Thursday, March 24, 2011

Jan Schakowsky's Fairness in Taxation Act Is Hardly "Fair"

Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky of (where else?) Illinois has introduced a bill for the Fairness in Taxation Act.  What does this wonderful bill do?  It introduces newer, and higher tax brackets for millionaires and billionaires:

•$1-10 million: 45%

•$10-20 million: 46%

•$20-100 million: 47%

•$100 million to $1 billion: 48%

•$1 billion and over: 49%
 
Here's what she said (from the above link), emphasis added by me:

It’s time for millionaires and billionaires to pay their fair share, which is why I introduced the Fairness in Taxation Act. This isn’t about punishment or revenge. It’s about fairness. It’s about avoiding budget cuts that harm middle class families and those who aspire to it. We can choose to cut education, job creation and health care, or we can choose to ask those who can contribute more to do so.
Oh, really?  You have to have a lot of balls to single out one group of individuals (here, the rich) and then title a bill "Fairness."  Old reliable Dictionary.com defines fair as "free from bias, dishonesty, or injustice."  This bill seems pretty biased to me.  Additionally, when you are introducing a bill and trying to make it into THE LAW, you cease to be "asking" people to do anything -- you are forcing them to do what you want them to do.  I would venture to guess that the millionaires and billionaires out there are contributing to the charities of their choice with their earned money.  Maybe encouraging them to do more of that would be "asking them to contribute more."  Why not just call a spade a spade?  Why call it the "Fairness in Taxation Act"?  It should be called "The People Who Earn More Money Who Are Capable of Contributing More Money Should Be Forced to Contribute More Money Act of 2011."

Even though this bill would not affect me -- yet -- I still do not understand this "fair share" the Democrats go on and on about.  Just because someone is able to pay more money in taxes doesn't mean it is "fair" to force them to do so.  I won't retread old ground with my opinion on that, though.

We could also choose to cut spending in other areas.  It would seem to me that rather than try to take more money from taxpayers, all members of Congress should be forced to read the GAO Report on Selected Federal Programs that Have Similar or Overlapping Objectives, Provide Similar Services, or Are Fragmented Across Government Missions.   The GAO found that billions could be saved annually by cleaning some of this up.  Considering that the preparation of this report probably cost us taxpayers millions, maybe it would be useful to consider putting some of these suggestions into practice?  Or would that be too difficult? 

2 comments:

  1. All I want is for the government to cut the damn spending, audit every single department/organization everywhere, consolidate, etc... and everything would be fine!

    ReplyDelete