James Talarico Still Can't Escape His Past
Ken Paxton Blasts James Talarico Over His Love for Taxes
After Letting the Homeless Freeze to Death, Mamdani Announces 'Extreme Heat' Executive Ord...
Acting AG Todd Blanche Announces Healthcare Fraud Charges Against Hundreds of Defendants
Scott Wiener Gets Dragged for Saying the Rainbow Is About 'Pride'
Despite Democrats' Best Efforts, Title IX Turns 54
Illegal Immigrant Busted After Using Uber Gig to Kidnap, Assault Passenger
After Smearing Elon Musk, Ro Khanna Is Desperately Trying to Avoid a Massive...
California Democrats Just Voted to Raise Healthcare Costs by Almost 97 Percent. Guess...
Algae Can Only Survive Off What Others Create—Just Like the Left
Iran Is Already Denying It Agreed to Nuclear Inspections
Trump Reveals Why He Isn't Worried About Releasing Frozen Iranian Funds
Tom Homan Levels Zohran Mamdani and DSA Candidate Over Their Fight to Abolish...
Planned Parenthood Endorses Graham Platner Despite Domestic Abuse Allegations
MLB Commissioner Backs Off Warning to Giants Players Over 'Pride Night' Bible Verses
OPINION

"Conservative Members" of Stupid Party Push Tax Increase

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.
"Conservative Members" of Stupid Party Push Tax Increase

What would you do if you saw somebody standing at the top of a skyscraper, about to jump? Would you avert your eyes in horror? Would you watch in dismay as they plummeted to the ground?

Advertisement

These are similar to the thoughts that are going through my mind as I watch Republicans begin the process of capitulating to a tax increase as part of the Supercommittee process.

Indeed, this is one of those moments when I desperately wish I was wrong. I warned back in August that the Supercommittee was a tax increase trap. Republicans have this lemming-like instinct to jump off the cliff, even though they get taken to the cleaners every time they agree to real tax increases and get make-believe spending cuts in exchange.

Here’s a depressing paragraph from a recent Washington Post story.

Tensions have mounted in recent days as two of the GOP’s most fervent anti-tax stalwarts on Capitol Hill — Sen. Patrick J. Toomey (Pa.) and Rep. Jeb Hensarling (Tex.) — have lobbied party colleagues behind the scenes to forgo their old allegiances and even break campaign promises by embracing hundreds of billions of dollars in tax hikes.

What makes this potential sellout so disturbing is that every dollar of tax increases will enable another dollar of wasteful spending.

Here’s what George Will wrote in his latest column about the GOP’s foolish naiveté.

Although only 21 of the 242 Republicans in the House and eight of 47 Republicans in the Senate were on Capitol Hill in 1990, everyone there should remember the results of that year’s budget agreement, wherein President George H.W. Bush jettisoned his “no new taxes” pledge: Taxes increased. So did spending. And the deficit. Economic growth decreased.

Advertisement

So why are Republicans thinking of repeating this mistake? Well, there’s no good answer, but the most commonly cited reason is that they have been misled into thinking that the alternative result – automatic “budget cuts” known as sequestration – is too harsh.

This is an absurd line of reasoning, in part because it is blatantly inaccurate. The supposed “budget cuts” are only reductions if one uses dishonest Washington budget math. For those who rely on real-world numbers, total spending will climb significantly even if the sequester occurs.

Here is a chart that was part of an excellent article by Veronique de Rugy of the Mercatus Center. It shows that spending – including defense spending – will increase regardless of what happens.

The only issue is whether members of the Stupid Party agree to a tax hike so that the burden of federal spending can climb even faster.

The Washington elites want a deal so they can transfer more money to Washington. For American taxpayers, however, the only good conclusion is a Supercommittee deadlock, followed by a sequester.

Daniel J. Mitchell, Cato Insitute- See Daniel's Blog

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement