Dr. No vs. Tax Hike Mike
Much to the surprise of the media pundits and political "experts", the two Republican candidates with the most momentum heading into the stretch run before the primaries are Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee. Ron Paul is raking in the cash and overwhelming everyone in volunteer support, while Huckabee has been climbing in the Iowa polls.
With the dollar in decline, the national debt closing in on ten trillion dollars, and a major recession (or worse) looming, how do these two Republican contenders compare on spending and taxes?
Spending Records
Ron Paul is well known in Congress and nationally for voting "no" on excessive spending bills, which means pretty much all of them, Congress being what it is. When your nickname is "Dr. No", the lobbyists don't bother to visit your office. The National Taxpayers' Union has named him a "Taxpayers' Friend" for ten consecutive years, and given him the honorary title of "The Taxpayers' Best Friend Ever" for his opposition to government spending.
Mike Huckabee's spending record in Arkansas is just that -- the spending record in Arkansas. Conservatives unhappy with the lack of fiscal restraint from President Bush should be forewarned -- during Huckabee's governorship, state spending increased by over 65 percent. He cut some taxes in Arkansas but raised many others, earning his own nickname from fiscal conservatives: "Tax Hike Mike."
Spending Proposals
Ron Paul has proposed hundreds of billions of dollars in spending cuts when he is elected President, starting with bringing the troops home safely from Iraq, as well as Japan, South Korea, Germany, and the United Kingdom -- wealthy countries that ought to pay for their own defense. He would also target the federal departments of Education, Energy, and Homeland Security for additional reductions, leaving education up to the states, energy up to the free market, and streamlining national intelligence services.
Mike Huckabee has identified no specific areas to reduce spending. On his campaign website, he says he needs the line item veto to deal with wasteful spending, but that would require a Constitutional amendment that is extremely unlikely to get through Congress. Mike Huckabee would continue the expensive war in Iraq, and increase subsidies for agribusiness and ethanol production. Even worse, he has his eye on expensive new government programs like his "Weapons of Mass Instruction" -- federal funding for arts and music education that would make any liberal proud.
Tax Proposals
Ron Paul has proposed eliminating the income tax and abolishing the IRS. While that may be unlikely in the short term, his efforts to reduce spending significantly would at least make major tax cuts possible, and build political momentum for eliminating the income tax. In the meantime, he would push for tax credits for health care expenses, allow young people to opt out of Social Security payroll taxes, and exempt tips from income taxes.
Mike Huckabee has made the "Fair Tax", a proposal for a 30% national sales tax, a centerpiece of his campaign. This has earned him support from some who would prefer a sales tax to the income tax, but is not a tax cut at all. On Huckabee's campaign website, he admits as much:
In the next sentence, however, Huckabee implies that a revenue neutral change in the method of tax collection can somehow save everyone money:
Balancing the Budget
Ron Paul is the only candidate in either party pledging to balance the budget right away. In a campaign ad, he promises to veto any unbalanced budget that passes. Since he is the only candidate promising significant reductions in federal spending, he is the only candidate with any hope of balancing the budget during his term in office.
Mike Huckabee's website is conspicuously silent on the topic of balancing the budget. Since he plans to continue the war in Iraq, increase agricultural subsidies, and increase federal involvement in education and the arts, while hoping for a line-item veto and fighting a lengthy political battle over how the same amount of taxes will be collected from us, perhaps that's not surprising.
Conclusion
Comptroller General David Walker has called our government's fiscal irresponsibility "the most serious threat to the United States." With the national debt already over nine trillion dollars and unfunded Social Security and Medicare obligations amounting to tens of trillions more, we need a president who will devote his full energy to reversing runaway government spending, not dreaming up new programs while getting bogged down in battles over how taxes should be collected.
If you are a fiscal conservative, Mike Huckabee is hands down the worst Republican candidate in the race. Only Ron Paul takes the financial crisis facing our nation seriously enough to propose balancing the budget immediately, without raising taxes. If you are a fiscal conservative, only Ron Paul deserves your vote.
