WaPo: House health-care surtax “bad policy”

posted at 1:36 pm on July 15, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

Count the Washington Post editors as opposed to a “soak the rich” tax scheme to fund health-care reform.  While the Post argues that the tax code should be made more progressive than it is currently, the idea of an “ad hoc” surtax strikes them as a tremendously bad idea — and unlikely to work in any case.  The Post apparently has more familiarity with dynamic tax analysis than either the House or the Obama administration, although they’re advising Obama to treat the rich as a rainy-day fund rather than adopt a sensible tax policy:

The traditional argument against sharp increases in the marginal tax rates of a very narrow band of Americans is that it could distort their economic behavior — most likely by encouraging them to put more of their money into tax shelters as opposed to productive investments. This effect could be greatest in certain states, such as New York, where a higher federal rate would add to already substantial state income taxes. The deeper issue, though, is whether it is wise to pay for a far-reaching new federal social program by tapping a revenue source that would surely need to be tapped if and when Congress and the Obama administration get serious about the long-term federal deficit.

That moment may be approaching faster than they would like. Even if Congress pulls off a budget-neutral expansion of health care, the gap between federal revenue and expenditures will reach 7 percent of gross domestic product in 2020, according to the Congressional Budget Office. And that’s assuming that the economy returns to full employment between now and then. The long-term deficit is driven by the aging of the population as well as by growing health-care costs, both contributing to Social Security and Medicare expenses. There is simply no way to close the gap by taxing a handful of high earners. The House actions echo President Obama’s unrealistic campaign promise that he can build a larger, more progressive government while raising taxes on only the wealthiest.

There are a couple of threads here.  First, the Post seems not to understand what it writes as it writes it.  They note that tax increases will change economic behavior, which will negatively impact the expected revenues from the surtax.  In other words, people will show less taxable income by avoiding capital gains and using other tax constructs.  All that is true, but then the Post turns around and says that taxing the rich now will mean not getting them to cover the skyrocketing deficits down the road.  They’re making the same case for a tax increase on the so-called rich to plug budget holes as Charlie Rangel made to cover health-care reform, apparently blissfully unaware of the irony.

This is part of the entire problem with the “progressive” tax system.  It punishes people for success and is at its most basic a real consequence of a grievance mindset, in which life is a zero-sum game and winners “steal” from losers.  As the economy itself has proven consistently, real wealth expands and standards of living increase for the entire population when capital is allowed to work in the markets.  Soaking the rich reduces that capital and stymies the expansion of wealth and creation of new jobs.  Government does not create wealth; it eats it, in some cases for good reason (national defense, for example) but too often for the kind of social engineering that inevitably makes matters worse.

Nowhere in the Democrats’ plan do they explain why 2.1 million Americans should have to pay to reform the health-care system for 300 million Americans, nor does the Post explain why 2.1 million Americans should have to pay for the massive deficits created by Democrats in Congress and Barack Obama.  Both accept the notion that government exists to transfer wealth without explaining at all the basis for a free government to do so.  If we need massive health-care reform, then the costs should be borne by everyone — and when that happens, you will find massive health-care reform to be a lot less popular than when Obama, Rangel, & Co try to pass it off as something for nothing.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Saw this today: The SEIU and ACORN merge to promote tax increases.

Of course the story is from Chicago.

WashJeff on July 15, 2009 at 1:39 PM

Charrging full steam ahead to the next great depression!

TrickyDick on July 15, 2009 at 1:41 PM

Saw this today: The SEIU and ACORN merge to promote tax increases.

Of course the story is from Chicago.

WashJeff on July 15, 2009 at 1:39 PM

Evil.

Firebird on July 15, 2009 at 1:41 PM

Nowhere in the Democrats’ plan do they explain why 2.1 million Americans should have to pay to reform the health-care system for 300 million Americans, nor does the Post explain why 2.1 million Americans should have to pay for the massive deficits created by Democrats in Congress and Barack Obama.

It’s so simple that it no longer even needs to be explained.

The rich must pay because they are rich.

myrenovations on July 15, 2009 at 1:42 PM

It’s so simple that it no longer even needs to be explained.

The rich must pay because they are rich.

myrenovations on July 15, 2009 at 1:42 PM

We’re running out of rich people in this economy.

