![In the Age of the Selfish Voter]()
by | Jul 1, 2012
In a Representative Democracy, voting for a particular political candidate or philosophy is the most impactful way a citizenry can change their country. While the “who†a person votes for is what actively shapes a Republic, digging into the motivation behind that vote is far more telling, and ultimately reveals far more about ourselves and where we are heading.
As government involvement in Americans day-to-day lives has expanded, the possible motivating factors at play driving each citizens vote has also expanded—and the effects of this have been devastating. Boiled down to the most basic level, there are two motivations that influence a political vote—you can vote in what you believe is in the best interest of the country, or you can vote in your own personal interest.
In past generations, before the American government was so deeply involved in the giving business, the vast majority of our population largely had only the best interest of the country as a whole to consider. Unfortunately, today nearly half of our citizens have the legitimate option of choosing to vote for their own personal gain at the ballot box.
Not Your Grandfather’s Democratic Party
Though it sounds crass, the modern day Democratic Party has evolved into a selfish group of constituencies that have something to gain in voting for Democrats and against Republicans. While the most obvious entries on the list involve financial assistance from the economic safety net—unending unemployment benefits, housing subsidies, food stamps, Title 19, etc.—in recent years this list has grown to include several other things.
Hispanic Americans can now vote Democrat to ultimately allow their friends and relatives who are here illegally become citizens. Gay Americans can now vote Democrat to gain the right to marry and the economic advantages that come with it. Union members can vote Democrat in order to receive more favorably negotiated salaries and benefits at the bargaining table. Those Americans who, for whatever reason, did not have health insurance can now vote a straight Democratic ticket in hopes of retaining it, since they have now been given it.
In large part this massive constituency of selfishly driven voters explains what the mind-boggling national debt has become so out of control. Far more than any other issue, not running annual deficits and paying down the national debt are two things that are in the best interest of the country—and not necessarily in the best interest of each individual American.  The polling data bears this out showing that, even with the national debt north of $16 trillion, only 66% of Democrats cite lowering this number as a major priority.
Contrarians to this line of thinking will make the charge that Republicans vote in their own best interest by voting for politicians who believe in lowering their taxes. As usual this charge leaves out one unavoidable fact—that the money taken by the government for taxes is earned, and it belonged to the individual in the first place. Put simply, voting to keep more of your own money and not giving it away to a largely wasteful entitlement state (especially one with a progressive tax code) is not a greed driven motivation—rather it is a logical one.
What It Means
The selfishly motivated voter is the single biggest reason why European style democracies are self-feeding, self-defeating, unworkable, and unsustainable. Yet in spite of the real-time evidence playing out across the Atlantic, a near majority of Americans refuse to change course. Increasingly, it is hard not to assume a major reason why American voters are unwilling to do so is that they would be putting themselves out to do so.
The only way to break this cycle is for the Democrat Party to shift away from promising things to an ever-widening group of voters. The sad truth though is that they have built a political base only able to stand upright through some combination of deficit spending, large tax increases, and social pandering. They have become so politically dependent on various sub-groups that making decisions for the economic good of the country, even if they wanted to, would quickly result in them paying a huge political price and losing elections.
Whenever Americans choose to overlook our national interest and instead vote in favor of their own, neither is well served.
The post In the Age of the Selfish Voter appeared first on The Conservative Reader.
by | Jun 29, 2012
Following the Supreme Court ruling upholding The Affordable Care Act, the financial fallout for the American people must be re-highlighted. We will have political analysis in the coming days, but for now here are the facts regarding the tax implications of this law
Comprehensive List of Tax Hikes in Obamacare
Individual Mandate Excise Tax(Jan 2014): Starting in 2014, anyone not buying “qualifying†health insurance must pay an income surtax according to the higher of the following
|
1 Adult |
2 Adults |
3+ Adults |
| 2014 |
1% AGI/$95 |
1% AGI/$190 |
1% AGI/$285 |
| 2015 |
2% AGI/$325 |
2% AGI/$650 |
2% AGI/$975 |
| 2016 + |
2.5% AGI/$695 |
2.5% AGI/$1390 |
2.5% AGI/$2085 |
Exemptions for religious objectors, undocumented immigrants, prisoners, those earning less than the poverty line, members of Indian tribes, and hardship cases (determined by HHS)
Employer Mandate Tax(Jan 2014): If an employer does not offer health coverage, and at least one employee qualifies for a health tax credit, the employer must pay an additional non-deductible tax of $2000 for all full-time employees. This provision applies to all employers with 50 or more employees. If any employee actually receives coverage through the exchange, the penalty on the employer for that employee rises to $3000. If the employer requires a waiting period to enroll in coverage of 30-60 days, there is a $400 tax per employee ($600 if the period is 60 days or longer).
Combined score of individual and employer mandate tax penalty: $65 billion/10 years
Surtax on Investment Income ($123 billion/Jan. 2013): This increase involves the creation of a new, 3.8 percent surtax on investment income earned in households making at least $250,000 ($200,000 single). This would result in the following top tax rates on investment income
|
Capital Gains |
Dividends |
Other* |
| 2010-2012 |
15% |
15% |
35% |
| 2013+ (current law) |
23.8% |
43.4% |
43.4% |
| 2013+ (Obama budget) |
23.8% |
23.8% |
43.4% |
*Other unearned income includes (for surtax purposes) gross income from interest, annuities, royalties, net rents, and passive income in partnerships and Subchapter-S corporations. It does not include municipal bond interest or life insurance proceeds, since those do not add to gross income. It does not include active trade or business income, fair market value sales of ownership in pass-through entities, or distributions from retirement plans. The 3.8% surtax does not apply to non-resident aliens.
Excise Tax on Comprehensive Health Insurance Plans($32 bil/Jan 2018): Starting in 2018, new 40 percent excise tax on “Cadillac†health insurance plans ($10,200 single/$27,500 family). For early retirees and high-risk professions exists a higher threshold ($11,500 single/$29,450 family). CPI +1 percentage point indexed.
Hike in Medicare Payroll Tax($86.8 bil/Jan 2013): Current law and changes:
|
First $200,000 ($250,000 Married) Employer/Employee |
All Remaining Wages Employer/Employee |
| Current Law |
1.45%/1.45% 2.9% self-employed |
1.45%/1.45% 2.9% self-employed |
| Obamacare Tax Hike |
1.45%/1.45% 2.9% self-employed |
1.45%/2.35% 3.8% self-employed |
Medicine Cabinet Tax($5 bil/Jan 2011): Americans no longer able to use health savings account (HSA), flexible spending account (FSA), or health reimbursement (HRA) pre-tax dollars to purchase non-prescription, over-the-counter medicines (except insulin)
HSA Withdrawal Tax Hike($1.4 bil/Jan 2011): Increases additional tax on non-medical early withdrawals from an HSA from 10 to 20 percent, disadvantaging them relative to IRAs and other tax-advantaged accounts, which remain at 10 percent.
Flexible Spending Account Cap – aka“Special Needs Kids Taxâ€($13 bil/Jan 2013): Imposes cap of $2500 (Indexed to inflation after 2013) on FSAs (now unlimited). . There is one group of FSA owners for whom this new cap will be particularly cruel and onerous: parents of special needs children. There are thousands of families with special needs children in the United States, and many of them use FSAs to pay for special needs education. Tuition rates at one leading school that teaches special needs children in Washington, D.C. (National Child Research Center) can easily exceed $14,000 per year. Under tax rules, FSA dollars can be used to pay for this type of special needs education.
Tax on Medical Device Manufacturers($20 bil/Jan 2013): Medical device manufacturers employ 360,000 people in 6000 plants across the country. This law imposes a new 2.3% excise tax. Exemptions include items retailing for less than $100.
Raise “Haircut” for Medical Itemized Deduction from 7.5% to 10% of AGI($15.2 bil/Jan 2013): Currently, those facing high medical expenses are allowed a deduction for medical expenses to the extent that those expenses exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income (AGI). The new provision imposes a threshold of 10 percent of AGI; it is waived for 65+ taxpayers in 2013-2016 only.
