct it towards these new expenses. But, what did they decide to do instead? Add accounting gimmicks and complexity to the tax code. What they have done is offered into statute a policy that permits the IRS to take more taxes from taxpayers than they are supposed to, and then give it back at the end of the year. This way they are technically not enacting a tax increase; but, they are depriving those taxpayers of the bank interest or freedom they would have had to use that money. The essentially are "stealing" that money for twelve months and then saying "Thanks, I used it for what I wanted...you can have it back now." With this extra or "stolen" revenue the federal government is then able to collect enough interest to pay for this new expense. Wow. This is a textbook example of the great lengths the Dem's are willing go to not even entertain the notion of spending accountability. In fact, the $2.5 million needed under the bill represents just .00014 percent of the budget. Come on...even the most ardent liberal would recognize that we could find that money in our $2.2 trillion budget. I guess the Democrat's would just rather steal from the taxpayer. If they prefer tax gimmickry above a budget offset of .00014 percent, I don't even want to imagine what they will do with the explosion of entitlement programs, which are on course to consume 100 percent of the federal budget by 2040.
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Posted by:
John Campbell
at
5:08 PM
According to a NFIB Research Foundation Small Business Poll released today on Tax Complexity and the IRS, "88 percent of small-employer taxpayers used a tax professional to prepare their most recent federal tax return. For those employers who employ 20 or more people, the percentage that used a tax professional increased to 95 percent...61 percent of small-employer taxpayers typically consult a tax professional prior to making a major financial decision for the business." Small business employer's stated that they have to use these tax professionals to ensure they comply with our incredibly complex tax system. On a related note, John Stossell reported today that in Estonia citizens need only about 10 or 15 minutes to file their income taxes. Why, you may ask? In 1992, Estonia became the first country to tax everyone at the same flat rate. Right now, their flat tax rate is at 22%, and in 2009, it will drop to 20%. To learn more and for a good read, click here.
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Posted by:
John Campbell
at
4:26 PM
On Tuesday, Robert Byrd, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, rolled out a long delayed earmark reform package. He did so as conservatives were becoming increasingly restless and poised to obstruct the upcoming spending bills. It was a shrewd political move by Byrd, who has long been known for his fondness of earmarks (Since 1991, he has directed over $4.88 billion in earmarks to his state of West Virginia. Approximately, 5 highways, 2 scholarship programs, and 29 buildings are named after him). But, a review of the meat of Byrd's proposal shows he is not really serious about cleaning up the process. In fact, the new rules have so many loopholes and ways to get around them, it may not do much of anything. For example, as part of the new rules, all earmarks that originate in committee must reveal the sponsor and recipient of the request. This sounds well and good -- after all it improves transparency and sunlight for committee proceedings. But, these rules do not apply to bills when they get to the floor of the Senate. As such, there is no recourse for senators if the Appropriations Committee doesn't live up to their word. If an earmark is added on the floor, Senators could not raise a point of order against any appropriations bill that does not meet the disclosure requirements. What Chairman Byrd proposed will sound good on a 30 second sound bite on the nightly news, but it has little substance to it. Let's get serious.
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Posted by:
John Campbell
at
2:25 PM
In honor of "Tax Day," that dreadful time of year when your 1040 federal tax returns are due to the IRS, I have made a top ten list detailing the craziness of our tax code and why we need to sunset it and start fresh with a common-sense, fair system. The current tax code is seven times longer than the Bible. It's length and complexity makes it ripe for abuse and often oppressive IRS enforcement. A key component of the American Taxpayer Bill of Rights, an ambitious fiscal reform agenda offered by the RSC last March, would take care of this. It would sunset the current code and force Congress to debate and develop a new and simplified method of taxation -- whether it be a flat, flatter, or fair tax system. Whatever comes from the debate is ancillary to the fact that it would force Congress to fix this monster of a system. # 10 - Americans spend an estimated 3.18 billion hours figuring out and filing their tax returns. That's 24.2 hours per taxpayer, according to National Taxpayers Union. # 9 - For taxpayers with incomes above $100,000 the odds of being audited in 2006 were 1 in 59; above $1 million, the odds increased to 1 in 16. People in lower income brackets — those reporting incomes below $25,000 — faced a 1 in 94 chance of being audited as reported by the IRS. # 8 - A new poll has found that 60 percent of taxpayers say their taxes are too high. Only two percent think they are too low. # 7 - General Electric Co., set a record last year by filing a return that, had it been printed on paper, would have totaled more than 24,000 pages # 6 - A new 2007 poll by the Tax Foundation has found that a majority of U.S. adults believe the federal tax code is too complex, that the federal income taxes they pay are too high, and the federal tax system needs major changes or a complete overhaul. # 5 - The needlessly complex nature of the code promotes tax cheating, strong enforcement measures by IRS revenue officers, and encourages lawyers and lobbyists to seek tax favors from members of Congress. # 4 - 60 percent of tax filing Americans are now using paid preparers or accountants, with the average compliance costs being around $207, as compiled by NTU. # 3 - The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office reports that those who made more than $87,300, the top 10% of our nation, paid 70.8% of all income taxes, an increase from their share of 48.1% in 1979. # 2 -The top 40 percent of Americans (those who make more than $43,200) pay 99.1 percent of all income taxes - while the bottom 40 percent (more than 44 million adults) pay no income taxes at all. Democrats have long argued the system is unfair. The question is: for whom? # 1 - The Democrat's Want More Taxes and Paperwork: They just passed the largest tax increase in American history in the budget - $3,035 more in taxes a year for the average American. Click here to read the specifics. Happy Tax Day!
