Saturday, September 27, 2008

Presidential Politics and The Constitution

Last night was the first Presidential debate for this election season. I personally was disgusted by the whole thing. McCain was a Chihuahua trying to act like a Pit Bull, he just kept yapping at Obama and not really ready for the debate at hand. Obama had a lot of pretty words, but they were naive (either his naivete or his assurance that the American public was naive enough to accept his blather at face value).

As he explained his economic solutions the only thing that was going through my mind was the fact that although it sounds good in word, in practice it doesn't work. You can't expect to effectively raise taxes on corporations and think that it will spur economic growth. His ignorance of basic economic principles shines when he speaks of economic issues. The fact that McCain brought up that the Corporate taxes in the U.S. are the second highest in the world, thus causing more jobs to be moved outside the U.S. to foreign companies and causing jobs to be lost in our Nation was correct, but he didn't defend his stance of lowering corporate taxes when countered by Obama. Obama's response that the tax loopholes essentially eliminate corporate tax responsibility was correct to a point. Yes, the tax code does allow for various write offs which lower the tax responsibility of corporations, but it doesn't eliminate them. When we talk of corporate taxes we need to look at all taxes paid by the corporation. First we have the FICA match which companies have to pay matching that paid by their employees (Medicare, SSI) this can cost larger companies millions of dollars each year. Secondly we have corporate taxes which are direct taxes on revenues. Then you have the Schedule C which is given to each corporate officer which is taxed at the individuals tax rate. Corporations are pass through entities if organized as a sub-chapter S-Corp not as C-Corps which most larger corporations are formed as C-Corps not S-Corps. Most small corporations those which are the backbone of America are registered as S-Corps and the "tax loopholes" aide them in employing their employees. The companies sending jobs outside the U.S. are the C-Corps which don't get the benefit of corporate tax relief and therefore to retain more profits they send jobs outside the U.S. to save the money on the FICA match. This is where The Constitution comes into effect. Since the C-Corp pays corporate taxes on revenues and then the corporate officer pays taxes on their Schedule C the revenues are double taxed. According to our Constitutional law we are not to be double taxed, but corporations are. Thus, we have a corporate loophole which pays the officer through a non-payroll transaction thus allowing the pay to be received without taxes. The answer to this loophole is not to raise corporate taxes and lower "middle-America" taxes. The answer is to re-write the tax code to be fair. The answer is most especially a flat-rate tax. Set the tax at a flat 15%, with a few selected write off categories and you will as a government bring in more taxes than you do with your current confusing tax code. The mantra from the left that a flat-rate tax would be unfair to the working class because a working class family would be paying the same amount (dollar wise) as the multi-millionaire is completely ridiculous. This is because 15% of $25,000 is not the same as 15% of $10,000,000. I've never understood as I've heard members of Congress and the Senate try and defend the unfairness aspect of the flat-rate tax. Now the purpose of this posting is not to try and sell the flat-rate tax, but to show the ignorance of both candidates with regards to the Constitutionality of the whole taxing system.

Another problem I have this year with the candidates is the other day on the View, McCain was being questioned by the illustrious Whoopi Goldberg (anybody with the name Whoopi should not be given credence when it comes to serious issues) about his claim to want to appoint Supreme Court Justices who were strict Constructionists (meaning individuals who view the issues in accordance with the way the Constitution was written). McCain explained that he wanted the Constitution to be interpreted as it was written and no hidden agenda (political, social, or ideological). Of course Whoopi right away got defensive and wanted to know if she should start worrying that she would be a slave again because the original writers of the Constitution had slaves. And instead of pointing out the utter stupidity of the comment McCain just said, I understand your concern. Understand her concern? What utter stupidity, what ignorance on the part of Whoopi and a blown opportunity for McCain. Even if the whole slavery issue were an issue, the courts never did anything to stop slavery, it was first the Emancipation Proclamation, and then the 13th amendment abolished slavery. The appointing of judges to the Supreme Court who are Constructionists will not effect the social status of Ms. Goldberg or any other. Slavery is illegal because the Constitution makes it illegal, not because any Supreme Court Justice said it should be illegal. Obviously neither Ms. Goldberg or McCain have ever heard of Dred Scott.

There has been several occurrences of this either complete and blatant disregard of Constitutional knowledge during the course of this election. We need to hold our elected officials accountable to the Constitution, not to the whims of their party or social opinion. Pretty words won't secure our freedoms, nor will pretended concern for the affairs of this Nation. Although I disagree with McCain more often than not, I have to support his candidacy for president of the United States of America. God bless us all, and may our elected officials start putting the Nation first and their egos and agendas last.

No comments: