Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Jack Kemp :: Townhall.com Columnist
Tax Cuts for the Middle Class
by Jack Kemp
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


This column is co-authored with Peter Ferrara, who is director of entitlement and budget policy for the Institute for Policy Innovation, and formerly served in the Reagan White House

Barack Obama says he supports a tax cut for 95 percent of all Americans. He is referring here to his proposal for a $500 refundable income tax credit for all workers, except those in the top 5 percent of income earners. These folks, for some reason, are to be singled out for "special treatment" -- i.e., tax increases -- unless, as he told ABC anchor George Stephanopoulos last week, "the economy remains weak." So apparently even Obama recognizes that his tax increases would be economically harmful.

Because Obama's tax credit does not reduce marginal tax rates, it will not benefit the economy. It provides no added incentives for work, savings, investment or business expansion. Because it's refundable (meaning workers get it even if they have little or no income tax liability), for many it will involve just another check from the government, rather than a reduction in tax liability. In those cases, it would not be a tax cut at all, but a transfer payment and a direct drain on tax revenues.

McCain proposes to double the personal exemption for each dependent from $3,500 to $7,000, for all families regardless of income. For middle-class workers in the 25 percent tax bracket, this $3,500 increase would reduce their tax liability by $875 for each child. While this tax cut also does not involve a reduction in marginal tax rates, it will promote working families with children.

But McCain also proposes marginal tax rate reductions that do promote economic growth and encourage investment. Because America today suffers from the second highest corporate tax rates in the industrialized world, McCain would help restore American competitiveness by reducing the federal corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 25 percent. This would benefit the middle class and workers by creating new jobs, at better wages, while strengthening the dollar.

It may even raise rather than reduce revenues. According to a 2007 study by the Treasury Department, Ireland -- with a 12.5 percent corporate tax rate -- raises almost 50 percent more revenue on a comparative basis than the United States does with a 35 percent rate.

McCain would also hold the top capital gains tax rate and dividend tax at 15 percent. Both of these would provide a much-needed boost for the value of stocks, which are now held by more than two-thirds of all Americans.

McCain further proposes to phase out the Alternative Minimum Tax, which would otherwise burden 25 million middle-class families. This will save middle-class families $2,700 each year on average, an overall middle-class tax cut of $60 billion per year. McCain's tax plan includes other provisions that would boost our economy, as well, including the expensing of new investment in equipment, machinery and technology.

Obama, by contrast, has proposed to raise marginal tax rates for almost every federal tax -- the individual income tax, the capital gains tax, the dividends tax, the payroll tax, the death tax, etc. He would further increase corporate taxes through such measures as the windfall profits tax on oil companies.

These marginal tax rate increases would dramatically discourage savings, investment, business expansion and job creation. Such tax increases would consequently slow the economy even further and reduce jobs and wages for working people and the middle class, while simultaneously weakening the dollar.

Republicans should promote additional middle-class tax cuts through fundamental reform of our confusing, contradictory and confiscatory tax code. Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., proposes to allow workers to choose a flatter tax system with a standard deduction of $25,000 for couples ($12,500 for singles), plus a personal deduction of $3,500 per family member (exempting the first $39,000 for a family of four).

A 10 percent tax rate would then apply to the next $100,000 for couples ($50,000 for singles), with a 25 percent rate above that. Currently, a 15 percent tax rate starts at $15,650 for couples ($7,825 for singles), with a 25 percent rate starting at $63,700 for couples ($31,850 for singles). Ryan's plan, which McCain has praised, would promote a powerful economic and investment boom, while creating jobs and good wages for millions.

Finally, the biggest middle-class tax cut of all would be allowing workers the freedom to choose personal accounts for Social Security, which McCain has also praised. These accounts should grow eventually to replace the entire payroll tax for those who choose them, with the accounts financing all the benefits now paid through the tax.

To the extent workers make this choice, this would eliminate payroll taxes on working people and the middle class, now the highest tax they pay. Instead, working people would be paying into their own personal store of family wealth, opening up broad new vistas of opportunity.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Jack Kemp is Founder and Chairman of Kemp Partners and a contributing columnist to Townhall.com.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Jack Kemp's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Thanks for the economics lesson.
Too bad it will be dumbed down to "Tax breaks for the wealthy!"

I agree!
So true Screwtape. The FACTS need to get out there!

The problem is
that the average voter does not understand the tax code well enough to interpret what Obama or McCain's proposals mean to them, their region, or their country. Not to say that the average voter is dense, but that taxes have become way too complicated. This is a great article that helps explain it.

However, another factor is that many patriotic Americans are proud of paying their taxes, and consider it somehow a put-down that they should be lowered. These are often the same hard-working folks who consider themselves fortunate to have the "burden" of children to raise and a decent income with which to do it. But they're too busy with their lives to do the research to see what's really happening. Unfortunately, many of them just say, "I don't care about the tax thing. I don't mind paying my fair share, and I'm voting Obama because he's for change." Sad indeed.

A simpler tax system is what we need. Sorry, H&R Block.

Julie
You got it. My old accounting professor has his PHD in taxes (of some sort, I could never figure it out) and he says he stays behind the curve on the tax laws. I am all for doing away with the federal income tax and instituting a federal sales tax. That way every time someone buys something they can see how much they are giving to Uncle Sugar.

Screwtape
Thanks. That's not a bad idea, although some will point out that a federal sales tax would penalize the poor. But what those folks fail to take into account is that, typically, the more you make, the more you spend. And I've never seen a local sales tax prevent a citizen from buying a big screen TV, even if they couldn't afford it, while complaining about the cost of milk.

County property taxes, in my area, are also a major problem. Are they in yours?


Ranger29-Huh?
What are you trying to say, buddy? Because almost none of your post made any sense to me, aside from, "hopefully the Republic can make it through". I hope so, too. But I am confident that the good, strong, citizens of our nation will make sure of it.

Julie
You would be wise to ignore Ranger Roberts posts. Please do not take what he says to heart. He is a very angry person who almost always attacks others because he cannot make a strong case.
Most here pity him.

RealCon
The problem is corporations don't pay taxes they just pass them on to the consumer -- so a tax on them is a tax on us. Also, if it costs them more to do business they hire less employees, pay less, and move overseas. And in the case of small business they go out of business.

Thanks STOK54
I forgot that Ranger29 is also the infamous jerk-Robert. There must be millions of people named "Robert" in the world, and it would be nice to know who is really posting this stuff, but... we wouldn't want to destroy the anonymity of the web, so I guess we should just let him show what a jerk he is.

It's easy to remain anonymous if you are as vague as Robert is with your posts. Some of us, I think, are so obviously ourselves that friends couldn't help but recognize us.

Go McCain/Palin!!!!


RealCon
""We already have experience with lowereing taxes on the investing classes to "create high paying jobs". It didn't work.""

I have one question for you.

Are you better off than you were TWO years ago?

Why not?


You dems keep crying that Bush destroyed the economy, but if I recall 2 years ago, Gas cost $2 less a gallon, and a lot more people had Jobs, and were paying their mortgages.

Gee, lets see, what happened 2 years ago that could have had an effect on the economy.

Oh Yes, I remember, Democrats took control of Both houses of Congress!

Gee, maybe it's NOT all bush's fault after all huh?

Nice try though.

LMAO! ©2008 Hal Drunkahue - Used without permission

Corporations... subsidized?
Did I read someone wrong? Or, was someone implying that lowering the taxes paid by corporations is the same as "subsidizing" them?

ronron...
You didn't read it wrong. Or we both did. I got that message, too. It is a fact, and it simply makes sense, that any business, when costs go up, will pass the additional costs on to it's customers as much as possible in order to maximize profits. However, because it is common sense that corporations which are forced to pay higher taxes will pass that additional cost on to it's customers, we must not expect a liberal to understand it. We have the second highest corporate tax rate in the world. Why would we even consider raising it?

WHY?
Why isn't it being pointed out that if the Bush tax cuts aren't made permanent and are allowed to expire (or voted to be eliminated by the democrats even before expiration), that everyones taxes will 'automatically' go up.
Of course, b.H.obama can 'promise' to reduce taxes (throw us some crumbs) for the 'bitter, gun toting, bible thumping' hard working Americans after our taxes have nearly doubled first.

FairTax is the only real answer
The current tax system punishes the behaviors we should encourage: savings, investment, running a business.
FairTax (federal sales tax balanced by elimination of all other federal taxes by employers and employees) will reverse the behavior.
Companies will stop exporting jobs. Just look at the success of Ireland after they reduced corporate tax rates...

Also, the majority of lobbyists will be out of business.

Politicians will no longer be able to "buy" votes with tax favors, like phony "rebates".

