Freedom Line Blog

The Commissioner of the IRS doesn’t even do his own taxes.   After all, the Tax Code is large, incomprehensible and it takes days to prepare a detailed return.

As IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman told C-SPAN this weekend, “I’ve used one [tax preparer] for years.  I find it convenient.  I find the tax code complex so I use a preparer.”

Thanks for those words of hope Commissioner Shulman.  If you can’t do your own taxes, maybe it’s time to hold off on the thousands of regulations that the IRS issues every year.

Not surprisingly, even members of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee use a “professional” to complete their tax returns.  Nobody in Washington, D.C. appears to know what’s going on with our Tax Code.  That’s not surprising at all.

The Hill – Obama Pushing $90 Billion Tax Hike
George Will – Rock on the Health Care Road
Karl Rove – President’s Bait-and-Switch Operation
NY Times – Reid Faces Continued Battles

Politico – GOP: We’ll Take Back the House
WSJ Editorial – Google Gets on Right Side of History
Bob Barr – GOP Should Not Push for Reid’s Defeat
National Review Online – Cadillac Tax Evasion

Federal Debt: $12.312 trillion

Jon Stewart has been getting laughs at the expense of conservatives (many justifiably), then booking conservative straw men that he could easily knock down for years. Yet Stewart met his match on Monday’s edition of The Daily Show, when he interviewed former Bush Administration DOJ official John Yoo (author of the infamous “torture memos”).

If Stewart hadn’t been the one ginned up for a fight, it would’ve been appropriate to invoke the mercy rule. But it was hard to feel sorry for the smug, self-righteous (Stewart’s least appealing style) host when Yoo gently and subtly exposed his complete lack of even a basic understanding of the issues at play.

On the following night’s show, Stewart even had to cop to how badly he got owned.  See the full interview here, here and here.

Much has been made of the special election in Massachusetts to replace the late Ted Kennedy.  The Senate race has major implications for the health care debate in Congress because if Republican candidate Scott Brown were to win next Tuesday, he could provide the 41st vote to stop ObamaCare in the Senate.

Obviously, any vote to limit the size and power of the federal government is welcome in Congress but the initial reward for taxpayers would be great.

As of tonight, however, the markets predict that Mr. Brown only has a slim 25.9 percent chance of victory against Democrat Martha Coakley, but his numbers are up sharply from earlier this month.

Regular polling has also seen a sharp tilt in his favor, as Brown has closed a 30 point gap and made the race essentially a tossup.  History is very much against Mr. Brown’s effort; Massachusetts has not elected a Republican Senator since Edward Brooke in 1972.

Below is one of the latest cartoons from Pulitzer Prize-winner Michael Ramirez.

National Review Online – Political Capital Gains
Washington Times – The Problem with Spending
Politico – House Dems Mount Health Assault
The Hill – Don’t Look for Tax Reform in 2010

John Bolton – Obama’s Next Three Years
Real Clear Politics – Obama’s Speeches Become a Weak Point
The American – The High Cost of No Price
WSJ Editorial – The $222 Billion Health Care Cost Cure

Federal Debt: $12.308 trillion

Back in September, I chronicled the controversy that accompanied health care reform in the Amish community, where government assistance is usually refused as a matter of faith.

Now comes word that heavily Amish communities have lobbied to get themselves exempted from Obamacare’s insurance mandates, a set-aside that could extend to other, similarly situated groups such as Christian Scientists or Old Order Mennonites.

My hat is off to the religious groups that have been able to carve out an exemption. One wonders how far this trend will go. By the same standard, wouldn’t it be legitimate for Catholics to seek an out if they feel their faith is compromised by the abortion provisions in the new bill? What if Jehovah’s Witnesses are required to carry insurance with provisions for blood transfusions?

Of course, we don’t allow untrammeled discretion to religious beliefs.  If your religion sanctioned murder or theft, you wouldn’t get a pass from the state. Rather, the western tradition of liberty has always been strongly influenced by the concept of natural rights — that the aspects of individuals that constitute their inherent dignity as human beings should be immune from coercive influence by the state.

Health care is an area that overlaps with those rights so frequently that these early controversies will prove to be only the tip of the iceberg. Thus, health care reform doesn’t just represent government overreach — it involves a paradigm shift in the relationship between the government and the governed. If we were truly adhering to this nation’s natural rights tradition, every American would get the same right of refusal as the Amish.

A week from today the people of Massachusetts will elect a replacement for the now departed U.S. Senator Edward M. Kennedy. According to polling results, it’s a lot closer than most people thought. So close in fact that Dick Morris is helping craft a last minute commercial and media buy on behalf of Republican candidate Scott Brown.  Brown’s victory would unshackle the Senate from one-party rule and force President Obama to negotiate with the Republican opposition. It may even defeat Obamacare since Democrats will have to choose between passing the Senate’s version of health care without amendments or go back to the drawing board.

Will checks and balances be restored in Washington?

