The American Spectator

Chuck| 12.2.10 @ 12:16PM

Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles are not to be trusted. Simpson is a zealot GOP liberal who voted against the override of partial birth abortion in 1996 and Bowles, a Clinton flunky was up to his ears in scandal as Bill's Chief of Staff. Don't be deceived the Simpson/Bowles plan is a massive tax increase. Remember the Grace Commission ’83 and Gramm/Rudman '85 and '87, they all failed and Gramm/Rudman-federal law was not enforced and disappeared.

Steve| 12.2.10 @ 3:41PM

You're right that Simpson was terrible on abortion, but he worked hard to get conservatives on the Supreme Court. From what I remember he had ACU scores of 80-90 and was a champion on stopping illegal immigration.

Mark in LA| 12.2.10 @ 5:03PM

A champion on stopping illegal immigration huh? You means that POS amnesty where he gave Kennedy everything he wanted, that has his name on it, and that he got the imbecile Reagan to sign. That amnesty that has put us in the mess we are in today, that champion?

Sean| 12.2.10 @ 12:20PM

I do not like these recommendation as it will provide cover for the liberals and does not even come close to cutting government.

Clint| 12.2.10 @ 12:33PM

"A spokesman for DeMint emphasized, though, that the conservative hasn't endorsed all the tax proposals.

"Senator DeMint appreciates the commission starting a real discussion about the debt crisis, however he has not endorsed all of the aspects of the plan’s spending and tax proposals," said Wesley Denton, a spokesman for DeMint. "The final report has not been released, but the initial summary while rightly moving toward a flat tax also includes troubling tax increases that amount to nearly $1 trillion in new death taxes, gas taxes, and other tax hikes. Our debt crisis is the result of a high spending problem, not a low tax problem.”
"A simplification of the taxes, elimination of all deductions, lowering the tax rates for individuals and businesses," he explained. "I think this would do more to reduce the debt and improve the economy and increase employment in the economy — a lot of things we would do if we would focus on this."

nobama2010| 12.2.10 @ 12:36PM

Eliminate the home mortgage interest deduction and you will have a real revolution and it wont be signs and rallies.

Clint| 12.2.10 @ 3:55PM

"Senator Jim DeMint has proposed a plan to create jobs, grow the economy, and save taxpayers billions of dollars. It’s been estimated to create 18 million new jobs in 10 years. It capitalizes on the American people’s ingenuity and frees them to take America’s economic destiny back from Washington control.

Here’s how it works:

1) Stop the crippling tax hikes set to hit taxpayers in 2011. Unless Congress and the President act soon, they will allow massive tax increasses begining on January 1, 2011. Senator DeMint’s plan would permanently:

* Repeal the alternative minimum tax (AMT) once and for all
* Keep dividends and capital gains tax rates at 15%
* Repeal the Death Tax for estates under $5 million and cut the tax rate to 15% for larger estates
* Extend the $1,000 child tax credit
* Eliminate the marriage penalty
* Simplify itemized deductions to include home mortgage interest and charitable contributions

2) Keep the Federal Government from taking more than 25% of income. Senator Jim DeMint believe no American family or business should have to pay more than that. The plan empowers American families and businesses instead of government by:

* Lowering the top income tax rate – the one paid by most small businesses – from 35% to 25%
* Simplifying the tax code to include only two other rates – 15 and 10 percent
* Keeping jobs and investment in America by lowering the U.S. corporate tax rate from 35% to 25%. This tax is currently the second highest among industrialized nations, forcing jobs and trillions of dollars overseas."

victor| 12.5.10 @ 2:53AM

Good job of cutting and pasting there Timmy*,
anything to say in your own words or is the ventriloquist asleep?

Al Adab| 12.2.10 @ 1:17PM

True we have to start somewhere - earmarks, federal pay, budget freeze - but does anyone recall that the Fed leases and sells federal lands for profit? Lease mineral rights, sell land for homesteads. Instead of spending the revenue on expanding projects and entitlements, why not use it to pay down the principle on the debt? Interest saved is, after all, interest earned.

David W| 12.2.10 @ 2:32PM

Does anyone really believe that regardless of what the plan might be that any cut in spending will happen if there is an increase in taxes?

The idea that there will be $x in spending cuts for every $y increase in taxes is laughable (actually more like cryable). Unless there is something that can prevent increased spending then the idiots in Congress and the White House will continue to spend, spend, and spend.

Tax and fee increases will just give them the excuse to spend more).

I challenge anyone to show proof that our government has ever been able to do this? New spending is never sunsetted nor given expiration dates. Tax cuts are never permanent. What can't these people understand?

Michael L. Hauschild| 12.2.10 @ 4:49PM

The issue of social security has to be addressed. The various schemes to accomplish this are very unrealistic; they are, at best, simple gimmicks to keep politicians in favor with the very active ballot aware seniors.
One of the best ways to bring about any type of change is thorough incremental (but fair) alteration of the age eligibility requirement.
Here is my proposal. Next year the earliest age you can draw is 62 years four months. The year after that you can draw at 62 years 8 months. Do this until the earliest you can retire is 68.
Each year the worse anyone will have to labor will be for four months more than the last. This will work best now because of the baby boomer influx. Later down the road we will have to probably invoke means testing.
All of this could be solved of course by the very simple replacement of ALL income, property, and similar tax schemes with an unrelenting “flat” sales tax. This aspect of course would get the 45 percent who don’t pay on board.
Those are the real answers, everyone must pay, and if you BUY more you PAY more.

Al Adab| 12.2.10 @ 5:06PM

Leave the payroll deduction in place. Those under age say 50 (or whatever the actuaries equate) place the money in a private 401 or TSA or similar. No withdrawl until age 62 except for medical expenses. those over the actuarial age would retain their claim against the SS system. This eliminates both the need for outside or government health care insurance, increases the capitalization of the national economy and eliminates the overdraft on the existing system. In addition it robs Congress of a slush fund that they "borrow" against to fund pet projects whyich is after all, the real reason the SS system is broken.

J.A.Miller| 12.3.10 @ 10:18AM

If you think low wages, cutting social programs and taxes which will mean more debt are the answer, take a look at Demint's home state. The result of those policies is a disaster:

http://jimdemints-southcarolina.blogspot.com/