Tax on Indoor Tanning Services($2.7 billion/July 1, 2010): New 10 percent excise tax on Americans using indoor tanning salons
Elimination of tax deduction for employer-provided retirement Rx drug coverage in coordination with Medicare Part D($4.5 bil/Jan 2013)
Blue Cross/Blue Shield Tax Hike($0.4 bil/Jan 2010): The special tax deduction in current law for Blue Cross/Blue Shield companies would only be allowed if 85 percent or more of premium revenues are spent on clinical services
Excise Tax on Charitable Hospitals(Min$/immediate): $50,000 per hospital if they fail to meet new “community health assessment needs,” “financial assistance,” and “billing and collection” rules set by HHS
Tax on Innovator Drug Companies($22.2 bil/Jan 2010): $2.3 billion annual tax on the industry imposed relative to share of sales made that year.
Tax on Health Insurers($60.1 bil/Jan 2014): Annual tax on the industry imposed relative to health insurance premiums collected that year. The stipulation phases in gradually until 2018, and is fully-imposed on firms with $50 million in profits.
$500,000 Annual Executive Compensation Limit for Health Insurance Executives($0.6 bil/Jan 2013)
Employer Reporting of Insurance on W-2(Min$/Jan 2011): Preamble to taxing health benefits on individual tax returns.
Corporate 1099-MISC Information Reporting($17.1 bil/Jan 2012): Requires businesses to send 1099-MISC information tax forms to corporations (currently limited to individuals), a huge compliance burden for small employers
“Black liquor†tax hike(Tax hike of $23.6 billion). This is a tax increase on a type of bio-fuel.
Codification of the “economic substance doctrineâ€(Tax hike of $4.5 billion). This provision allows the IRS to disallow completely-legal tax deductions and other legal tax-minimizing plans just because the IRS deems that the action lacks “substance†and is merely intended to reduce taxes owed.
by | Jun 18, 2012
Preparing for the Supreme Court Fallout
With the Supreme Court ruling on the Affordable Health Care Act expected within the next two weeks, both sides of the isle are busy making contingency plans. Two things of specific note here are:
- This decision will directly affect the next session of the Iowa Legislature. As of this moment the General Assembly has delayed setting up the insurance exchanges that are required in the health care law. If the law is upheld there will be mounting pressure on Iowa Republicans to begin this process quickly, and they will be forced to decide to either design the exchanges in order to have a say in how they are built, or take no action and risk having Iowa being governed by the exchange that the Federal government constructs.
- The decision’s details will have a great impact on our health care system as it pertains to the expansion of Medicaid. The working theory is that, as long as the whole law is not thrown out, the expansion of Medicaid that would put at least 16 million new people on the Medicaid roles would remain in effect. In this scenario action by Congress would be required to reverse this new reality. This highlights the importance of Republicans winning both the Senate and the Oval Office in November, regardless of the Supreme Court ruling.
    New York Times: With Justices Set to Rule on Health Law, Two Parties Strategize
An Early Analysis of Iowa in November
Take a look at the infrastructure the Obama and Romney campaigns are building in Iowa, and some of the factors at play in a crucial swing state.
Among some of the interesting things dealt with here are how having Steve King and the judicial retention elections on the November ballot will affect the Presidential race.
Slate: The Psychological State of IowaÂ
A Disturbing Sign of the Times
One wonders how long our Country can prosper while producing citizens capable of the following behavior–and having a social safety net that makes it possible.
Unbelievable and Despicable:Â News Channel 3 (Memphis): Memphis Man Owes Child Support to 15 Women
Even More Unbelievable and Despicable:Â News Channel 3 (Memphis):Â Tenn. Man “Fathers” 30 Kids But Can’t Support AnyÂ
by | Apr 25, 2012
Last night’s Polk County Central Committee meeting was a harbinger for both good and bad things to come for the future of Republicans in Polk County.
