BCT Editorial – 4/19/06

This page was last updated on April 19, 2006.

Golden goose; Editorial; Beaver County Times; April 19, 2006.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“Congress reluctant to reform U.S. tax code because it benefits them not to do so

“One of the more amusing aspects of listening to members of Congress lament the labyrinthine tax system is that they’re the ones who are responsible for it.

“How complex is it? So complex that The Associated Press reports that three of the four top lawmakers on the Senate Finance and House Ways and Means committees, which are in charge of writing the nation’s tax laws, pay a professional to prepare their annual returns.

“The Washington Post reports that since Republicans gained control of Congress in 1994, ‘the number of pages of federal tax rules has soared by 64 percent, the hours Americans collectively spend complying with the tax code each year has surpassed 6 billion and the annual cost of complying has more than doubled to $265 billion.’

“One reason for this complexity is that tinkering with the tax code has become a way for Democratic and Republican members of Congress to promote their social agendas without having to pay for them.

“While it’s often difficult to find money for new programs that promote social engineering, tax credits don’t require the direct allocation of funds. They are a hidden way to reward supporters.

“Another reason the tax code is huge is because the needs of the special interests must be served.

“The code is shot full of clauses that are slipped into it by members of Congress to benefit specific businesses or individuals.

“Needless to say, those who benefit from this tax-code inclusiveness appreciate what was done for them come election time.

“For politicians, the U.S. tax code is the golden goose that never stops giving. That’s why everybody talks about tax reform but doesn’t do anything about it.”

[RWC] While this is one of those rare occasions when an editorial is completely correct, it is nonetheless just a tad hypocritical. Here’s why.

Using the tax code to promote economic, political, and social agendas has always been a foundation of communism/fascism/liberalism/Marxism/progressivism/socialism and unfortunately has become a staple of current Republicanism. This behavior violates conservative principles.

Now let’s get back to why the editorial is hypocritical. How many times have we read editorials supporting programs that “rob Peter to pay Paul?” Times’ positions on healthcare, mass transit, and public educations are just three examples.

Does anyone care to guess what position the Times would take on a tax code that employed a perfectly flat tax ($x per person) or a flat percentage tax (x% of income or purchases) with absolutely no adjustments, “credits,” deductions, exemptions, et cetera for anyone?