Freedom Line Blog

Having never met a tax increase they didn’t like, Democrats voted to increase the Death Tax today.

Under current law, the Death Tax was set expire in 2010.  Now, starting in January, the tax could increase from 0% to 45%.  Not one Republican voted to increase the Death Tax, proving that the GOP still has some semblance of a fiscal spine.

All hope is not lost, however, as the Senate still has to take up the measure and pass the House version of the tax increase.  It must then go to President Obama’s desk for signing.

The final vote was 225 to 200 (218 needed for passage).

As the Senate continues to debate the future of health care in America, the California Medical Association handed the White House a blow today when it announced that it would oppose the current health care bill.

The California Medical Association has more than 35,000 physicians, the second largest state-based group in the nation.   Though the American Medical Association (AMA) is still supportive of the House version of “reform,” state medical associations in Texas, Florida and Georgia have all joined to oppose a government takeover of health care.

Their main objection is reimbursement rates under Medicare.  The Senate bill is set to slash physician reimbursement under Medicare by 40%, and as a result, most doctors would simply refuse to take Medicare patients.

As Dr. Dev GnanaDev noted, “If doctors can’t see you, the only choice you have is the emergency room, which is a very bad way to get healthcare.”

Let’s hope the AMA joins with California doctors to oppose the Senate bill.

The Hill – Democrats Look to Spend $300 Billion on ‘Jobs’
Politico – Democrats Push for Another Stimulus
Rep. Eric Cantor – A Real Jobs Plan
Breitbart – Representative Lobbies for Newspaper Bailout

WSJ Editorial – The New York Tax Revolt
Washington Examiner – Time to Corral ‘Sheriff Biden’
Rep. Bob Barr – The Chicago Gun Ban Challenge
WSJ – Weekly Jobless Claims Decline

Federal Debt: $12.069 trillion

Taxpayers are doing their part to defeat government-run health care by marching, calling Congress and urging others to get involved.

Senator Judd Gregg, someone with direct power to defeat ObamaCare, now has a legislative blueprint for stopping the Senate’s version of health care “reform.”

Among the highlights:

• “Hard” Quorum Calls – requires at least 51 Senators to be present in the Senate chamber for any substantive debate on health care.

• Reading of Amendments and Conference Reports in Entirety – with 2,000 pages to read, it would take days.

• Senate Points of Order – delays legislative business because the Senate is required to take two roll call votes to dispense with a point of order.

• Filibuster by Amendment – until Harry Reid invokes cloture, Senators may offer an unlimited number of amendments.

• Motion to Instruct Conferees – Senators may offer an unlimited number of motions to instruct the Senate’s conferees.

You can do your part to defeat government-run health care by calling 202-224-3121 and telling your Senators to vote “No” on the Senate bill.

Senator Max Baucus caught some of Joe Biden’s foot-in-mouth disease today when he admitted the Senate health care bill would cost $2.5 trillion, far more than what CBO estimated and propoents of the legislation have been touting.  Taxpayers should be thankful for Baucus’ loose lips.

The CBO cost estimate priced the Senate legislation at $848 billion, but that figure does not represent the full cost of the mandates on individuals and employers.  In addition, the bill masks the true cost of the legislation because it doesn’t begin to subsidize health care until 2014.

As Senator Baucus reveals, the true cost of the legislation over a 10-year period is much higher.

Just for a second … health care reform, whether you use a ten-year number or when you start in 2010 or start in 2014, whenever you start at, so it is still either $1 trillion or it’s $2.5 trillion, depending on where you start…

This week Congress will vote on whether to increase the Death Tax from 0% to 45%.  That’s quite the tax hike for an economy with 10.2% unemployment.

Under current law, the Death Tax is set to expire in 2010, but under the misleading, “Permanent Estate Tax Relief for Families, Farmers, and Small Businesses Act of 2009,” Congress could give the gift of a 45% tax hike during this holiday season.

Only in Washington is a 45% tax hike called “Tax Relief.”

You can find the text of the legislation here, but you’ll notice in the bill that the tax threshold is not indexed for inflation.  As a result, in approximately 40 years, half of the U.S. will be hit with the Death Tax.  So much for only soaking the rich.

Call your representative at 202-224-3121 and tell them to vote “No” on H.R. 4154.  Real tax relief means a 0% rate, not 45%.

The Hill – Sen. Reid to Unveil New Public Option
Washington Post – President Makes Afghanistan His Own
Sen. Jeff Sessions – KSM in NYC is Bad for America
Markos Moulitsas – Democrats Face Intensity Gap

Stuart Rothenberg – The Dangerous Dozen House Seats for 2010
Politico – Republican Candidates Shun Climate Bill
WSJ Editorial – ObamaCare at Any Cost?
Washington Times – The War on Estate Taxes

Federal Debt: $12.065 trillion

Taxes, higher premiums and rationing.  That’s what consumers will face if the Senate’s version of health care reform becomes law.