Simjpify Taxes
Each year, taxes get more complicated. A tax on what you purchase or spend or any other type of tax is better than what we have. Even tax experts have to keep on top of the changes every year.

Born Free - Taxed to Death
What in the world is wrong with the Fair Tax idea? Where has it gone: buried in political manuevering with no real concern for the working people that put them up there in the Ivory Towers - that's where!

McCain/Palin '08

Ben is right, et al
I am also for the Fair Tax, a consumer tax. Please read the book!

We tax our corporations higher than most other countries, and wonder why jobs are going overseas. We can also thank the unions, for pricing us out of a job. Corporations don't pay taxes, WE DO!

Kemp writes...
"Republicans should promote additional middle-class tax cuts through fundamental reform of our confusing, contradictory and confiscatory tax code."

Well, he's right of course. But it ain't gonna happen. The lobbys for tax lawyers and CPA's won't let it happen.

When you have a situation where ten IDENTICAL tax returns are given to ten competent accountants to determine the tax liability, and they come up with ten different answers (all of them correct, by the way), you have a tax code that should be repealed.

But, like I say, it ain't gonna happen. Dems love to use the tax code for "social engineering," i.e., redistribution of wealth, which amounts to taking from the rich and giving to the poor.

Everything obama wants to do has
been tried in the past and failed.
He thinks Social security is just fine, but the FICA tax cap should be higher. The cap was $1200 and the tax was 1% when that Ponzi scheme was instituted and we see where it is NOW. The ONLY way to fix it is to scrap the damn thing and privatize it...done right, no-one gets hurt and everyone will retire with no increase in the retirement age and with more money.
You age index the changeover over a 20 year time frame, us oldsters will be dead so it is a natural progression from one system to another.
The dems won't do it, so elect republicans who actually care or you'll never see a dime.

I'm still waiting
for Bill Clinton's much-hyped, never-was middle class tax cut.

Trickle down economics doesn't work?
What would you do?
Suppose you gave every "poor" person 100K cash and cut off all welfare tommorow, all subsidies, everything...what would happen?

Would they save it, invest it, start a business or would they blow it on whatever suits their fancy and come back for more?

Something that is not earned is not valued.


Ben is right, ronrontaiwan...
You two have got it.

The Dims have been doing this for years.

Lessening of confiscatory tax rates are termed "subsidies to the rich".

Giveaways to those who pay no taxes are termed "tax breaks for the middle class".

Reductions in the rates of increase in spending programs favored by the Dims, while actually amounting to net increases in spending, are routinely called "slashes in vital socail programs".

It all comes back to the media. Outright lies and distortions of this type should be exposed by an honest and unbiased media.

I agree with earlier posters in that the McCain/Palin campaign needs to get this economic message out the the American people in a simple and effective way. Hammer Obama on his acknowledgement that raising taxes is not advisable given a weak economy.

Your Obedient Servant,

GW

RealCon[man]
The REASON there are so many "loopholes" for corporations is BECAUSE we have the second highest corporate tax, you moron.

Tell me, just how many jobs do you think corporations would keep here in the US if they were unable to avoid much of the tax burden our stupidly high corporate tax would levy from then without the "loopholes"? Why WOULD they stick around if they could simply move to Ireland, tell you Communist idiots to "eff off", and do just as much or more business?

RealCon = Typical Liberal.
Some guy who would have been a common thief, except that he lacks sufficient character to stick a snubnose into the ribs of some teenage convenience store clerk.

To read some of his other posts, he's a narcistic paranoid conspiracy theorist, too.

He's right about one thing, though; He's far to immature to ever stand on his own feet; the rest of us will have to support his useless donkey.

Don Juan PhD in Econ
There was no such thing as Trickle down econ. That is a fallacy. Money or captial does not "trickle down". That phrase is old and worn out. Read the book "Basic Economics".
Corporations create jobs and businesses opps using capital. The lost opportunity cost of that capital(about 35-40%) goes towards taxes. Some of those taxes are recouped from the consumer, but not all. That lost opportunity cost could go to various things in a business. Giving a potential business owner a 10% increase in potential cash on hand in the aggregate will boost the economy. Tax cuts on the coporations and small to-mid sized biz owners will expand the economy, not trickle down to the poor. If anything it expands the playing field and lowers the bar for new biz owners.

Same old Same Old From Jack
It's funny how Republicans never think about funding the government with these explanations of their theories about the tax code.

