No one wants to admit that stopping a phased out tax cut is a tax increase. Democrats and Republicans alike want to call it everything they can without calling it a "tax increase." Apparently taxes can take a third direction besides up or down.
And of course, we should all just trust them on this one. You know, it's just for a little bit. "We'll phase the tax out eventually, trust us, we're politicians and we always follow through on our promises! We're like Wal-Mart. Always low taxes. Always."
That's the faith Democrats and "moderate" Republicans are asking of fiscally responsible legislators and the public. They want to stop the phase out of the death tax and the franchise tax, but what they won't say, and what isn't being reported, is that there is no timetable in any of the proposed bills that would continue the phase out of tax cuts approved several years ago. Rather than lambasting the fiscally responsible, how about a show of good faith by setting a new timetable to continue phasing out these unfair and irresponsible taxes? I thought it was all about compromise? How about a little compromise on the part of the tax and spenders; be willing to put your promises into statute.
There's a good reason a timetable will never be set. It's not because it couldn't be changed later. After all, the current timetable can be adjusted with just a majority passage of a bill. No, there's a much more sinister reason tax and spend politicians don't want to set a timetable into statute; because then they'd have to publicly change the timetable again in a couple of years when their out of control spending can't be supported by the tax base.
It's really that simple. It's much easier to promise a tax cut in the future without having to ever vote on it than it is to put it in statute and have to take a public vote in a few years to change it again. After all, if it's just a verbal promise then come election time it can be the "other" guy's fault a proposal never came to a vote. Put an actual delay in statute and each and every legislator automatically becomes responsible for their vote and whether or not they'll follow through on their "delay" promises.
(Why the photo? I don't know. I just think Paul Davis is a really scary looking person.)