Doughboy on July 15, 2009 at 1:43 PM

Here’s my proposal: counties (or parishes) that vote for Dems will be hit with a tax surcharge of 5% on all income.

WashJeff on July 15, 2009 at 1:45 PM

“Government does not create wealth; it eats it, in some cases for good reason (national defense, for example) but too often for the kind of social engineering that inevitably makes matters worse.”

Kinda like the social engineering that caused the economic collapse in the first place…………

………. which is still in place, and running on all eight cylinders.

Seven Percent Solution on July 15, 2009 at 1:46 PM

Nothing to see here.

Healthcare will pass regardless.

Knucklehead on July 15, 2009 at 1:46 PM

We’re running out of rich people in this economy.

Doughboy on July 15, 2009 at 1:43 PM

Then we will re-define the word “rich”.

myrenovations on July 15, 2009 at 1:46 PM

the people don’t want this $hit sandwich

gatorboy on July 15, 2009 at 1:47 PM

Here is my proposal. All teachers and professors get hit with a 50% tax increase to demonstrate what fairness is.

Limerick on July 15, 2009 at 1:49 PM

Democrats rigidly adhere to static analysis unless there is government money to be spent. Then they announce absurdly inflated multipliers.

Golden Boy on July 15, 2009 at 1:49 PM

Hmm,

It’s a bad idea to drastically tax the rich to pay for health care.
On the other hand it’s a good idea to drastically tax the rich to pay for deficit reduction.

Can’t these guys ever keep from contradicting themselves?

MarkTheGreat on July 15, 2009 at 1:50 PM

You don’t have to be rich
To pay my tax
You would have to be fool
To want my world
Ain’t no particular tax I have problem with
I just want your extra income and your

Wealth

WashJeff on July 15, 2009 at 1:50 PM

I thought it was common knowledge that SEIU and ACORN were part of the same group of liberal crooked organizations funded by Soros.

Daggett on July 15, 2009 at 1:51 PM

I think it was CT that instituted a millionaires tax to help close their budget deficit.
The next year they found that they only had 1/3rd the number of millionaires.

Rich people aren’t stupid. Unlike the Democrats who want to prey on them.

MarkTheGreat on July 15, 2009 at 1:52 PM

To All Hotair members:

Would any of you let me and others know what response you are getting when you call, fax or email the House members when you contact them?

bluefox on July 15, 2009 at 1:45 PM

bluefox on July 15, 2009 at 1:52 PM

I am just flabbergasted that the Washingotn junta is running around defending their public health insurance plan by claiming that it is the federal government’s job to provide competition for private businesses by opening their own business. This is as un-Constitutional as anyhting, yet no one is complaining about this very essential part of their argument. At least with Medicare and Medicaid, the feds tried to make it all sound COnsitutional by arguing “general welfare” (which Madison had anticipated and explicitly warned against abusing) but now they don’t even bother with that pretense and launch directly into the idea that the feds are supposed to compete with private business in the market. This is just pure insanity. Where are the voices arguing against this lunacy? I hear no one.

progressoverpeace on July 15, 2009 at 1:54 PM

MarkTheGreat on July 15, 2009 at 1:52 PM

Chicago started a water bottle tax in 2008. Same thing, less revenue than expected.

WashJeff on July 15, 2009 at 1:55 PM

Two options: live with it or vote them out in 475 days.

n0doz on July 15, 2009 at 1:59 PM

When all these rich people making over $250,000 are done paying for all these schemes that they’re expected to pay for, they’ll be on welfare.

Jeff on July 15, 2009 at 2:01 PM

All this talk about the health care not working…they said the same thing about Social Security, and look how well that is doing…why we have received at least 2% return on our money over a 35 year period and it is bankrupt….and like health care, congress won’t participate in it, they will have their own, they aren’t stupid…

right2bright on July 15, 2009 at 2:02 PM

Would any of you let me and others know what response you are getting when you call, fax or email the House members when you contact them?

bluefox on July 15, 2009 at 1:45 PM

Paul Ryan is my house rep, I am pretty sure he’ll vote against it seeing he is a Republican.

My senators Kohl and Feingold are my Senators so I know Kohl will vote for it Feingold I am not sure. If I hear from them I let you know.