The Highlights
Among the several speakers to address the committee were Polk County Sheriff candidate Dan Charleston and Senator Rick Bertrand (pictured at right). Charleston has been very active in his attempt to unseat his boss Bill McCarthy, who has once again doubled down on his support for spreading controversial traffic cameras throughout Iowa. His bid to remove McCarthy will not be easy, however, this is an outcome that becomes more possible with McCarthy supporting a hot-button policy that the majority of Iowans reject. While Conservatives throughout Polk County will be rightly focused on state and Congressional seats in the coming months, it would be a mistake to ignore this race for sheriff. It can be easily argued that the performance and priorities of law enforcement has an equal impact on citizens at the County level as legislative seats. All Conservatives who are unaware of this race would be well advised to visit Dan Charleston’s website, were he lays out his positions on several issues (including traffic cameras and illegal immigration). It is safe to say he would bring a far different mindset to the job–and there is much to like.
While Senator Rick Bertrand was not on the agenda to speak, all in attendance were glad he made the trip. Speaking for nearly 20 minutes, he got fired up covering topics ranging from his background, his victory in a legal slander case against Iowa Democrats, and the future agenda of Senate Republicans.
Beyond being a gifted and enthusiastic speaker, the real positive to take away from his presence in the Iowa Senate is his potential to bridge the divides that have recently been created by the emergence of a more Libertarian brand of Republican in the party. I have asked him personally about the prospects of real legislative results from the Conservative movement in the Iowa Legislature–and I assure you he has a plan and will be front and center in achieving it. In my view, he is one of a handful of current Republican legislators who can effortlessly bridge the gap between the old and new guards in the Republican Party. In the coming months The Conservative Reader:Iowa will be laying out exactly what this 7 issue action plan is, and will be looking at each in detail.
The Low-Lights
Having been in attendance at the last two Central Committee meetings, there is little doubt left that the drama surrounding last month’s meeting is not going away. The divide between Chairman McLaughlin (along with other members of the leadership), and co-chair Dave Funk is quickly approaching critical mass. Several times during the meeting there was open bickering and contention between the two. This was taking place not in the side or back during down time, but actually during the meeting and at the front of the room.
As of this time I am not taking sides. Far more important than taking sides is finding some way for this strained situation to be resolved. Besides risking several political objects that are certainly within reach, this feud is simply embarrassing for all of the new folks who have been energized during the caucus and have made the time consuming decision to get involved. At this rate the attendance of these meetings will swell only on the grounds of voyeurism, as people will start coming to view a live version of the Jerry Springer Show. Finding a way to make these meetings a little less bland would be a more than worthy endeavor, however, this is not exactly what I had in mind.
Looking Forward
I will be in attendance at the next meeting, if it is plagued by these same issues than the report you read here following it will be of a far different tone. At that point critical mass will have unquestionably been reached and a movement to action will have to be initiated. With so much crucial work to be done in the coming months, continuing in this manner is simply not an option.
![In the Age of the Selfish Voter]()
by | Apr 24, 2012
The following is an op-ed I wrote some time ago that was edited slightly and then published by the Des Moines Register. After turning on the television, which was tuned to MTV, while babysitting my young niece and nephew recently I was reminded how unfortunately relevant this piece still is. The sections which are redacted below are ones that the Register was uncomfortable printing. This perhaps make the point most poignantly.
The following words were spoken on the floor of the U.S senate by Illinois Senator Dick Durbin in the heat of the recent debate on The Fairness Doctrine:
It takes away the authority of the Federal Communications Commission to basically determine that radio and television stations use their Federal licenses in the public interest. What does this mean? It means that the FCC can tell a television station it cannot put on a violent movie early on Saturday morning when kids are tuning into cartoons. It cannot put on something with sexual tones in it at a time when children and family are watching.
Heartwarming isn’t it.  Well it seems Mr. Durbin has not taken a look at his local T.V. menu lately. On my T.V. menu, here in Ankeny, Iowa, on the very day that Mr. Durbin spoke the above words, this is a sampling of what I found in the after school time slots of 3:00 to 5:00 p.m.