Bill Clinton raised income taxes and cut capital gains/dividends taxes which I think was the right balance for the tax code. We had one of the biggest economic booms in American history and he reduced the number of insured children in this country.

Tax increases don't always have long term impact on economic growth. As long as the federal income, payroll and state income taxes combine for all people are less than 50%, you will continue to have economic growth. Tax increases which are still under that rate will usually only slow economic growth for two quarters or less which is how long it usually takes business to adjust to the new rates.

65% of corporations don't pay the corporate income tax including some of the most profitable companies in the country like Microsoft.So what exactly would you gain by reducing it?

Obama could raise the capital gains tax back to 20% & it would have almost no effect on capital gains activity. He could get away with raising the top rate to 37% without a significant impact on the economy. Now the fact that he wants to sufficiently raise the caps on the payroll tax would be bad policy. The Windfall profit tax on oil companies is bad policy too.

Finally, I just want to say this for all you people that are always about me with these tax policy ideas and always bitching about the redistribution of wealth and socialist left wing agenda of the Dems with their progressive tax code. If you look at almost anything that's good about America since WWII it has been funded by a highly progressive tax codes and theses redistribution of wealth schemes of the Dems. The GI Bill, which allowed for GIs to get a college education and to buy a home through the FHA was funded by a 91% Top Tax rate. It also made home ownership a middle class ideal with 70% of Americans owning homes

Debonair
You said something that is profound:
"It's funny how Republicans never think about funding the government with these explanations of their theories about the tax code."
These are not theories, they have worked in practice. It has been proven that tax revenues have increased when taxes have been reduced. Look at the actual financials to back this claim.
The REAL problem is the other side of the equation:Govt spending. There is ZERO accountability in this area. That over use of Govt spending creates another "tax", it is called inflation.

Rebuttal to RealCon & DonJuan
Please, for your own good , study & comprehend some basic economic reality. That which is subsidized,increases.Behaviour which is penalized,shrinks.
Labor markets (wages) are driven by demand, supply, and productivity; and are as competitive as other markets,absent artificial constraints such as Unions or minimum wage laws.
Just because one may advocate for free market capitalism,it does NOT logically follow they're for wasteful subsidies, price supports, lobbyist-driven gov't favoritism or no-bid contracts. Both political parties contain culprits, this is why a "maverick" like McCain is needed.
Regarding marginal tax rates; they DO affect behaviour. There may be a "sweet spot" on the Laffer curve, we haven't found it yet. Clinton's increase of top individual rates didn't APPEAR to negatively impact the continuing (from Reagan) entrepreneurial boom, but the increase from 31% to 39.6% MAY have been mitigated by lowering capital gains rates.

LuLu
It is a fallacy that we have to reduce the corporate tax rate from 35% to something lower. It is a fact that the average large corporation doesn't pay any tax. And when the totals are averaged it comes out to a rate of around 17%.

By the way, who's going to pay down the national debt?

http://www.ctj.org/corpfed04pr.pdf
http://www.parade.com/articles/editions/2008/edition_04-13- 2008/Intelligence_Report

No good
Barack Obama's economic plan to reduce taxes is nothing but a pyramid scheme. The bottom 40% don't pay any taxes, by taxing the upper middle class, the wealthy and businesses he will be able to give this bottom 40% bonus checks. This does not help the economy, it only transfers money from one group of people to another. The Governments only income is the taxes that they collect and transferring money from one group of people to another does not create any more revenue for the Govt.

Rebut/RealCon/Lulu cont.
Taxing different actions with different rates will encourage some behaviour and discourage others. Does ANYONE believe interest income, which is predictable and guaranteed, should be taxed at the same rate as capital gains ? One encourages taking risks in expanding businesses and startup enterprises, while the other favors sitting back and playing safe.Which creates new jobs and furthers productivity with new technologies ?
Similiarly I believe there is another "sweet spot" when considering corporate tax rates, and we haven't found IT yet. In a global economy America must NOT have to compete with one hand tied behind its' back.
Finally, Obama's announced plans are NOT new, not capital-enhancing and DEFINITELY not job-creating.