The Supreme Court, unexpectedly, did not issue its opinion in the First Amendment case of Citizens United v. FEC.  The Court heard oral arguments last September and many court watchers expected an opinion today.

Perhaps this delay means the opinion is larger and more sweeping than many observers anticipated.  The first major Supreme Court case reviewing McCain-Feingold, McConnell v. FEC, weighed in at 298 pages.  Will Citizens United top that figure?

The Court likely made up its mind last year but perhaps the long delay means that the lobbying continues.

Stay tuned for more coverage.

Washington Post – Federal Reserve Earned $45 Billion in 2009
WSJ – Stimulus? There’s No Stimulus Here
Fred Barnes – Unhappy New Year … For Democrats
Las Vegas Review-Journal – The Big Harry Mess

The Hill – ACLU Sues Library of Congress
Politico – Deadline Looms over Health Care Reform
National Review Online – The State of Play in Massachusetts
Red State – Sen. Dodd Says Health Bill Hanging by a Thread

Federal Debt: $12.304 trillion

In light of our recent video on air travel, reason.tv opines as well.

The argument for tort reform usually goes something like this.  Doctors like to practice medicine.  In order to practice medicine they need to carry a certain amount of medical malpractice insurance to cover the costs of their mistakes.  The price of med-mal insurance has risen over the years because more doctors are getting sued. The main drivers increasing costs are juries that award huge damages amounts to patients.  The higher the cost of insurance, the more a doctor’s compensation goes to pay for the privilege of working.  Eventually, doctors will choose not to practice medicine in places that make it cost prohibitive.  Thus, the argument goes, we need tort reform to cap the amount of damages a jury can award to keep doctors’ insurance costs manageable.

Perhaps it’s time for public university administrators to get on the tort reform bandwagon.  With the recent decisions of two now former head football coaches to contest their firings in court, the state governments in Texas and Florida may want to consider the issue.  Both Mike Leach of Texas Tech and Jim Leavitt of South Florida are accused of mistreating players.  Both were fired for cause.  And both were owed in excess of $10 million on their remaining contracts because were long-tenured and quite successful.  That each has decided his best option is to litigate rather than try to land another job indicates the severity of their conduct (if true), and the unlikelihood of getting similar riches in a contracting economy.

But the fact remains that each man was a state employee when fired, and though they are alleging defamation and constitutional violations against school administrators, a future legislature could curtail their amount of recovery.  Certainly, it doesn’t benefit tax payers to foot the bill for protracted litigation that will undoubtedly raise the cost of hiring future coaches.  If disputing firings becomes a trend among coaches, legislatures and school officials may need to reconsider the value and necessity of subsidizing such a liability when higher education budgets are being slashed across the country.

Not all behind-the-scenes political books definitively scuttle reputations and ambitions. For instance, former Bush speechwriter Matt Latimer’s “Speech-Less: Tales of a White House Survivor” caused a stir among fellow former Bushies, but after less than a month of notoriety, the book took its place on the shelves of the chattering classes to be consumed and forgotten. But “Game Change”, the new book by Mark Halperin and John Heilemann about the behind-the-scenes maneuvering during the 2008 presidential campaign is different. Way different.

Today’s Drudge Report has no less than four distinct links commenting on the book’s contents. There’s confirmation about John Edwards’ affair, and more than you ever wanted to know about his dysfunctional marriage. There are stories about the Clintons attempting to use slights and smears to undermine Barack Obama’s campaign. And of course, there’s more evidence that John McCain did a disservice to Sarah Palin and his supporters by failing to make sure she was prepared to be a Vice President. Oh yeah; don’t be surprised if Harry Reid’s racist remarks about Obama presage a Dodd-like retirement announcement after a health care “reform” bill gets signed.

While the information in this book isn’t likely to impact the 2010 congressional races because they’ll be a referendum on the Democrats’ control of Washington, the same can’t be said for which Republican candidates become serious presidential contnders in 2012. My guess is that the people most interested in this book are the politicos and journalists that make up the GOP establishment. Most of the sources denigrating Palin since the campaign are the moneymen and professional staff that have a hand in every presidential contest. They’ve seen her act before, and no amount of Tea Party support is going to persuade them to promote her to the top of the ticket next time around. And now they have a printed counter-argument to Palin’s “Going Rogue”.

All of which poses the question of who benefits the most from Palin’s likely marginalization? Probably Mitt Romney. While keeping a low media profile compared to Palin’s book tour and Mike Huckabee’s television show, Romney is doing the kind of chit building that wins primaries. Through his PAC and endorsements he’s currently in full back-scratching mode. Come campaign season, it will be time to cash in those chits for generous, top-down support.

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court resumes its 2009-2010 term with a round of two oral arguments.  Though the two cases that pit Alabama v. North Carolina and Briscoe v. Virginia have national legal implications, court watchers are eagerly awaiting other consequential decisions this term.