Brat4life on July 15, 2009 at 2:02 PM

Then we will re-define the word “rich”.

myrenovations on July 15, 2009 at 1:46 PM

That’s a given. Soon anyone making 6 figures will be considered “rich”. Then they’ll bump it down to 75 grand.

Doughboy on July 15, 2009 at 2:02 PM

If the government ever made sense they would encourage smoking to cover S-Chip instead they tax it to death. If they wanted to increase tax revenue they would………..oh never mind.

fourdeucer on July 15, 2009 at 2:03 PM

blockquote>bluefox on July 15, 2009 at 1:52 PM

Well…kinda. My congressman is pretty good about being in-line with my viewpoints. That said, my two Senators communicate NOTHING. I can’t tell you how many issues I’ve voiced to Hutchinson and Cornyn. My mailbox only receives the generic “I’m fighting for you” letter in response.

There are two exceptions (sorta), Congresswoman Bachman, (wayyyyyyyy up in Minnesota, that I donated to, and Senator Joe Lieberman, wayyyyyyyyyy over in Yankee land, who I admire for standing up on the ridge instead of hiding in a hole. My two Texas senators are more interested in my wallet then my opinion. Joe actually sent me a personal letter telling thanks and offered his view of my complaints. I can’t fault a fella for sticking to his guns.

I guess I don’t have a proper handicap on the links for Cornyn and Hutchinson.

Limerick on July 15, 2009 at 2:04 PM

You don’t have to be rich
To pay my tax
You would have to be fool
To want my world
Ain’t no particular tax I have problem with
I just want your extra income and your

Wealth

WashJeff on July 15, 2009 at 1:50 PM

Bwahahaha!

By the way, does anyone know what name “the artist formerly known as Prince” was born with?

Count to 10 on July 15, 2009 at 2:05 PM

By the way, does anyone know what name “the artist formerly known as Prince” was born with?

Count to 10 on July 15, 2009 at 2:05 PM

Wiki says its ‘Rogers Nelson’…
But that’s Wiki.

Count to 10 on July 15, 2009 at 2:07 PM

If we need massive health-care reform, then the costs should be borne by everyone — and when that happens, you will find massive health-care reform to be a lot less popular than when Obama, Rangel, & Co try to pass it off as something for nothing.

Exactly. If they want nationalized health care, taking over 15% of the economy, then I say raise every one’s taxes 25% at a minimum. If they want trillion dollar deficits I say raise every one’s base tax rate to at least 50% with no limit on social security payments.

Let’s get down to the basic f’king reality of what we are doing. Then maybe, maybe we will all realize the cliff we are walking off.

patrick neid on July 15, 2009 at 2:07 PM

Limerick on July 15, 2009 at 2:04 PM

I hear you. Hutchinson sent a form letter for cap and trade that made my blood boil. It is like she just plugged in a second paragraph depending on whether you were for or against it.

HoustonRight on July 15, 2009 at 2:09 PM

bluefox a lot of us have recent experience, say June 25-26 when they were rahmming cap and tax through. Their phone bank operators were instructed to lie to us if others experience were similar to mine. On Thursday, Al Green, D-TX9 instructed his staff to say he had not made up his mind as he had not yet read the bill. At 9am Friday he still had not finished reading the bill but was considering constituents input. At 10:45am they were simply taking comments to forward to the esteemed representative but the local call taker admitted they had not forwarded any positive responses for the bill. At noon they admitted they were overwhelmed with calls but would not say which way the calls were going. I could not EVER get through to the DC office.

Al Green, D-TX9 ended up voting for it with no comment.

DanMan on July 15, 2009 at 2:09 PM

If we need massive health-care reform, then the costs should be borne by everyone — and when that happens, you will find massive health-care reform to be a lot less popular than when Obama, Rangel, & Co try to pass it off as something for nothing.

Great Point. If healthcare poses a threat to our economy that Obama says, then everyone should ‘sacrifice’ and pay their fare share..

Oh, but the Unions complained last week about having to pay their share; that’s why Rangle & Dems pulled the old ‘tax the rich’…

TN Mom on July 15, 2009 at 2:11 PM

By the way, does anyone know what name “the artist formerly known as Prince” was born with?

Count to 10 on July 15, 2009 at 2:05 PM

I think it actually is Prince Rogers Nelson.

myrenovations on July 15, 2009 at 2:12 PM

Charrging full steam ahead to the next great depression!

