-
Cummings Accused of Subverting IRS Investigation
June 19, 2013 | 4 comments
-
Gerson, Wehner, and the Losing Old Ways Crowd
June 18, 2013 | 17 comments
-
Hannity: Secure the Border First
June 17, 2013 | 6 comments
-
Charles Krauthammer and The Limbaugh Theorem
June 14, 2013 | 27 comments
-
GI Told He Can’t Read Levin, Hannity, Limbaugh
June 7, 2013 | 5 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Yesterday in answer to a Quin Hillyer post on Newt Gingrich and Senator Tom Coburn I referenced his cite of a posting from Jim Geraghty over at National Review Online.
This has drawn a direct response from Senator Coburn’s office in the form of the following e-mail from Coburn aide John Hart. We aren’t the mainstream media here….we want Dr. Coburn, for whom we have great respect, to have his response in full. Here it is.
Jeffrey,
I hope you are well. I read your interesting post on Newt. You claim that Dr. Coburn has proposed a $1 trillion tax increase. That is false. Dr. Coburn, like most free market conservatives who are not lobbyists, believes the best tax reform is reform that lowers rates and broadens the base. The plan Grover Norquist was referring to was a $9 trillion deficit reduction proposal called Back in Black. Depicting one of the most-detailed spending cut plans ever released as a “tax increase” proposal is ludicrous and undermines the conservative effort to cut spending and reduce the size of government. Remember, Mr. Norquist believes eliminating spending hidden in the tax code, even Obama stimulus spending, is a tax increase. Most free-market conservatives reject that argument. Defending tax earmarks for ethanol producers and Hollywood movie producers, as Mr. Norquist has done, is the tax increase position. Tax earmarks keep rates artificially high and are a de facto tax increase on everyone who doesn’t receive the benefit.
Back in Black: http://www.coburn.senate.gov/public/?p=deficit-reduction
Best,
John
View all comments (7) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Jeffrey Lord
http://spectator.org/blog/2012/01/26/coburn-responds
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Once Upon a Time in the West
- Way Beyond the Lemonade Stand
- Gerry Ford at 100
The Spectacle Blog
Democrat Dan Maffei Blames Budget Cuts for Girl’s Rape, Mother’s Murder
Robert Stacy McCain | 6.18.13
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
JmsA| 1.26.12 @ 10:57AM
Didn't the good doctor pal around with the One? Just asking.
Dai Alanye | 1.26.12 @ 12:15PM
Norquist is generally on the right side, but his scoring of subsidy removal as a tax increase is plain kooky.
BullPasture | 1.27.12 @ 3:16PM
If there is a tax subsidy that is eliminated the increased revenue should be offset but cuts elsewhere. Otherwise it IS an effective tax increase. The fed needs not one more cent!
Fred| 1.28.12 @ 1:02PM
Every tax subsidy (i.e., gift) comes via either a loan from China or currency inflation. Both reduce the standard of living of every American who is not a beneficiary of the tax subsidy. Eliminating all such subsidies should be the goal.
In the case of the ethanol subsidy, not only do taxpayers suffer qua taxpayers, but they suffer when the price of corn falls to an artificially low level because of the negative health effects of the boost to corn consumption: http://www.dailyfinance.com/20.....s-fatter/.
Once again, freedom is simply the best option.
BD57| 1.26.12 @ 12:22PM
Bottom line - the first purpose of the tax code should be to raise the revenue required to fund the proper purposes of government, period.
albert constantine jr| 1.26.12 @ 5:19PM
I thought the Obama (and Chicago, for that matter) approach is that the purpose of the tax code (and most of government, as well) is to punish your enemies and reward your friends.
Fred| 1.28.12 @ 1:03PM
Tom Coburn: knowledgeable, intelligent, experienced, principled, consistently conservative. Clearly, he's not one of the "Big Three."