According to a new report released by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), some self-insured individuals could see a jump in premiums if the Senate bill becomes law.   In some instances, the hike in premiums could be upwards of 13%.  As CBO Director Doug Elmendorf wrote on his blog yesterday, “The average, unsubsidized premium per person covered (including dependents) for new nongroup policies would be about 10 percent to 13 percent higher in 2016 than the average premium for nongroup coverage in that same year under current law.”

And for those of you who have employer-based “platinum” health insurance?  Expect new taxes on you and your employer.  The CBO projects that 1 in 5 people with employer-based coverage will be subject to the new 40% excise tax on health insurance.

With projected costs of the Senate bill reaching $6 trillion over ten years, it’s no wonder that 53% of the nation opposes this sordid version of “reform.”

The Hill – EPA Pushes for Higher-Ethanol Gasoline
Politico – GOP Establishment Scorns Purity Test
USA Today – Obama Takes on Holiday Agenda
Washington Examiner – Big Government Serves Big Business
Fred Barnes – What Obama Needs to Say at West Point

Brett Joshpe – A Public Option Won’t Benefit U.S.
WSJ Editorial – Sen. Specter Would Make it Easier for Terrorists to Sue
National Review Online – Health Care Bill Will Raise Premiums
Red State – A NY-23 Scenario in Maryland?
The American – The Case Against Net Neutrality

Federal Debt: $12.061 trillion

In the “not a big surprise” news category, the ABA announced that it “supports” Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to try some Gitmo detainees in New York federal court.

Carolyn Lamm, President of the ABA (American Bar Association) and occasional lobbyist for Uzbekistan, wrote General Holder arguing that “[t]he transfer of these high-profile cases to federal court affirms this nation’s adherence to due process and the rule of law, and clearly establishes that these men are being tried as criminals, not as soldiers in armed conflict.”

CFIF has opined on these trials here and here, and while the Gitmo detainees are clearly being treated as criminals now, are we not now in an “armed conflict?”  How many Americans have died in Afghanistan because 9/11 conspirators like Khalid Shiekh Mohammed decided to turn passenger jets into missiles?   Would American conspirators in foreign countries be tried in civilian courts for engaging in acts of war?

The ABA seeks “competent assistance of counsel … due process … and [the right] to be treated as innocent until proven guilty” for the Gitmo detainees.  Let’s hope they receive those rights without jeopardizing national security or turning a real trial into a spectacle that puts American foreign policy on the witness stand.

A few members of Congress took a financial hit this year due to the recession but according to Roll Call, the 50 Richest Members of Congress are still worth approximately $1.3 billion.

It pays to be a professional politician too, as 4 of the 5 richest members have “served” a combined 74 years in Congress. A freshmen politico, Senator Mark Warner (D-VA), adds new money to the pile with a minimum net worth of $72 million.

You can click here for the list or click here for the story.

National Review Online – ObamaCare Falls in the Polls
WSJ Editorial – The Nanny Financial State
Dr. Gary Becker – How to Increase Employment
Times Online – Climate Change Data Dumped

The Hill – Unions Pressure on Health Care Reform
Washington Post – No Deficit Cure for Health Care
Politico – Seven Stories Obama Doesn’t Want Told
Michael Barone – No Global Warming Consensus

Federal Debt: $12.056 trillion

A chronicle of the Pilgrims’ arrival at Plymouth, as recorded by Nathaniel Morton, via the Wall Street Journal.

So they left that goodly and pleasant city of Leyden, which had been their resting-place for above eleven years, but they knew that they were pilgrims and strangers here below, and looked not much on these things, but lifted up their eyes to Heaven, their dearest country, where God hath prepared for them a city (Heb. XI, 16), and therein quieted their spirits.

When they came to Delfs-Haven they found the ship and all things ready, and such of their friends as could not come with them followed after them, and sundry came from Amsterdam to see them shipt, and to take their leaves of them. One night was spent with little sleep with the most, but with friendly entertainment and Christian discourse, and other real expressions of true Christian love.

The next day they went on board, and their friends with them, where truly doleful was the sight of that sad and mournful parting, to hear what sighs and sobs and prayers did sound amongst them; what tears did gush from every eye, and pithy speeches pierced each other’s heart, that sundry of the Dutch strangers that stood on the Key as spectators could not refrain from tears. But the tide (which stays for no man) calling them away, that were thus loath to depart, their Reverend Pastor, falling down on his knees, and they all with him, with watery cheeks commended them with the most fervent prayers unto the Lord and His blessing; and then with mutual embraces and many tears they took their leaves one of another, which proved to be the last leave to many of them.

Being now passed the vast ocean, and a sea of troubles before them in expectations, they had now no friends to welcome them, no inns to entertain or refresh them, no houses, or much less towns, to repair unto to seek for succour; and for the season it was winter, and they that know the winters of the country know them to be sharp and violent, subject to cruel and fierce storms, dangerous to travel to known places, much more to search unknown coasts.

Besides, what could they see but a hideous and desolate wilderness, full of wilde beasts and wilde men? and what multitudes of them there were, they then knew not: for which way soever they turned their eyes (save upward to Heaven) they could have but little solace or content in respect of any outward object; for summer being ended, all things stand in appearance with a weatherbeaten face, and the whole country, full of woods and thickets, represented a wild and savage hew.