Merle
I'm not sure what Obama's tax plan is but if he were to increase the taxes on the top 1% by ohhhh, let's say 3% we could start paying down some of the debt run up in the last 8 years. We could probably pick up an extra $300-400 billion/year. Not a lot but not chump-change.

failing banks
McCain and Gramm fought with their political office to stop any investigations and put no regulations on fanacial banks.this started with the S&l mess in the late 80's and early 90's.Now they want to regulate.people then did not count and lost their money.running for a higher office makes one say anything to get there.he is a fanatic.

lower business taxes.
Using a tax plan that only re-distributes taxes will not give the Govt any additional revenue. The way to do this is by lowering taxes on businesses which will allow them to expand and in turn create jobs and additional revenue for the govt to pay their bills.Obama's tax plan won't create any jobs and no growth.The tax and spend policys of the past have been failures,Bill Clinton was somewhat sucessful in growing the economy because of the dot.com bubble, but did not address the growing problem of terrorism and thus did not have to spend money on that problem.

Tax cuts for the middle class
Thanks Jack Kemp. Now we know the truth!

Obama just doesn't get it!
I know that's a favorite phrase of the left, but I really have to believe that most of them have never seen and therefore could not understand a profit and loss statement. They make assumptions about business that completely leaves out risk and free will. No business is guaranteed to succeed, in fact, many of them fail. I don't think we should be bailing out poorly managed companies and if that makes more people unemployed for a while, well, too bad, so sad, sucks to be you, if you were a better worker you could get a job at a better company.

No one can force you to work for a company, just as no one should force a company to hire you. No one can force you to buy their product, just as you can not force them to give you their product for less than they are willing to accept.

The reality is that businesses don't pay taxes, consumers do, so before you buy into the "tax the big bad business" mentality remember who will actually be footing the bill.

Just additional wealth redistibution...
When you give tax money back to people who did not pay it in the first place it is not a tax cut. It is simply an additional form of wealth redistribution in excess of what the acknowledged wealth redistribution plans enacted by Congress do. If you haven’t put enough programs in place to redistribute as much wealth as you collected, why simply give it directly to those who you want to have it, (vote for you) and call it a tax cut or rebate.

John Shaft
I know the data and what you say is true but the other side of that equation is: Will the lost in tax revenues from the cut be offset by the increase economic activity.

For example, less say the government collects 20% in capital gains taxes on 100 million dollars in capital gains activity. That's 20 million in tax revenue. If you lower the tax to 15%. The economy has to produce 134 million in capital gains activity to produce the same amount of revenue. You are making a bet the a 5 basis point reduction in the tax is going to get you a 34%+ increase in capital gains activity. This may not be the case.

Once you get a tax below people avoidance level, meaning the tax amount that makes them change their behavoir to avoid paying the tax, the tax cut or increase has a nominal effect.

You saw this under Clinton with the income tax increase. People made the adjustment and continue their economic activities. Clinton also cut the capital gains tax from 28% to 20% which got the capital gains tax below alot of people's avoidance level and you had a big increase in capitals gain activity. You had a lot people cash out long term position in companies like MSFT and Coke after that cut and tons of money came into the treasury. If he had just cut it to 25%, I don't think it would have made that big of an impact.

People like Jack want you to believe the supply side model always works but it may not work that way.

Debonair
Exactly. I referred to this area of tax rate level as the "sweet spot" in previous posts.
As you say, lowering the cap. gains rate may have mitigated the effect of raising top marginal individual ordinary income rates. In the abstract, it suggests this spot is somewhere between 31 % and 39.6 %. However, Bush's lowering it to 35 % seems to have increased revenues AGAIN.
Now we need to find the "spot" for corporate rates, I'd guess it to be somewhere between 15% and 25 %, IF all other things ( subsidies, incentives, boondoggles ALL ended) were equal.
Regarding deficits, I believe excessive spending, specifically earmarks, and wasteful inefficiencies are the problem.

NO LAW CAN MAKE ME STUPID
Obama is a fool if he thinks he can generate the additional revenues he wants with his tax increases. Non-liberals aren't stupid, and to avoid paying higher capital gains taxes they will simply not sell anything that causes a gain. You'd have to be an idiot not to move your money around before Obama is sworn in. I'm making my plans now, as I have no desire to let Obama use my hard-earned money to fund socialist schemes.

Now let me see... where is it that the Kennedys hide their money? Figi?

http://www.colony14.net

If you took all the money...
If you took all the money in the nation and divided it up equally among all the citizens, I'd venture a guess that within a few years the people who used to be wealthy would agian be welathy and the people who used to be poor will be poor again.