TrickyDick on July 15, 2009 at 1:41 PM

It’s Bush’s fault.

WordsMatter on July 15, 2009 at 2:12 PM

How can we put a pricetag on the misery and suffering that this disaster will cause? While we’re all concerned about the cost, don’t forget the human toll.

Wine_N_Dine on July 15, 2009 at 2:12 PM

Remember these names when you get ready to vote in 2010 and they supported the Porkulus and the Health Scam
AK Murkowski
Republican Sr III 2010
AL Shelby
Republican Sr III 2010
AR Lincoln
Democratic Sr III 2010
AZ McCain
Republican Sr III 2010
CA Boxer
Democratic Jr III 2010
CT Dodd
Democratic Sr III 2010
DE Kaufman
Democratic Jr III 2010
FL Martinez
Republican Jr III 2010
GA Isakson
Republican Jr III 2010
HI Inouye
Democratic Sr III 2010
IA Grassley
Republican Sr III 2010
ID Crapo
Republican Sr III 2010
IL Burris
Democratic Jr III 2010
IN Bayh
Democratic Jr III 2010
KS Brownback
Republican Sr III 2010
KY Bunning
Republican Jr III 2010
LA Vitter
Republican Jr III 2010
MD Mikulski
Democratic Sr III 2010
MO Bond
Republican Sr III 2010
NC Burr
Republican Sr III 2010
ND Dorgan
Democratic-NPL Jr III 2010
NH Gregg
Republican Sr III 2010
NV Reid
Democratic Sr III 2010
NY Gillibrand
Democratic Jr III 2010
NY Schumer
Democratic Sr III 2010
OH Voinovich
Republican Sr III 2010
OK Coburn
Republican Jr III 2010
OR Wyden
Democratic Sr III 2010
PA Specter
Democratic Sr III 2010
SC DeMint
Republican Jr III 2010
SD Thune
Republican Jr III 2010
UT Bennett
Republican Jr III 2010
VT Leahy
Democratic Sr III 2010
WA Murray
Democratic Sr III 2010
WI Feingold
Democratic Jr III 2010
CO Bennet
Democratic Jr

yoda on July 15, 2009 at 2:13 PM

Here is my proposal. All teachers and professors get hit with a 50% tax increase to demonstrate what fairness is.

Limerick on July 15, 2009 at 1:49 PM

What about those teachers that voted against 0bama, like my wife and almost all of her co-workers? Not really demonstrating what fair is there, Limerick. There’s always an exception to the rule.

Torch on July 15, 2009 at 2:14 PM

and on that note bluefox, Hutchison was completely under cover regarding the amnesty vote two years ago. She would not make any kind of statement during the entire sham. As I recall she voted for it. Thus giving Cornyn cover to vote no since he was up for re-election in ’08.

Pretty sure she voted for stimulus and TARP too.

DanMan on July 15, 2009 at 2:17 PM

If Michael Steele wasn’t snoozing in his office & drooling on his shirt, he might actually…. yea never mind.

bloviator on July 15, 2009 at 2:20 PM

I don’t know what the concern is about “rushing” this crap sandwich through.

When you don’t have any idea what you are doing, like Congress, you can take 10 years and not get it right.

Face it, our elected representatives in Washington are completely incompetent. That’s what you get when campaigns are run entirely on the basis of what color or sex the individual is and why we should feel sorry for them.

Or who their father/mother was.

Comptetence? Experience? Qualifications? That’s so old-fashioned.

NoDonkey on July 15, 2009 at 2:22 PM

bloviator on July 15, 2009 at 2:20 PM

That’s not fair, I’m sure Mr. Steele is raising funds at this very movement, so RNC can continue doing whatever it is the RNC does.

Which is pretty much limited to fundraising.

NoDonkey on July 15, 2009 at 2:24 PM

Shut up, WaPo, Ed. This is too important to debate and read. Pass it now, now, now! The August vacation is coming for Congress, and The One wants it done before then. What could go wrong by passing it so quickly…healthcare only represents about 1/6th of our GDP? why does the party of No even want to talk about it? Rush Limbaugh…last 8 years…we won. (did I miss any of the arguements?)

NickelAndDime on July 15, 2009 at 2:26 PM

Paul Ryan is my house rep, I am pretty sure he’ll vote against it seeing he is a Republican.

My senators Kohl and Feingold are my Senators so I know Kohl will vote for it Feingold I am not sure. If I hear from them I let you know.

Brat4life on July 15, 2009 at 2:02 PM
************************************************
Thank you Brat4life, I’m trying to keep a record so I can be selective when I fax or call.

bluefox on July 15, 2009 at 2:27 PM

Limerick on July 15, 2009 at 2:04 PM
*****************************************

Thanks Limerick, yeah I understand about Hutchinson & Cornyn. Glad that Palin is supporting Perry for Gov.(I think) since I heard she’s doing something on his behalf. Hard to keep up. Time for torches & pitchforks.

bluefox on July 15, 2009 at 2:31 PM

How about an amendment that says all of the government provided health care insurance subsidies provided for federal employees be converted to VA benefits? That includes all of congress. That should solve two problems…veterans will get improved service and we’ll get to test drive the proposal for economic comparison.

DanMan on July 15, 2009 at 2:32 PM

The House actions echo President Obama’s unrealistic campaign promise that he can build a larger, more progressive government while raising taxes on only the wealthiest.

Well, why didn’t you point that out during the campaign?

BacaDog on July 15, 2009 at 2:36 PM

Nowhere in the Democrats’ plan do they explain why 2.1 million Americans should have to pay to reform the health-care system for 300 million Americans, nor does the Post explain why 2.1 million Americans should have to pay for the massive deficits created by Democrats in Congress and Barack Obama.

Exactly, Ed.

It makes perfect sense to me that the middle class people who currently don’t have health insurance should pay a premium for the health care they are about to receive.

Let’s not forget Obama’s other proposed tax hikes coming down the road for “the rich”:

An increase in the income tax rate
An increase in Capital gains tax rates
An increase in the Social security taxable amount
…and he still loves the idea of capping deduductions, making me suspect that will pop up again sometime.

MayBee on July 15, 2009 at 2:36 PM

Al Green, D-TX9 ended up voting for it with no comment.

DanMan on July 15, 2009 at 2:09 PM
********************************************
I know exactly what you mean. When I called & they gave me that kind of an answer, I said “How is it the American people know & we certainly don’t have any bill to read (of course they didn’t either) and we know it is a tragedy?” I sort of thought they were hedging, thanks for clarifying it.

bluefox on July 15, 2009 at 2:36 PM

Remember these names when you get ready to vote in 2010 and they supported the Porkulus and the Health Scam

yoda on July 15, 2009 at 2:13 PM
*************************************************
Thanks for that yoda! I’m copying that to a folder.

bluefox on July 15, 2009 at 2:39 PM

How many people makes a million dollars a year. So even if Obama and the Dems hit them with a 100% surtax, it will not begin to cover the cost.

bayview on July 15, 2009 at 2:40 PM

and on that note bluefox, Hutchison was completely under cover regarding the amnesty vote two years ago. She would not make any kind of statement during the entire sham. As I recall she voted for it. Thus giving Cornyn cover to vote no since he was up for re-election in ‘08.

Pretty sure she voted for stimulus and TARP too.

DanMan on July 15, 2009 at 2:17 PM
********************************************************
Interesting. I know they conive. I remember that amnesty, I was wore out calling & etc. I cannot stand Kay Bailey, always checking to see how the wind it blowing, well I think the wind in Texas is coming from the North; I hear Sarah Palin is supporting Perry LOL If that’s not correct, please advise, if you know differently. Thanks

bluefox on July 15, 2009 at 2:43 PM

http://docs.house.gov/gopleader/House-Democrats-Health-Plan.pdf

just saw this on Drudge

cmsinaz on July 15, 2009 at 2:44 PM

What about those teachers that voted against 0bama, like my wife and almost all of her co-workers? Not really demonstrating what fair is there, Limerick. There’s always an exception to the rule.

Torch on July 15, 2009 at 2:14 PM

Wow, really?…Are they parochial school teachers?

Jeff from WI on July 15, 2009 at 2:44 PM

The left doesn’t deny that the pie keeps getting larger (this will cease in the coming Obamerica). They just want ever larger slabs of that pie for themselves (government).
Ultimately, they want ownership of the whole pie, with tiny slices doled out to desperate citizens in return for guranteed votes for those who hold the spatula.