Read more at Paul 4 Prez
With the dollar in decline, the national debt closing in on ten trillion dollars, and a major recession (or worse) looming, how do these two Republican contenders compare on spending and taxes?
Spending Records
Ron Paul is well known in Congress and nationally for voting "no" on excessive spending bills, which means pretty much all of them, Congress being what it is. When your nickname is "Dr. No", the lobbyists don't bother to visit your office. The National Taxpayers' Union has named him a "Taxpayers' Friend" for ten consecutive years, and given him the honorary title of "The Taxpayers' Best Friend Ever" for his opposition to government spending.
Mike Huckabee's spending record in Arkansas is just that -- the spending record in Arkansas. Conservatives unhappy with the lack of fiscal restraint from President Bush should be forewarned -- during Huckabee's governorship, state spending increased by over 65 percent. He cut some taxes in Arkansas but raised many others, earning his own nickname from fiscal conservatives: "Tax Hike Mike."
Spending Proposals
Ron Paul has proposed hundreds of billions of dollars in spending cuts when he is elected President, starting with bringing the troops home safely from Iraq, as well as Japan, South Korea, Germany, and the United Kingdom -- wealthy countries that ought to pay for their own defense. He would also target the federal departments of Education, Energy, and Homeland Security for additional reductions, leaving education up to the states, energy up to the free market, and streamlining national intelligence services.
Mike Huckabee has identified no specific areas to reduce spending. On his campaign website, he says he needs the line item veto to deal with wasteful spending, but that would require a Constitutional amendment that is extremely unlikely to get through Congress. Mike Huckabee would continue the expensive war in Iraq, and increase subsidies for agribusiness and ethanol production. Even worse, he has his eye on expensive new government programs like his "Weapons of Mass Instruction" -- federal funding for arts and music education that would make any liberal proud.
Tax Proposals
Ron Paul has proposed eliminating the income tax and abolishing the IRS. While that may be unlikely in the short term, his efforts to reduce spending significantly would at least make major tax cuts possible, and build political momentum for eliminating the income tax. In the meantime, he would push for tax credits for health care expenses, allow young people to opt out of Social Security payroll taxes, and exempt tips from income taxes.
Mike Huckabee has made the "Fair Tax", a proposal for a 30% national sales tax, a centerpiece of his campaign. This has earned him support from some who would prefer a sales tax to the income tax, but is not a tax cut at all. On Huckabee's campaign website, he admits as much:
The Fair Tax isn't intended to raise any more or less money for the federal government to spend - it is revenue neutral.
In the next sentence, however, Huckabee implies that a revenue neutral change in the method of tax collection can somehow save everyone money:
Expert analyses have shown that the Fair Tax lowers the lifetime tax burden of all of us: single or married; working or retired; rich, poor or middle class.
Balancing the Budget
Ron Paul is the only candidate in either party pledging to balance the budget right away. In a campaign ad, he promises to veto any unbalanced budget that passes. Since he is the only candidate promising significant reductions in federal spending, he is the only candidate with any hope of balancing the budget during his term in office.
Mike Huckabee's website is conspicuously silent on the topic of balancing the budget. Since he plans to continue the war in Iraq, increase agricultural subsidies, and increase federal involvement in education and the arts, while hoping for a line-item veto and fighting a lengthy political battle over how the same amount of taxes will be collected from us, perhaps that's not surprising.
Conclusion
Comptroller General David Walker has called our government's fiscal irresponsibility "the most serious threat to the United States." With the national debt already over nine trillion dollars and unfunded Social Security and Medicare obligations amounting to tens of trillions more, we need a president who will devote his full energy to reversing runaway government spending, not dreaming up new programs while getting bogged down in battles over how taxes should be collected.
If you are a fiscal conservative, Mike Huckabee is hands down the worst Republican candidate in the race. Only Ron Paul takes the financial crisis facing our nation seriously enough to propose balancing the budget immediately, without raising taxes. If you are a fiscal conservative, only Ron Paul deserves your vote.
[…] Read the rest of this great post here […]