Taking money from one person to give to another is not the answer. Give people an incentive to work and they will prosper. Raising taxs - any tax - is a disincentive to work. WHy can't liberals understand that?

We all have our thresholds. If mine is reached uner Obama, I will simply close my business and retire - leaving a lot of people out of work. Why should I work 12 hour days 6 days a week so that Obama can send $65 billion per year to the United Nations for a ludicrous anti-global poverty program? The U.N. will waste in 10 seconds more than I can make in a lifetime.

If Obama is elected, I'll move to Texas or Alaska and work to secede from the union. Then we won't sell Obama any of our "foreign" oil!

http://www.colony14.net

Buy the vote
Promises of tax cuts and credits for the poorer 95% is a blatant attempt to buy the vote of the poor and middle class.

HELP FOR THE "LITTLEMAN" ANYONE???!!!
Mr. McCain WHAT A CROCK !! "OBAMA TO BLAME" YOU ARE THE ONE THAT "SUSPENDED HIS CAMPAIGN TO FIX THE MESS" WELL HAVE YOU??? IS IT NOT "YOUR PARTY, AND YOUR MEMBERS, FROM YOUR STATE, THAT KILL THE DEAL?????" OBAMA TO BLAME? PLEASE TELL ME HOW???

YOU DEREGULATE THE BANKING SYSTEM YOU, AND YOUR PARTY GAVE THE TAX BRAKE TO YOUR FAT CATS!! AND TO "THE LITTLE MAN" WAS GIVEN A TAX LOAN, SAY, DID YOU ALL NOT KNOW THIS?? WELL THE YEAR AFTER "THE TAX BRAKE, THE LITTLE MAN HAD TO GIVE BACK WHAT WAS GIVEN TO THEM BEFORE THEY GOULD GET A REFUND" IS THAT NOT A LOAN?? DID THE FAT CATS DO THAT? HELL NO!!!
YEAR AFTER YEAR YOU ALL GIVE YOURSELVES A PAY RAISE IN THE DEAD OF NIGHT, WE DO NOT GET TO VOTE ON IT (THAT IS SOMETHING THAT MUST BE CHANGE) WE THE PEOPLE EMPLOY YOU ALL, WE MUST HAVE A SAY WHEN AND HOW MUCH IF ANY RAISE YOU OBTAIN IS THAT NOT HOW A BUSINESS IS RUN?? HOW ABOUT A CUT IN MEDICAL COVERAGE SO THAT WE THE PEOPLE CAN OBTAIN SOME OF THAT "WELFARE??? "

HELP FOR THE "LITTLEMAN" ANYONE???!!!


NOW THAT WE ARE ALL IN THE SAME BOAT, SHOULD YOU ALL NOT GIVE BACK SOME OF THE PIRKS THAT YOU ENJOY SO THAT, GOOD CITIZEN THAT YOU ARE ,CAN FEAL SOME OF OUR PAIN??? TRY LIVING ON MINIMUM WAGE FOR A WEEK SO THAT YOU CAN BETTER JUDGE US, THAT IS ASKING FOR A HAND OUT??? OH NO!! I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT YOUR FRIENDS THE BANKS !! THEY DESERVE THE "BAIL OUT"' DON'T THEY?? SNICKER!SNICKER!!! HA!HA! I AM TALKING ABOUT WE THE PEOPLE THE ONES THAT PAY TAXES!! THAT IS LOSING OUR HOME ! DYING UNDER THE CREDIT CARDS AND BANK PRATICE THAT, TAKE AND KEEP ON TAKING , WITH LOAN SHARKING, THAT WOULD GET ANYONE ELS IN PRISON BUT YOUR FRIENDS, THE PRACTICE OF EVERY ONE, RAISING YOUR RATE WHEN YOU ARE LATE WITH ONE PAYMENT TO ONE PERSON, SHOULD NOT ALL THIS BE SNEAK IN TO THIS BILL, AS IS THE PRATICIS SO THAT "WE THE PEOPLE " OBTAIN THE RELIEF THAT WE DESERVE???

LAST BUT NOT LEAST WHY DOES Mrs. PLAIN NEED A CHAPERON WHENEVER SHE SPEAK TO THE PRESS OR REPORTER??!! GOD FOR BID THAT YOU ARE NOT HERE AND SHE HAS TO TAKE OVER WILL SHE HAVE ONE THEN??? I DO NOT GET IT??
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.