The president of the Club for Growth, the conservative group that supports free-market candidates in GOP primaries, strongly criticized the proposal by Sen. Robert P. Corker Jr. (R.-Tenn.) and Sen. James P. Lankford (R.-Okla.) that would create an automatic mechanism to raise federal taxes in the Senate’s tax reform bill.
“The idea of a ‘tax hike trigger’ should be rejected on its merits,” stated Club for Growth President David M. McIntosh.
Corker and Lankford successfully included their proposal, which would immediately raise federal taxes if the economy’s growth fell below the growth rate assumed in the economic models used to score the bill’s effect on the federal debt, into the tax bill that was reported out of the Senate Budget Committee Tuesday.
The Tennessee senator is a member of the Budget Committee and he met with Majority Leader A. Mitchell McConnell (R.-Ky.) before he offered his amendment to the tax bill that passed the committee.
McIntosh said it defied logic that the Congress would raise taxes because the economy is growing too slowly.
“Any senator who understands basic business principles and truly cares about the deficit should understand that this trigger is an automatic tax increase and will actually harm economic growth,” he said.
“It will have harmful impacts on American businesses and undermine any economic growth potential in this tax reform bill because businesses will not invest due to the possibility of a higher tax rate,” he said. “What Senators Lankford and Corker are saying here is that if the deficit gets too large, then they want to tax people more.”
McIntosh said a better solution was to force cuts on the other side of the ledger.
“Here’s an idea. How about cutting spending? Just yesterday Senator Lankford issued 100 wasteful examples of federal spending. But instead of cutting the programs, ironically, Senator Lankford would allow wasteful measures like them to continue to receive funding – through his automatic tax increases no less!” he said.
“If they’re truly worried about the deficit and they want to establish a trigger, then they should limit the size of government. A spending cut trigger would be a far better idea.”
Join the conversation!
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.
Derrick Wilburn Explains Why Democrats Are So OLD
Derrick Wilburn of Rocky Mountain Black Conservatives (RMBC) explains in a stirring new piece shared on Facebook why the Democratic Party leaders are so old, while the Republican Party — adherent to its own term-limit laws — provides fresh faces in committee leadership.
Quick, name a nationally-prominent Republican who’s under 60 years of age. Those who pay even the least bit of attention to the political game can likely name Tim Scott (52), Marco Rubio (46), Mia Love, (48), Ted Cruz (46), Rand Paul (54), Trey Gowdy (51), Nikki Haley (46) among others.
In recent weeks as many as 7 Republicans who are current committee chairmen have announced their intentions to retire from Congress. Why? Many in the media are attempting to sell the narrative that its because they sense impending doom. Not true. Its’ because the Republican caucus term limits its chairmanships and these have reached the end of their terms.
A recent piece in TheHill.com spotlights a key difference between the way the Republican caucus & Democrat caucus in Washington D.C. operate, but a difference few in the USA are aware of: “The term-limit policy, put in place by former Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) in 1994, was designed to keep the party from growing stale by regularly injecting new blood and fresh ideas into the mix.”
The GOP’s self-imposed rule is that legislators can not serve more than six years as the party’s top lawmaker on a committee. So once you’ve chaired a committee for six, you’re out and it someone else’s turn. And there’s no back-dooring it. Once you’re done, you’re done. You can’t return to committee member status for a year or two then run for Chair again. They can chair another committee, but not the same one again.
Democrats have no such rules and its at least a part of the reason there’s such a lack of youth in the Dem caucus leadership.
Apply the same question which opened this newsletter to today’s Democrat party leadership — *quick*, name a prominent Democrat, someone with presence on a national level — who’s under 60 years of age. Nancy Pelosi (78), Harry Reid (tho now retired most can name him, 80), Diane Feinstein (84), Chuck Schumer (68), Maxine Waters (80), Elizabeth Warren (70), Bernie Sanders (76 – tho technically an Independent not a Democrat) & the list goes on. All nationally prominent, all 70, 75, 80+ years of age.
Where’s the youth? Blame, at least in part, a lack of (self-imposed) term limits.
Democrats pay their dues early in their careers by carrying the water (i.e. providing necessary votes) and one day ascend to the desired position of Committee Chair, then stay there, …forever.
So what happens often times is younger Democrats win local elections, get to D.C., look up and realize that these old farts aren’t going anyplace! The old guard is from districts in which they can’t be un-elected; they’ve been their for 25 years; been chair for 14; are currently 72 years old meaning they’ll be Committee Chair for at least another 10 or 15 until they retire (if they ever do.) So the young bucks realize, “I’m frozen out.”
For example: Rep. John Conyers, who was forced to (finally) resign in December amid the #MeToo scandal, was born in 1929. Conyers helped draft the presidential articles of impeachment — against Richard Nixon! Conyers first won a seat on the Judiciary Committee in 1965. He first became Chair of the House Oversight Committee in 1989.
Imagine you’re a young lawyer, say 46 years old, a Democrat who just won an election and your dream has been to get to D.C. one day and chair a committee that’s chaired (when Dems are in power) by 70 y/o Elizabeth Warren. You know good & darn well that you’ve no hope of that chairmanship for another 10 or 15 years! What’s that do for your hopes for your future?
You’ve heard of, seen and know Trey Gowdy, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Tim Scott, and they’re nationally prominent because they get a shot at the top much earlier in their careers and that, at least in part, summarizes why pretty much the only Democrats you see on the nightly news speaking from a podium into a microphone at press conferences are old farts. Nancy Pelosi, Chuch Schumer. That’s just about it.
The situation caused the National Review to write a major piece which it titled “Old-Guard Democrats Refuse to Leave the Stage” sub-title “They’re keeping new leaders from emerging.”
Are term limits a good thing? That debate rages on. But the Capital Hill Republican party took the step of self-imposing them 25 years ago and it cannot be argued that the step has not created some very noticeable separation and differences between the parties.
-A Derrick Wilburn original
Al Gore’s Running Mate Tells Democrat Voters to Reject Socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
A former Senator is cautioning voters against voting for socialist candidate for U.S. Congress Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. “Ocasio-Cortez’s victory ‘seems likely...
Black Supremacist Tariq “King Flex” Nasheed has History of Authoring Sexist Books
A black supremacist and popular Twitter figure has a long and sordid history of writing books for the purpose of...
EXCLUSIVE: Police Investigate NY Times Reporter For Breaking Into GOP Staffer’s Home
Police and a Prince William County magistrate have opened an investigation into New York Times reporter Stephanie Saul for breaking...
San Francisco Board of Elections to Allow Non-Citizens to Vote
After two failed votes, the San Francisco Board of Elections has finally attained its goal of allowing illegal immigrants to...
Trump Turns On NRA and GOP Establishment, Endorses Underdog for Georgia Governor
Trump's endorsement of Kemp puts him at odds with the National Rifle Association, who endorsed his opponent.