If they looked behind them, there was a mighty ocean which they had passed, and was now as a main bar or gulph to separate them from all the civil parts of the world.

By now, most of you have heard that New York’s highest court, the Court of Appeals, has ruled in favor of New York City’s use of eminent domain.

This opinion strikes a huge blow to the state of property rights across the nation and it’s another sad consequence of the U.S. Supreme Court’s dreadful decision in Kelo v. New London.

The land in the New York case wasn’t blighted or vacant.  Instead, certain well-heeled individuals with connections to the city government thought that they could use their power to construct … a basketball arena for the New Jersey Nets.  Seeing as how the Nets haven’t won a game this year, perhaps they ought to take up residence in a local high school gym instead of forcing landowners out of their property.

If you have the stomach for it, the full New York Court of Appeals opinion is available here.

Much has been made about the proposed federal mandate that all individuals purchase health insurance.  Some have called this mandate unconstitutional since the only constitutional justification could be the interstate commerce clause in Article I.

Since standing around and not purchasing health care is hardly an act of interstate commerce, critics make a good point.  The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) went one step further in its criticism of the mandate in 1994 when it noted that the individual mandate was “an unprecedented form of federal action.  The government has never required people to buy any good or service as a condition of lawful residence in the United States.”

This year, Greg Dattilo and Dave Racer conducted a study of state and federal mandates.  The results aren’t too surprising when you consider that most government action fails to achieve the desired result, or leads to unintended consequences that harm other sectors of the economy.

For example, auto insurance is mandatory in 47 states but the uninsured rate has held steady at 14.6 percent.  In addition, the federal income tax is of course mandatory, but the non-compliance rate is still 14.7 percent.  These individuals are all law breakers, to be sure, but mandating something doesn’t make it so.

I would propose a government mandate on happiness, prosperity and full employment.  That could solve a lot of problems.  Perhaps a government mandate on earning at least $30,000 a year?  The way the FED is printing money, that should be no problem.  Maybe a government mandate for universal chocolate chip cookie access and subsequent ban on diabetes?

Racer and Dattilo conclude:

If the goals of health reform are to reduce the uninsured rate, increase access to health care, and improve quality, forcing more people to sign up for health plans is not the answer.  The CBO makes it very clear; people who are forced to own health insurance will, as a result, use more health services.  That will increase overall health spending, put stress on the supply of health care services (reducing access) and not make a dent in quality.

The Hill – Jobless Rate Will Stay High Through 2012
Politico – NFL Star to Run Against NJ Democrat
Washington Post – DOJ Investigating WV Democrat
John Stossel – We Pay Politicians to Lie to Us

Chicago Tribune – Stimulus Snow Job
National Review Online – Winner Take All on Health Care
New York Times – Senate’s Women Could Sway Health Bill
Rep. Bob Barr – The Dark Side of “Going Green”

Federal Debt: $12.034 trillion

Ah, the world of Democratic fiscal policy.  If you pass three massive stimulus bills that not only fail to stimulate job growth, but partly contribute to 10.2% unemployment, why not go back to the well and push for tax hikes?

According to the Hill, Democrats are seeking a $150 billion tax on the sale and purchase of financial instruments like stocks and derivatives.  The thinking is that since Wall Street is finally recovering and unemployment is still lingering above 10 percent that Wall Street needs to involuntarily fund a “Job Creation Reserve” for the unemployed.  If that’s all it takes to lift a $14 trillion economy out of recession, why didn’t our exalted class of politicos think of this before?

Now that Wall Street is starting to recover, what better way to welcome it back to prosperity than with a massive new tax hike?  This failed line of thinking reminds me of the old Ronald Reagan quote, “If it moves, tax it.  If it keeps moving, regulate it.  And if it stops moving, subsidize it.”

For real life illustrations of this quote see: Wall Street bailouts/new taxes, taxing “rich people,” bailing out Detroit, subsidizing Amtrak, subsidizing the postal service, subsidizing agriculture, and the regulation of pretty much every productive economic venture in the U.S.

HT: reason.tv

New York Post – Harry Reid’s Louisiana Purchase
Michael Barone – Are Democrats Exiting the Sinking Ship?
WSJ – Lieberman Digs in on Public Option
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette – Three Republicans Ready for 2012?

The Hill – Rep. Moore Becomes First House Retirement
Politico – Democrats Push for War Surtax
PC World – Mobile Groups Protest Net Neutrality
WSJ Editorial – Rationing: Liberals and Mammograms

Federal Debt: $12.030 trillion

This might be a bit too “wonky” but here is the take from two Harvard economists on fiscal policy:

Fiscal stimuli based upon tax cuts are more likely to increase growth than those based upon spending increases. As for fiscal adjustments, those based upon spending cuts and no tax increases are more likely to reduce deficits and debt over GDP ratios than those based upon tax increases.

Bottom line: tax increases are bad.
HT: Greg Mankiw