The fate of the First Amendment and campaign finance reform could be decided as early as tomorrow in Citizens United v. FEC.  The justices reargued the case on September 9, 2009, but the Court has yet to report a decision.  With federal primary elections less than a month away, candidates and First Amendment lawyers seek guidance from the Court as soon as possible.

The best case scenario would be a broad sweeping opinion striking down many of McCain-Feingold’s onerous First Amendment restrictions.

In addition, the spring term ushers in a new round of retirement speculation.  Justice John Paul Stevens is the oldest member of the Court, 89, and has not hired his full slate of clerks for the next Supreme Court term.

This article also mentioned the possible retirement of Justice Antonin Scalia.  Any vacancy would cause political wrangling in the Senate but a Scalia departure, coupled with President Obama’s liberal record on judges, would result in a judicial and political Armageddon unseen since the days of Judge Robert Bork.

Whatever occurs during the conclusion of this Supreme Court term will surely have major implications for individual rights and the future of our Constitution.

To give President Obama some credit, he knows how to get Congress in line.  Or,  perhaps Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid know how to crack the whip on their members.

According to Congressional Quarterly, Congress voted with the President 96.7% of the time in which he had a clearly stated position.  This broke the 44-year old mark set by President Lyndon Johnson, according to the study.  Oddly, President Johnson also had a miserable fiscal record.

Of course, many Democrats who voted with President Obama in the past will attempt to run as far away from the President as possible when pitching their “achievements” to voters.   Luckily, Congress can’t hide from its voting record.  From cap-and-trade, to tax hikes, to pork-barrel stimulus spending, this Congress has been far worse than the previous band of tax-and-spend acolytes.

Luckily, voters will have a chance to voice their disapproval on November 2.

New Hampshire Union Leader – Government Will Keep You Fit
Weekly Standard – Thank You, C-SPAN
Michael Barone – Up to a Point, Mr. President
The Hill – Tea Party Protesters Greet Lawmakers in Detroit

Politico – Democrats Rush to Reid’s Defense
New York Times – GOP Urges Reid to Step Down
Washington Examiner – A Massachusetts Miracle?
PC World – Court Questions FCC over Net Neutrality

Federal Debt: $12.299 trillion

There is a fascinating piece over at Foreign Policy from a former American paratrooper and human rights defender who was tasked to help remake Liberia’s decimated military. The almost humorously titled “I Built an African Army” provides a sober assessment of the big picture thinking needed to train, equip, and manage a developing country’s military. One of the most important insights was to inculcate ideas about social justice, and a soldier’s place in a democracy into recruits who identified themselves and others by tribe membership before citizenship.

And though the author doesn’t linger on it, early on he mentions that his mission on behalf of the U.S. State Department was contracted through DynCorp International, a private military company. Yes, liberals, there are plenty examples of private military contractors doing the kind of nuanced, real world nation building that all the money from the UN, WTO, and IMF couldn’t equal. It’s nice having a new round of ammunition.

Who says the Republican Party is a staid, top-down organization that values order over creativity? With the announcement of his book on how to regain majority status, Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele has something for everyone in the GOP to be shocked about. For congressional leaders it’s that Steele didn’t consult them before publishing it. And for conservative activists the most surprising thing about Steele’s book is that it indicates that at least one person in the party’s establishment has actually committed a plan to paper.

So why is Steele now claiming that he “wrote the book before he became chairman?” Granted, most chairmen keep a low profile while raising huge sums of money in order to let the politicians grab all the headlines. But come on. It’s not like the current congressional leadership has shown a knack for implementing winning campaign strategies the last two cycles. In fact, so far the most consequential decision made by the National Republican Senatorial Committee was not to spend money in contested Republican primaries because of the backlash from conservative activists and Tea Party members.

Maybe Steele shouldn’t be so public about pushing one specific plan for winning elections. Maybe he should sit back, collect checks, and let minority leaders Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and John Boehner (R-OH) find a path back to power.

Then again, maybe not.

Finally, a sudden bout of honesty from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on ObamaCare.

Before you get excited, however, you should read for yourself what she had to say, as reported by CBS News:

“The House and Senate plan [is] to put together the final health care reform bill behind closed doors according to an agreement by top Democrats,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said today at the White House.

In other words, after days of spewing laughable tales of how “open and transparent” the legislative process on health care has been, the Speaker has decided to be “open and transparent” about how non-transparent Congressional Democrats plan to be moving forward in their efforts to pass ObamaCare.

For more on this issue, read CFIF’s commentary titled, “The Transparency of the Presidential Lie.”

You know he must have really been in the wrong. The headline: “Obama Reneges on Health Care Transparency.”

This is hardly breaking news, but now that the national media has latched onto the story and White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs has spent the past few days parrying verbal barbs from the press, maybe President Obama and Congress will listen and actually open the doors for the American people to see what’s really going on during those backroom deals.

Mr. President, the ball is now in your court.

HT: Max Pappas