Category: Taxes

The Green Party.

Of course, there are some New Yorkers happy to see the GOP here, namely the finance types. “[T]he firms, which lean Republican in their political giving, are eager to show their gratitude to President Bush and GOP lawmakers for enacting legislation providing billions of dollars in tax and other benefits to their industry and for Bush’s pledge to seek even deeper tax cuts.” Yeah, I bet they are. Well, at least the GOP does in fact support their corporate “values”…In fact, Wall Street may be one of the few groups of self-professed Republicans around the country that aren’t being lied to constantly by the Bushies.

The A-Rod Write-Off.

Well, thank goodness the GOP Congress has finally done something to alleviate the financial burden of sports team ownership in this country. When I think of all the pain, misery, and degradation that Mark Cuban, George Steinbrenner, and other multi-millionaires have been subjected to by the tax code of late, my heart just sickens. Now hopefully Congress will turn their attention to eliminating the IRS entirely, and I’ll be able to sleep knowing that no corporate CEO or energy baron will ever again be unduly harrassed in this great nation.

The Art of the Kickback.

Meanwhile, Dubya has less to say about a sweetheart corporate tax package being pushed through Congress by the GOP, one that offers ridiculous handouts to various Republican-leaning business special interests. “[W]hat started as an effort to repeal a $5 billion-a-year subsidy has grown into one of the most significant corporate tax measures in years. The Senate bill, 980 pages long, includes more than $167 billion in business tax cuts over 10 years, handing out favors to NASCAR racetracks, foreign dog-race gamblers, Oldsmobile dealers and bow-and-arrow makers, to name a few.” Hmmm…might be time to invest in bow-and-arrow futures. Update: The bill passes the House.

But what about the politics of cynicism and misanthropy?


As it turns out, I was able to make it to the John Edwards event on campus this morning, and, all in all, I’d give him a B+. He both read and rushed through the first half of his remarks, which involved some new formulation of his trade policy (more on that in a second), and I found his opening lines particularly ham-handed and speechwriterly. “I know y’all have been waiting for a Son of the South to come to NYC…A-Rod,” he said (and I’m paraphrasing.) “Well, I’m not A-Rod, but Wisconsin proved one thing: I can close!” Um, ok, but A-Rod is a shortstop and all, not a closer.

Anyway, nitpicking aside, Edwards improved measurably once he put the paper down and got into the rhythm of his “Two Americas” stump speech, which he’d clearly delivered many times. There were moments, however, when he definitely could have embellished his standard schtick, given the crowd. Edwards talked about how he was a lonely, legal David often going up and winning cases against a Goliath-sized team of corporate lawyers, a biographical stat which probably plays great in the Heartland. It went flat here, though, perhaps because the many law students in the auditorium seemed confused by his remarks: But we want to be those well-paid corporate shills!

Still, Edwards came off extremely polished and personable, and he definitely got the crowd on his side, even when he was blindsided by a sneak “Campaign on AIDS!” protest on the dais behind him. Several members of the VIP crowd unveiled red-ribbon shirts and began chanting right in the middle of his biographical portion (In fact, I could’ve sworn it was right after he gave the “son of a millworker” line, which was a clever signal to choose, if nothing else.) Edwards gave them a moment, asked the crowd to applaud the “activism of these young people,” calmly told a heckler he’d address their point after finishing his bio, and then said a few positive words about fighting AIDS at home and abroad (A critical world issue to be sure, but not a particularly controversial one in this day and age…c’mon, y’all, this isn’t 1988. And why try to derail a candidate who is politically sympathetic to your cause, particularly when Karl Rove is across town?) At any rate, no harm no foul for Team Edwards: He navigated this potentially rocky shoal extremely successfully, although I presume some advance guy or gal was given the serious what-for soon thereafter.

As for the trade stuff, I liked where he was going at first, but he eventually seem to fall back on the fair trade side of the usual dichotomy. As I see it, the problem isn’t free trade itself per se as much as the loss of American jobs, as well as the ugly spectacle of corporations firing tons of US workers only to turn right around and offer up a fat dividend. Edwards obliquely mentioned this formulation, then fell back on tax breaks for “good” corporations and the trouble with NAFTA. My feeling is, if you want to stop this kind of behavior, there needs to be more stick and less carrot. Hit business where it hurts: Tax the heck out of (or even, God forbid, disallow) corporate dividends that occur in the same fiscal year as the downsizing of X number of American jobs. Simply put, if you can’t afford to pay your workers anymore, you damn well shouldn’t be paying dividends to stockholders. Edwards came close to saying thus, but then fell back into the old free trade/fair trade rut, which to my mind is a bit like shouting into the wind. If you want to change corporate behavior, focus on corporate behavior…don’t blame the increasingly irreversible trend of globalization.

At any rate, all in all Edwards came off quite well, although not as inspiring or Clintonesque as I would’ve originally liked. He’s definitely got a great future in the party and in American politics, and he’d no doubt make a solid contender in this election season against the likes of Dubya (or Dick Cheney.)

A Line (and Figure) in the Sand.

By respective votes of 303-125 and 87-12, the Iraq funding bill passes the House and Senate. (In terms of the Dem contenders, Lieberman and Gephardt voted in favor of the bill, while Kerry, Kucinich, and Edwards did not.) So Dubya got his money this time…let’s hope it’s enough to get the job done. Perhaps it’s time for Congress to reconsider the Biden Amendment?

Nickle and Dimed.

Don Nickles calls it quits, putting his Oklahoma Senate seat in play for 2004. “A businessman before coming to Washington, he championed business’s causes, including tax cuts, deregulation, curbs on damages from lawsuits and opposition to minimum wage increases.” Apparently, he decided to quit after botching his coup attempt during the Lott affair last December. Can’t say I’m sorry to see him go.

Hat in Hand.

While he’s still abusing the terrorism angle to hoodwink us on Iraq (As Howard Dean noted yesterday, the only indisputable thing Iraq has to do with terrorism is that we’ve now chosen it as the place where terrorists can attack us), Dubya at least admitted on nationwide television that unilaterally, we’re in over our head, which I suppose amounts to what alcoholics refer to as a moment of clarity. Yet, with the necessary Iraq funds — even lowballed as they are — threatening to blow the deficit to $525 billion, I do hope that the Bushies realize that the responsibility and sacrifice they’re expecting from the American people, our somewhat skeptical allies, and everyone but themselves in prosecuting this war should preclude any more discussion of a tax cut in the coming year. After all, why shouldn’t America’s wealthiest citizens also have to pay the heavy price for Dubya’s blundering, incompetent, and hubris-ridden diplomacy on the road to war?

Less Money, Mo. Problems.

Dubya ventures to the Midwest to hype the jobless recovery in Kansas City, site of 10,000 recent telecom layoffs. Perhaps he’d do better to sell his tax writeoff plan for the wealthy to a swing state it’s actually helped…that is, if he can find one. (In almost completely unrelated news, Doglover Dubya, via High Industrial.)