Tag Archives: Progressive Taxation

Is Pat Garofalo the biggest hypocrite in the Minnesota Legislature?

Yesterday I wrote about a 2009 email from Rep. Pat Garofalo of Farmington.  In the email, Pat chastised the DFL members of the legislature for passing a bill to lower the amount of interest that can be claimed as a tax deduction.  The bill capped the interest that could be claimed, meaning the higher the value of your home, the less you could deduct in taxes.  Seems like a pretty progressive tax solution to me.  The poorest people tend to own the least valuable houses, so the impact would be minimal.  The million dollar home in Wayzata might be impacted a little more.  Seems fair to me.

That bill was vetoed by Governor Pawlenty.  Pat was happy because in his words it “would increase the cost of home ownership.” Those are Pat Garofalo’s exact words.  Fast forward from 2009 to 2012, and Pat Garofalo tweets “Remember when Democrats tried to repeal the home mortgage interest deduction and raise taxes on the middle class? I do.” Ignoring his lie implying that DFLers tried to get rid of it, it is odd that he remembers 2009, but seems to forget that he just voted to eliminate the Homestead Credit for Minnesota Homeowners.  Didn’t that vote “increase the cost of home ownership?”  His vote not only increased taxes on the middle class, but it impacted the poorest Minnesotans as well.  It is a true regressive tax that impacts the richest Minnesotans the least.

Pat Garofalo must be considering running for Vice President.  Because like the current Republican Vice Presidential candidate, he can only focus on events and votes in a narrowly viewed and skewed way that make everything positive for him, and nothing bad happens in his Republican world.  Is it delusion? Has he forgotten his vote? Is the word ‘hypocrite’ even in his lexicon?

Pat is truly an embarrassment to rational, principled and cordial voters in Farmington and the surrounding townships.  His opponent Jim Arlt is a truly caring Christian, with a big heart, the integrity of a career cop serving the people in the most honorable way, and he has a great sense of humor that does not include insulting one-third of his neighbors on a regular basis.

When you vote on November 6, vote for Jim Arlt.  If enough people vote for Jim, maybe Pat Garofalo who loves Las Vegas might move there, where the integrity and values he has shown as a Representative are much more common.

Advertisements

Eisenhower and Reagan Quotes Are Still Pertinent Today

I posted the following two posts on Facebook recently:

“President Eisenhower supported trade unions, Social Security, and progressive taxation. Ike said that opponents of trade unions were “fools.” He called opponents of Social Security “stupid.” And he said that the way to balance the budget was to “tax the rich.””

 

“Where free unions and collective bargaining are forbidden, freedom is lost.” ~Ronald Reagan”

I received a comment that basically implied that a past quote does not make it pertinent in today’s context. I think there is a lot of relevancy in those quotes today.  I think you would have a hard time finding a quote from FDR, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter or Clinton that so contradicts the current Democratic agenda of national healthcare, the rights of worker, the importance of a strong public education system, the need to eliminate poverty or a fair taxation system.  Those are all major tenets today of Democratic policy, as they have been for decades.  And while the Democratic Party has moved to the right during that time, the Republican Party has moved rapidly and unsustainably far to the right recently.  The quotes from the above Republican standard bearers reflect that that move to the right. 

The Party is becoming so dogmatic that icons of the party would probably be excluded today.  Recent attitudes have seen moderate Republican after moderate Republican drummed out of the party.  Arlen Specter, Lincoln Chafee, Lisa Murkowski, the Override Six… Jim Ramstad, a good Congressman, probably would have had GOP opposition in the last couple elections if he had stayed, and Arne Carlson is a pariah. 

I think there will be a return to moderation at some point.  I think Republicans who are more willing to follow Reagan’s ideals rather than using his name as some sort of conservative badge to prove their worthiness, will begin taking back the party. There are Independents today who are true Republicans, but have left the party officially because of Tom Delay, Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, John Boehner and even celebrities like Glenn Beck.  These people are not mainstream Republicans like Reagan was who appealed to so many independents.  They are not the future of the Party.  They are temporary attention seeking zealots in the mode of Joe McCarthy. 

They place Reagan on a pedestal, but only seem to remember the things that pertain to today’s agenda.  They ignore the deficit growth, tax increases, his hatred of nuclear weapons and his desire to avoid conflict.  One of the stupidest things I heard around the recent election was a series of interviews with Republican candidates who were asked living or dead who they would like to have dinner with.  A few conservatives said a family member or Jesus, but the majority said Ronald Reagan.  It seemed very contrived to me.  These no compromise, no middle ground Republicans don’t belong in Reagan’s company.  Reagan said if 80% of what he wanted passed, it was a success.  80% is a loss in the mind of so many Republicans in power, Walker, the Fitzgerald brothers, Boehner, Pawlenty…  The only correlation between Reagan and some of these extremists is the little “(R)” after their name.  It certainly isn’t intelligence or an understanding of political success.