Posts tagged as:

Republican

Professor Ting Offers His Side of the Story

August 8, 2008 · 1 comment

Earlier today, I blogged the story of my former law professor’s expulsion from the GOP in Delaware. I followed up via email with Professor Ting, who graciously agreed to answer a series of questions about the fiasco – and his quick views on the candidates and tax reform – despite the fact that he’s currently on vacation!

Thanks to Professor Ting for telling his side of the story – and on such short notice. Here are the unedited answers to my questions:

1, According to the Journal, Sahm said that he told you that you should show discretion in public, through things like political donations, and “as a prominent Republican you should think of our party’s interests and put them above personal interests.” Do you feel that you were indiscreet or disloyal?


I feel that as a private citizen, I ought to be able to contribute money to any candidate I want, and attend any public meetings I want, notwithstanding my membership in and past service to one political party. But for the easy internet access to everyone’s political contributions I wouldn’t have this problem. What I was told could have come from the mouth of a Communist Party political commisar.

2, You’ve been a loyal Republican for such a long time, even while teaching at a predominately liberal school. Has this experience soured your view of the Republican party?


No one party has a monopoly on good ideas or political wisdom. The pendulum swings back and forth. Reagan was elected because the Democrats overplayed their hand. Now it looks like Obama will win because the Republicans did a bad job both in Iraq and at home. My suspicion is that if the Democrats win everything they will overplay their hand again, and the Republicans will be given another chance.

3, Do you regret that this happened – or that it was made public?


No. But I regret that the story came out while I was on vacation. This was something that happened back in April.

4, How did you come to be the advisor for Giuliani (which, by the way, is very cool)?


He looked like the Republican front-runner and was someone I could comfortably support. Much of the party leadership was on-board, and I signed up, too. The campaign then asked me to join one of their advisory committees, on immigration policy, and I of course welcomed the chance to try to help shape a candidate’s immigration policy.

5, What are your thoughts on the other Republican candidates who participated in the primary? Would your support for Obama be swayed if McCain chose a VP candidate like Giuliani? Are their any specific candidates for the VP office that you would endorse?


As a knee-jerk Republican, I probably could have fallen in line behind anyone other than McCain, even though I found Obama very appealing because of his opposition to the Iraq war. McCain is too old, doesn’t have the temperment to be President, having excoriated his fellow Republicans who had the temerity to disagree with him on immigration policy, and is a pandering flip-flopper. I don’t think anyone is really swayed by any presidential candidate’s choice for VP.

6, Can you comment briefly on both proposed tax plans – including whether or not you believe that either would actually pass in Congress? Along those lines, the Journal reported that you were not a fan of Obama’s tax plan – can you be more specific?


Like most Republicans I’m not a fan of tax increases for anyone. I’ve no doubt that too much government money is wasted through inefficiency and outright theft. Republicans however have overplayed the de-regulation concept. So now people want more from their government, and that’s going to require either more revenue or reduced spending elsewhere. Obama really is a bi-partisan compromiser, and is smart enough to understand and provide leadership on tax issues among others.

7, Clearly you don’t have a crystal ball, but with respect to tax reform, where do you think the candidates should be focusing their efforts?


Most serious students of tax policy agree on the broad outlines of reform: broader base, lower rates, simplification. I’m glad to see Obama embrace the notion of government-prepared tax returns based on all the information it collects anyway, which would reduce the expenditures now wasted on tax compliance and return preparation for most individual tax payers. I think it’s pretty clear which candidate is most likely to understand and embrace the challenge of tax reform.

Thanks again to Professor Ting for his thoughts. I’d love to hear comments from my readers!

{ 1 comment }

If You Like the War So Much, You Can Pay For It.

October 3, 2007 · 0 comments

Or so say three senior House Democrats who have proposed an income tax surcharge to pay the $150 billion annual cost of operations in Iraq (and the $40 billion annual cost of operations in Afghanistan). Rep. David Obey (D-WI), John Murtha (D-PA) and Jim McGovern (D-MA) introduced the bill, claiming that it is unfair to pass the cost of the war on to future generations. The surcharge would total about 2% for low- and middle-income taxpayers and 12-15% for upper class taxpayers.

The proposal was immediately shot down by ranking Democrats and Republicans.

Nonetheless, Obey said: “By putting together this bill we hope people will stop ignoring what this war is costing American taxpayers and call the president’s bluff on fiscal responsibility.”

In contrast, the Republican National Committee spokesman replied: “Americans will reject Democrat plans to take away their hard-earned dollars and will penalize the party that demonstrates an inability to win the War on Terror.”

Hmm. It’s a dilemma for both parties. On the one hand, the Republicans are incapable of touting themselves as the party of fiscal responsibility while continuing to pour dollars into a war that appears to have no end. On the other hand, the Democrats continue to cry foul about the war but are taking no real steps to end it other than increasing taxes. Neither party can claim the high road on this one.

{ 0 comments }

Tax Talk 2007: Ron Paul

May 21, 2007 · 12 comments

Our next presidential candidate to be featured in our series of interviews is Ron Paul, a Republican and Texas Representative.

Here are his unedited answers to my six questions:

1. What’s the single most important tax issue facing Americans today?

Simply put, taxes are too high.

2. If you could only make one “quick fix” in terms of an extra credit, a disallowed deduction, whatever – what would it be?

I would eliminate the income tax.

3. Which is a more egregious tax on the American public: the AMT or the federal estate tax?

It depends on your income level and personal situation. Both should be eliminated.

4. It has been suggested that the IRS should be eliminated. Do you believe that this makes sense, and if you do, what would you establish in its place?

I have advocated eliminating the IRS for my entire political career. The IRS could be replaced with a flat tax or national sales tax, although any consumption tax must be coupled with prompt repeal of the 16th amendment.

5. Do you think that significant tax cuts are possible considering the current state of the economy, specifically the escalating cost of the war in Iraq?

All tax cuts must be paid for with cuts in spending. I would start by changing our interventionist foreign policy, in which we spend hundreds of billions of dollars policing the world, fighting war and subsidizing the security of other wealthy nations. By changing our foreign policy, we can cut taxes and address the burgeoning problem of exploding entitlement spending.

6. And just for fun, if Uncle Sam handed you a huge refund check right now, what would you do with it?

I would buy gold.

–

Thanks, Congressman!

For more information on Representative Paul’s policies, visit his website.

{ 12 comments }