SKYFOX on July 15, 2009 at 2:47 PM

That’s not fair, I’m sure Mr. Steele is raising funds at this very movement, so RNC can continue doing whatever it is the RNC does.

Which is pretty much limited to fundraising.

NoDonkey on July 15, 2009 at 2:24 PM
*********************************************************
I doubt that NoDonkey, I hope your comment was in jest. I don’t know anyone that’s even talking to the RNC, let alone sending any money. I know I’m not, selective funding imo, e.g, to the Candidate.

bluefox on July 15, 2009 at 2:47 PM

Obama in 3rd debate with McCain claiming there would be no fine on small businesses that didn’t provide health insurance:

MCCAIN: Now, Senator Obama, I’d like — still like to know what that fine is going to be, and I don’t think that Joe right now wants to pay a fine when he is seeing such difficult times in America’s economy.
point is…

OBAMA: I just described what my plan is. And I’m happy to talk to you, Joe, too, if you’re out there. Here’s your fine — zero. You won’t pay a fine, because…

MCCAIN: Zero?

OBAMA: Zero, because as I said in our last debate and I’ll repeat, John, I exempt small businesses from the requirement for large businesses that can afford to provide health care to their employees, but are not doing it.

And here is the plan from the house that he endorsed today:

Under the House measure, employers with payrolls exceeding $400,000 a year would have to provide health insurance or pay the 8% penalty. Employers with payrolls between $250,000 and $400,000 a year would pay a smaller penalty, and those less than $250,000 would be exempt. Certain small firms would get tax credits to help buy coverage.

The relatively low thresholds for penalties triggered the sharpest criticism yet from employer groups, who said the burden on small business is too high and doesn’t do enough to help them expand insurance coverage.

I’m sure Obama will say he’s been consistent but, make no mistake, small businesses will be paying fines. According to the article in the WSJ, small businesses with between 5 and 9 employees average payrolls of $375,000. So, they will be paying fines. The only ones exempted are really micro-business with less than 5 employees. A fine of up to 8% is huge for a small business.

I’m sure Obama will claim he is consistent by exempting small businesses but most will just be re-defined as large businesses. He’ll define down small businesses to mean up to five employees or so and then claim that this plan doesn’t fine small businesses.

He also hammered Hillary in the debates for wanting mandates for individuals. And, big surprise, this bill also mandates individuals get health insurance or face fines.

JohnInCA on July 15, 2009 at 2:48 PM

That’s not fair, I’m sure Mr. Steele is raising funds at this very movement, so RNC can continue doing whatever it is the RNC does.

Which is pretty much limited to fundraising.

NoDonkey on July 15, 2009 at 2:24 PM
*********************************************************
I doubt that NoDonkey, I hope your comment was in jest. I don’t know anyone that’s even talking to the RNC, let alone sending any money. I know I’m not, selective funding imo, e.g, to the Candidate.

bluefox on July 15, 2009 at 2:47 PM

RNC is dead. Our only hope a new party, a conservative one.

Jeff from WI on July 15, 2009 at 2:49 PM

Two options: live with it or vote them out in 475 days.

n0doz on July 15, 2009 at 1:59 PM
*******************************************
We only have one “option” LOL

bluefox on July 15, 2009 at 2:55 PM

All y’all from Texas, I just wrote on another thread my disgust with Cornyn and Kay Bailey. I got the same form letters from both when shamnesty was before them. She voted in favor and Cornyn did vote against it – however, Cornyn was also for dramatically increasing the H1-b program because we need lettuce pickers with Phd’s or some such nonsense..

24K lady on July 15, 2009 at 2:56 PM

Jeff. The RNC is dead, but if enough of us band together we don’t need to form another party. The party is us, it’s the deadwood we need to kick out.

24K lady on July 15, 2009 at 2:58 PM

Jeff. The RNC is dead, but if enough of us band together we don’t need to form another party. The party is us, it’s the deadwood we need to kick out.

24K lady on July 15, 2009 at 2:58 PM

I think the brand name is dead. Kind of like Edsel.

Jeff from WI on July 15, 2009 at 3:06 PM

All y’all from Texas, I just wrote on another thread my disgust with Cornyn and Kay Bailey. I got the same form letters from both when shamnesty was before them. She voted in favor and Cornyn did vote against it – however, Cornyn was also for dramatically increasing the H1-b program because we need lettuce pickers with Phd’s or some such nonsense..