At 3:00 p.m. on MTV (Direct TV channel 331) we have a program called “Sex…With Mom and Dad.â€Â On today’s episode of this show we meet Natasha, a nineteen year old California girl who is self-described as a “party girl who is not afraid to experiment.â€Â She tells us that she ********************************************** at fifteen, and is having problems in her relationship with her single father—wait for it . . . —because she slept with one of his co-workers!
At 4:00 p.m., also on MTV (DTV channel 331), we have a show called “Room Raiders†where another nineteen year old girl is going through the bedrooms of three guys to decide who she is going to go out on a date with. In the first guy’s room we all have a good chuckle when she finds some female oral contraceptives in his night stand. In the second guy’s room she takes a magnifying glass to his bed sheets to find and then comment on the ********************** she sees. Fantastic. So maybe this is not your thing. Never fear you can also turn over to the gay, lesbian and trans-gendered network LOGO (yes, you do likely have this channel-DTV ch.272), whose midday offering is a 12:30 to 4:30 marathon of “RuPaul’s Drag Race,†in which a variety of gay and trans-gendered contestants vie to see who is the best drag queen.
This is but a small sampling of content that parents must be made aware, I could go on ad nauseam with examples but it’s safe to assume the point has been made. When we dig a little deeper into this we find every one of these shows comes from the same source, a company called Viacom.
Allow me to do the honors and introduce you to one Sumner Redstone. You likely are unfamiliar with him, but if you have any pre-teen or teenage children he has been trying to familiarize himself with them for years.
You see Mr. Redstone is the owner of Viacom, and thus is singularly responsible for a jaw-dropping amount of immoral garbage, not just in the aforementioned time slots but, unmercifully, around the clock. Also disturbing is that along with owning CBS, Paramount Pictures, Blockbuster Video (majority stock holder), MTV, MTV 2, VH1, CMT, and the gay, lesbian, trans-gendered LOGO network, Viacom, ironically, also owns Nickelodeon. Making matters worse is the fact that the stated demographic audience for MTV, MTV 2 and VH1 is 12-34 years of age (yes this is not a misprint, I said 12 years old). This age group is deemed very valuable to marketers because – you guessed it, they are by nature very impressionable and have a longer future consumer life.
Shining the light on Viacom and these types of shows is long overdue, for only with knowledge can we have action. I have a feeling the average American parent has no idea that this is going on, that a broadcaster would or could so brazenly put on shows, squarely aimed at their children, in after school time slots that teachers would get fired for putting on at school. Though it seems hard to believe I assure you that it is in fact occurring. Even if it means recording these shows with your DVR, I encourage parents of any aged children, not to take my word for it but to go to these channels (all of which are provided above) and become aware of this content themselves.
It is not my purpose to blame anyone for ignorance on this matter, and to the contrary maybe we all deserve a break on this one. Looking back at what was on the air when many of us were coming of age is very interesting. Those currently around the age of 70 had “The Whistling Wizard†and “Howdy Doody,†those around 60 had “The Millionaire†and “American Bandstand,†50 or so saw shows like “The Beverly Hillbilly’s†and “The Andy Griffin Show,†and if you are between 35-40 you had choices such as “The Love Boat†and “The Jefferson’s.â€Â Quite a far cry from “Sex…With Mom and Dad,†wouldn’t you say.
Since I suspect most of you parents out there do not condone sexually-charged, immorally bizarre programs being offered up to your children by Viacom and others, and clearly the regulating bodies are not looking out for your “public interest,†I urge all of you to contact your cable providers and, in the least, use your remote control’s parental blocking features. In many ways this is a unique opportunity. In a climate that too often finds us deeply divided on one political issue or another, this might be about as close to a shot at consensus as we get. Let us not lose the ability to at least stand up, and stand together when we can.
Finally here is a chance to act in the interest of not only our children, but plain common decency. Finally, here is something that we don’t get much of these days…something we can agree on.
The post Finally… Something We Can Agree On appeared first on The Conservative Reader.
In a Representative Democracy, voting for a particular political candidate or philosophy is the most impactful way a citizenry can change their country. While the “who†a person votes for is what actively shapes a Republic, digging into the motivation behind that vote is far more telling, and ultimately reveals far more about ourselves and where we are heading.
