As former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee begins to challenge former Mass. Governor Mitt Romney for the lead in the Iowa Republican caucuses, his big-government past continues to haunt him.
Huckabee, a hundred pounds ago, practically begs the Arkansas legislature for a tax increase:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Words do come back to bite politicians... like Romney's flip-flop-flip on abortion... like Rudy's call to confiscate all guns to secure his city...
but this is completely out of context. The others show a deep belief about one issue or the other, and are impossible to take out of context... unlike this video, which is trying to paint Huckabee as a lover of taxes.
Let me tell you why this is not true.
If Huckabee adored taxes, he would have pushed for a property tax... they are unavoidable, longer, and harder to repeal. This was a series of consumption based taxes which are lower impacting, and the consumer has the choice to support the tax by their purchasing habits. This is the best kind of tax, because it allows choice for supporting the tax.
The CATO institute supports a 20% flat income tax, but I don't hear people crying foul, and calling the CATO institute lovers of taxes...
And to put the entire tax issue into context, Mike Huckabee was handed a court order to better fund the Arkansas education system. His state was broke at the time, and it is against their state constitution to deficite spend. There was literally nothing left to cut to raise $100 Million overnight. The only option then is a consumption tax, which is low impact.
So Gov. Huckabee does not LOVE taxes. In fact he is the only candidate endorsing the Fair Tax, and one of two candidates endorsing the elimination of the IRS, and supporting the cutting of government programs across the board.
You need to think things through a little better...there are some major flaws in your reasoning here.
1) It is much harder politically to call for a property tax because it is an "in-the-open" tax that the taxpayers personally feels. That may be harder to repeal, but people see the money leaving their account, unlike "hidden" taxes.
2) Calling for a replacement of the graduated income tax system with a flat tax is not the same thing as what Huckabee wanted(or wants).
and
3) If the Huckster wanted to increase revenue in order to fulfill the order to fund schools he should have done the one things that ALWAYS works. He would have CUT the tax rate, thereby increasing consumption and driving revenues up. Even the ultra-hardline commie nation of Albania has figured that out as they cut the tax rate and increased their incoming revenue by more then they had predicted.
Simple fact of life: Personal and Economic freedom spurs the human spirit to achieve greatness. Nanny-ism and higher taxes only drive people to achieve mediocrity.
Right Said:"CUT the tax rate"
This is a very true statement, but cutting the tax-rate and waiting for an economic rebound is a long term plan. The court order required an instant change to the funding of the education system. In this particular cases there was not time for the economic rebound approach. They needed instant income and could not spend in the red, as it was against state constitutional law.
Regarding Huckabee's stance on national taxes, he is in favor of the fiar tax, which is a 0% income tax, and a pure consumption tax! The CATO institute has said that this is optimal, but that we are forced to work our tax codes within the confines of the current system, and thus support a flat tax on income.
Huckabee stands very much in favor of personal growth and freedom... this video is grossly out of context.
What would you do in the face of a court order when you cannot spend in the red? You need immediate income, and the least impact comes from consumption taxes! HIdden or not, it is the lowest impact to the citizen!
Ummm, you might want to check with Mike about the court order. Although that is what HE said, the campaign did a press release stating basically that he misspoke and that those comments were for the general funding, not for a court-ordered funding of schools.
Not so out of context after all.
BTW, ColoThinker...
I don't mean to go after comments or the person making those comments, for the most part and I wasn't meaning to here on this topic.
I guess I am just sick and tired of the fact that conservatives have to "accept" the field of candidates presented to us and are willing to alter reality to make it easier to accept.
"I've always been a conservative" is the mantra being spewed to us by every top or second tier candidate when the reality is that there is not a single candidate that is both socially and ecoomically conservative....not one.
Mike Huckabee is just another example of a "half-caff" conservative. No matter how he spins it, he is still economically liberal. Rudy is NOT a social/constitutional conservative. Romney isn't sure if he is or isn't, was or wasn't. And, honestly, I would not pin my hope of Thomson being even close to a Reagan.
Let's face reality. True conservatives are going to face a very tough choice this next cycle. Do we hold our nose and vote in a social liberal or a economic liberal. We can't have both, and that's just the way it is. (I won't even go in to other alternative of not voting for an R...another time, another topic)
In that light, however, we need to stop making excuses for the candidates and try to make them appear more conservative than they really are. Although we want our candidate to be a true conservative, at least "To thine own self be true."
IF Mike is the candidate that you support, fine. Just be sure to not sugarcoat his track record too much or you may find the after-taste of President Huckabee's social gospel spending more bitter then you can bear. A little dose of reality now will make it easier to swallow later.
Not just Mike, but any of the candidates that are in the real running. Whoever you choose to support, make sure you understand the negatives that come with him.
You might consider the words of Dick Morris concerning Mike Huckabee's record in Arkansas:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/
articles/2007/11/huckabee_is_a_
fiscal_conservat.html
Let's look at Gov. Huckabee's COMPLETE fiscal record and not just focus on one one-minute clip, taken completely out of context. All the candidates fear these types of "policy" clips. Gov. Huckabee cut taxes 94 times in Arkansas, balanced the budget every year, and left Arkansas with an $850 million surplus. The fiscally liberal NEVER cut taxes.
What Huckabee adores is using the power of the government to address every perceived ill in society. He does not represent the conservative agenda with regard to smaller government, individual responsibility and states rights. He is truly a more compassionate version of Mr. Bush, which I believe means he will not only pursue foreign crusades but also "nanny" governement policies like a federal "smoking ban".
He can't do these things without increasing the size of Government and continuing to transfer power and wealth from "We the people" to the Federal Government.
With Huckabee, his perception of God's will trumps America and the Constitution.
I used to like Huckabee. Until he started talking about how government can solve every problem known to man. I refuse to vote for GWB a third time.
Post a Comment