24K lady on July 15, 2009 at 2:56 PM
**************************************************
24K lady, don’t you just hate form letters? I’m getting ready to send THEM some LOL On H1-B, don’t get me started.
I don’t know any IT people that regard Bill Gates with any esteem. Another betrayal of the American worker.
*****************************************************
But 24K lady, we have Soooooooooooooo much deadwood!! :)

bluefox on July 15, 2009 at 3:07 PM

Wow, really?…Are they parochial school teachers?

Jeff from WI on July 15, 2009 at 2:44 PM

Nope, public school teachers at the elementary level. One of them actually cried when 0bama was elected. Another one has two puppies named, Ronald and Nancy Reagan, and all that voted against 0bama are proud conservatives. It also helps that they teach in a rural community and most of the residents are farmers and such. It’s a very conservative area around here.

Torch on July 15, 2009 at 3:24 PM

I emailed congressman Ciro Rodriguez (TX-23, Dem) about cap and tax, even though I heard he was leaning “yes”, and even though I don’t live in his district. Our family business is in his district, and I mentioned that in the email.

He voted No at the last minute, and really po’ed the Dems, so I emailed him to thank him for voting no.

I got an email the other day from him. I’m sure it was a form, but it was nicely detailed, explaining the harm the bill would do to energy independence, agriculture, local industry, etc. I’m actually using some of his talking points when I talk to other people about this bill.

juliesa on July 15, 2009 at 3:52 PM

Nope, public school teachers at the elementary level. One of them actually cried when 0bama was elected. Another one has two puppies named, Ronald and Nancy Reagan, and all that voted against 0bama are proud conservatives. It also helps that they teach in a rural community and most of the residents are farmers and such. It’s a very conservative area around here.

Torch on July 15, 2009 at 3:24 PM

Very different here. THe states largest and most powerful union is the teachers union and it’s about as cut throat and Marxist as you can get. They love Obama, they love ALL DEMS. The only teachers around here NOT voting DEM are some, not all, parochial school teachers.

Jeff from WI on July 15, 2009 at 4:15 PM

juliesa on July 15, 2009 at 3:52 PM

That’s encouraging Juliesa & kudos to him. Thanks for sharing.

bluefox on July 15, 2009 at 4:22 PM

Jeff from WI on July 15, 2009 at 4:15 PM

Well, we live about 30 minutes from Branson MO, so it’s a very conservative place for the most part. The teacher’s union that my wife belongs to actually does it’s job, they inform their members of the voting record of ALL the candidates and the union only gives support for those candidates that support their cause, the education of the kids. I was actually very impressed with their newsletters – they tell the member the voting record, why the union supports the candidate (and they have in the past several years supported Repubicans numerous times over the Democrat), and they don’t tell the member how to vote.

Now, the union that my father-in-law belongs to is the exact opposite. They only support the Democrats, they only have Democrats come speak to them at meetings during election years, and they tell the members how to vote. It’s a road construction union. They also live closer to St. Louis, one of the two cesspools of liberalism in Missouri (the other being Kansas City of course).

Torch on July 15, 2009 at 4:26 PM

You know what this needs? More coverage.

Hey, AP, why not make it a headlines item to complete the set? kthxbai

Abby Adams on July 15, 2009 at 4:51 PM

What about those teachers that voted against 0bama, like my wife and almost all of her co-workers? Not really demonstrating what fair is there, Limerick. There’s always an exception to the rule.

Torch on July 15, 2009 at 2:14 PM

Wow, really?…Are they parochial school teachers?

Jeff from WI on July 15, 2009 at 2:44 PM

Believe it or not but there are quite a few conservative teachers in NE Ga. I have been teaching for close to 20 years and have never voted for a libtard and never belonged to a teachers union.

dawgyear on July 15, 2009 at 5:08 PM

WaPo is just warming the crowd up for the Taxes For Everyone program.

Seixon on July 15, 2009 at 5:58 PM

Where will we go when things get really bad? I’m voting for secession, but that’s just because I think that Texas could survive (again) on it’s own. Other than that: Australia? Costa Rica? New Zealand (sp?)?

To where can we emigrate once the U.S. goes the way of the other nations?

Who is John Galt?

Theophile on July 15, 2009 at 6:10 PM