Monday, April 16, 2007
Posted by:
John Campbell
at
5:21 PM
As reported today in the Christian Science Monitor, a study prepared by economist Gary Shilling has found that 1 in 2 Americans now receive income from federal government programs, an increase from from 1 in 4 in 1950. It is apparant that entitlements like Social Security and government healthcare programs are largely the source of this increased dependency on the government. The budgetary reality of these increases must be confronted.
You can read the article here.
"Healthcare and Social Security are the big programs poised for growth, thanks to the arc of the baby-boom generation, longer lifespans, and rising medical costs. Insurance-style programs also include farm subsidies and efforts to relieve poverty."
"You do have the yearning for cradle-to-grave paternalism, but as Americans you also have the carry-over of the frontier spirit" of individual opportunity, says Shilling. "That's the trade-off that will define the scope of government," he says.
"European nations have shown that advanced economies can maintain generous social-welfare programs, but...these nations pay a price of more tepid growth. Sweden...has in recent years dropped off the global Top 10 list for per-capita output. Ireland, by contrast, has kept the government burden low and enjoyed rapid economic growth."
Monday, April 16, 2007
Posted by:
John Campbell
at
1:54 PM
As the deadline for federal income tax filing looms, writers across the nation are penning some quality articles on our government's chaotic tax code and troubling spending forecasts. One article of note was written by Brian Reidl of the Heritage Foundation. In it, he clearly laid out the break down of federal spending per American household. The federal government is slated to spend $24,106 per household this year, the highest total since World War II. Of that number, roughly 30 percent will go towards entitlement programs, which is only going to increase as time goes on. We need to get our fiscal house in order. This spending growth is simply unacceptable. To read Reidl's entire article, click here. Top Five Areas of Federal Spending per Household: 1. Social Security/Medicare: $8,301. 2. Defense: $4,951. 3. Anti-Poverty Programs: $3,550. 4. Interest on the Federal Debt: $2,071. 5. Federal Employee Retirement Benefits: $907.
Thursday, April 12, 2007
Posted by:
John Campbell
at
5:09 PM
In the last 50 years, the federal government has grown five times faster than the median family income. Congresses controlled by both parties and presidents of both parties and every combination thereof we have run up deficits to pay for this unsustainable growth. If we don't enact systemic changes to this broken process, our children and grandchildren will be the ones that pay the price.
This is part of the message RSC Chairman Jeb Hensarling has been taking to the people the past couple weeks. He is using the Democrat imposed spring break to spread awareness and drum up support for the American Taxpayer Bill of Rights.
Here are some solid articles detailing his message and this important reform agenda:
http://www.athensreview.com/local/local_story_101214555.html
http://www.jacksonvilleprogress.com/local/local_story_101160650.html
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
Posted by:
John Campbell
at
2:58 PM
Many of you have posted comments pointing out that Republicans committed many of the same fiscal sins when we were in control that are now being committed by the Democrats. You are absolutely correct. And Republicans lost the majority in no small part because we said we were fiscal conservatives, but we didn't act like it. When the Democrat's swept into power, they said they would be committed to reforming earmarks and being fiscally responsible. They are doing neither. They have clearly not changed from the tax and spend days of old. My previous posts on this blog speak to the lengths they have gone the past couple months. Now, that does not excuse Republican fiscal transgressions. I would love to tell you my colleagues have learned these lessons. But that is not true. However, many of us never lost that fiscal compass. It is we in the Republican Study Committee that have kept the fiscally responsible flame burning on Capitol Hill, however, dimly. If you care about lower taxes, curtailed spending, and less government in your lives, the Democrats will never deliver for you. First, we must expose their hypocrisy in that regard. Then we must return a Republican majority to Congress with the renewed fiscal discipline of 1994. That is my mission. I hope you will join me.
|
The Republican Study Committee, which has over 100 members, is the largest caucus of conservatives in the House of Representatives. Congressman John Campbell, who chairs the group's Budget and Spending Taskforce, is using his green eyeshade and his experience as a CPA to watch out for taxpayers.
The Latest on TownHall.com
|