jump to last post 1-11 of 11 discussions (13 posts)

A pledge to not ever, ever raise taxes.

  1. peoplepower73 profile image93
    peoplepower73posted 5 years ago

    Grover Norquist is a conservative republican political lobbyists who made the republican congress sign a pledge to never raise raise taxes.  Now there are some republicans who are saying they want out.  Up until this last election, he has been able to hold them to this pledge.  Here is the latest news on him.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/20/us/po … -test.html

    After reading this, do you think he will still hold the power to keep them from raising taxes?

    1. PrettyPanther profile image83
      PrettyPantherposted 5 years ago

      I think it is bordering on criminal for an elected official to sign a pledge to a lobbyist.  Politicians are beholden only to their constituents and their constituents should fire them for making promises to a self-serving lobbyist out of fear.

      In answer to your question, I think some will finally break rank and vote for tax increases for those making over $1 million.

      1. JayeWisdom profile image93
        JayeWisdomposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        I don't think it's "bordering" on criminal for an elected official to sign a pledge to a lobbyist that affects the American people--I think it's high treason!  I hope more than a few Congressional representatives will remember who they really should answer to, their constituents, and act in the best interests of ALL American citizens, not just a small percentage, and the best interest of the country.   Loyalty to a lobbyist who is paid by big business and/or the ultra-wealthy 1% of the nation's population to ensure that bills get passed that favor them only (or don't get passed if that's what they want) is not in the best interest of the USA and its overall citizenry.

    2. wilderness profile image97
      wildernessposted 5 years ago

      Wrong.  The attitude that an elected official in DC is beholden to and owes only the people that elected him is what causes the billions upon billions of wasteful spending we find in the thousands of earmarks each budget contains.  There are, of course, many other results as well, nearly all as objectionable.

      A politicians FIRST priority needs to be running the country (or state, county, city etc.) in the best interests of the country, not just in the best interests of their constituents and especially not to provide for what his constituents want but that is NOT the interests of the country as a whole.

      I fully agree, though, that any politician agreeing to support a lobbyist in exchange for money, personal or campaign, needs to fired immediately.  By either congress OR those that voted him in.

      1. PrettyPanther profile image83
        PrettyPantherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        I pretty much agree with you.  I think generally what is in the best interests of the country is ultimately in the best interests of a politician's constituents, even if on the surface it might not immediately appear to be.

    3. psycheskinner profile image83
      psycheskinnerposted 5 years ago

      Either taxes will go up *and* entitlements go down, or the country will crash and burn--no matter what they sign.

    4. peoplepower73 profile image93
      peoplepower73posted 5 years ago

      Congressman are constantly campaigning for re-election.  The house is every two years. The senate is every six years, but it is divided into thirds.  So every two years one third is campaigning for re-election.  They get funded by big moneyed interests.  Therefore, they are beholden to them, not to the man on the street.  The only reason they need the man on the street is to get the votes.  But they have to pay their debt to the big moneyed people by supporting their interests, not the man on the street. 

      Grover Norquist is very well connected to those big money interests and he essentially runs a protection racket to keep the game going.  If a republican congressman doesn't sign the pledge, his chances of getting re-elected are reduced.  But it appears as if things are changing now, because some congressman are tired of  playing his game.

      They know that raising taxes on those earning over 250,000 is the only way we are going to lower the deficit on the income side of the equation.  On the expense side, they don't have to touch social security and medicare, they can cut spending on defense.  Defense is loaded with corruption and fraud and needs to be trimmed.  They can do this without affecting our national security.

    5. peoplepower73 profile image93
      peoplepower73posted 5 years ago

      There is hope for the GOP.  A top republican senator is bailing out of the Grover Norquist Pledge to not raise taxes.  Read this. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/20 … ax-pledge/

    6. tillsontitan profile image90
      tillsontitanposted 5 years ago

      The people and the economy should dictate the way things need to be.  If Social Security (hypothetical here) were going to crash and burn in two years you would certainly need to raise taxes to keep it solvent.  On the other hand, to raise taxes because the government can't figure out how to contain it's spending is another story all together. The PEOPLE and what's best for them should dictate whether or not taxes are raised.
      Signing a pledge or comitting to one way or the other is just to difficult to maintain in these volatile times.

    7. mperrottet profile image96
      mperrottetposted 5 years ago

      Here's today's article from the Philadelphia Inquirer - looks like finally his grip is loosening.  It's about time.

      http://www.philly.com/philly/news/natio … _grip.html

    8. peoplepower73 profile image93
      peoplepower73posted 5 years ago

      Here is an article about Lindsey Graham jumping ship! It's interesting to see how Grover is in denial and how he spins reality.

      http://news.yahoo.com/gop-starting-rebe … 23817.html

    9. crazyhorsesghost profile image78
      crazyhorsesghostposted 5 years ago

      The Rich should pay more. If your making millions of dollars and benefiting from living and owning businesses in the USA you should pay more. Many of the very rich do not pay hardly any taxes. I say pay your share based on Income. And close all the loop holes for those Americans living outside the USA and paying little to no taxes.

    10. peoplepower73 profile image93
      peoplepower73posted 5 years ago

      Watch Grover Norquist spin this interview.

      http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/power-playe … 15427.html