Fair Tax Nation

Replace All Federal Taxes on Income with the Fair Tax Act , HR 25

PA-12: Democrats demagogue the FairTax


Democrats are using the FairTax, a popular tax proposal put forward by Americians for Fair Taxation and promoted by Republican talk show host Neal Boortz, in attack ads against Tim Burns:

In the May 18 special election in Pennsylvania to replace the late Rep. John Murtha (D), the DCCC is running a television ad attacking the Republican nominee, Tim Burns, for supporting the fair tax, using the issue to accuse him of supporting higher taxes on groceries, gas and medicine.

The ad refers to an interview Burns gave last year in which he said he “would love to ultimately see the fair tax implemented.” He went on to suggest that pursuing the fair tax “straight out of the gate” would be impractical because it would require overhauling the entire tax code.

A Burns campaign spokesman, Kent Gates, said the DCCC ad “is a complete distortion at best.” Burns issued a statement to The Hill saying he supports “making our tax code flatter and fairer.”

Here is the ad in question:




What the ad doesn’t tell you (shocker!) is that the FairTax would replace the current tax code, including the Internal Revenue Service, and replace it with a 23% national retail sales tax and some other form of compliance enforcement. The proposal is very easy to demagogue, which is one reason I support a flat tax over the FairTax.

It shouldn’t surprise us that Democrats are misleading voters of Pennsylvania’s 12th Congressional District. Democrats can’t run on ObamaCare in this district, their nominee, Mark Critz, is running an ad in the district playing up his opposition to the health care bill.




Views: 102

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

At least they did not use the 30% factor for exclusive rate. I did notice that they have blocked posting any comments!
This is why we need candidates who will "promote" the FairTax, instead of merely "supporting" it. If the candidates would get out in front of the opposition and explain (i.e. promote) the FairTax, the opposition would not be able to distort it without someone calling them on it.
What we NEED is an all out war on the DCCC.

THIS is why the R party tells their candidates NOT to openly support the FairTax. It is because we FairTaxers do not FIGHT back!

It is time for us to FIGHT and show these liars for what they are.

We MUST start raising money to fight these lies or we cannot expect good men to walk into gunfire carrying the FairTax Flag.

It is time to come out swinging or give up all together.

I have been expecting this and I have a plan. It all hinges on how badly people want FairTax to happen.
But....but the democrats want this type of tax reform


Use their own words against them!!
I like how their youtube videos also disable comments...nice!
Okay...here's my response. Before I send it out, is there any input as to format or misinformation etc?

April, 25, 2010

430 S Capitol Street,
S.E. Washington, D.C. 20003

Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer et al,

I am writing to you in reference to a letter requesting tax reform sent by Democratic leadership to President Bush in December of 2004. In your letter you pointed to three distinct areas that were in need of reform. I have reprinted them here for your convenience:

Fairness: Tax reform must not result in tax increases on middle-income families, and we must uphold our commitment to progressive taxation. Millions of middle-income Americans are paying more than their fair share as a result of an overly complicated, loophole-ridden tax code. This tax burden will only increase as more families are ensnared by the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT). By 2010, the AMT is expected to hit 33 million taxpayers, up from just 1 million in 1999. We believe that tax reform must include a long-term solution to protect middle-income taxpayers from the AMT’s unintended consequences.

I would first like to ask what ‘long-term solution’ have the Democrats instituted with regards to the AMT? I am not aware of any long-term solution correcting the AMT problem, even with the majority in both Houses since the 2006 election. It is now 2010 and presumably those 33 million taxpayers are still faced with the potential impact of the AMT. You indicate a commitment to progressive taxation. The Fair Tax (HR 25) includes a progressive prebate system based upon number in the household, rather than on income. This plan protects the basic necessities from taxation for ALL American families. If fairness must be a component of tax reform, why not consider passage of the fairer plan, the Fair Tax plan?

Simplification: We must make the tax code far less complex. The tax code and its regulations currently span more than 60,000 pages, thousands of which have been added since the mid-1990s. It takes the average family nearly 7 1⁄2 hours longer to complete their tax return than it did in 1994, and tax changes made since 2001 have only served to further complicate the tax code. The following example illustrates how the current tax code is unnecessarily complex. Parents with children in college must choose between two non-refundable tax credits and the higher education deduction, all of which are calculated differently with different income limits and phase-outs. Moreover, parents saving for their children to attend college have to decipher three different saving mechanisms. It is a taxpayer’s nightmare.

As of January 2009, the number of pages in the tax code is 70,000 or 3,784,745 words according to the NTU. That does not include changes from 2009 or 2010! I’m not seeing simplification here. The current average number of hours spent by Americans to complete tax returns has increased to 17.5 hours according to the IRS. The filing forms have only decreased one page since you wrote this letter, but the pages in the information pamphlets to explain the code have increased from the 142 pages in 2005 to 174 in 2009. I don’t see that as indicative of simplification. And this is without consideration of what the new Health Care bill might add with regards to either number of pages or complexity! The Fair Tax plan simplifies all of this by instituting a national consumption tax and removes the necessity of filing altogether. If you are truly for simplification, where are the Democratic co-sponsors for the Fair Tax bill, HR 25?

Fiscal Responsibility: We must not add to the deficit; indeed, we must steadily reduce it. Revenue neutrality is especially important given the historic level of debt. Democrats are committed to reforming the tax code without burying our future under a mountain of national debt.

Where is the evidence of this commitment? I see growing national debt and deficits and continued big spending by the Democratic majority, who were elected in large part to address that specific issue. I recently watched one lone Republican in the Senate try to hold Congress to its commitment of pay-go, and he was lambasted for remaining true to that commitment. The only reform that will address the growing debt that will be laid upon the heads of our children and grandchildren is the Fair Tax. It not only simplifies the manner in which the federal government collects revenues, it incentivizes the growth in the economy, and therefore revenues to the federal government, necessary to bring this country back from the brink of disaster. If Democrats want to harness the energy from the tea party movement, the best way they could do that would be to show support for REAL tax reform by co-sponsoring and moving through Congress the Fair Tax bill. Americans want definitive change that not only simplifies and funds the government at the current budget levels, but will enable us to pay off the huge amount of debt that BOTH Republicans and Democrats have seen fit to thrust upon the American citizen.

I hope that you will give this consideration and that you will live up to the commitments you expressed when the other party was in power. Co-sponsoring the Fair Tax bill (HR 25) would go a long way in demonstrating that commitment.

Patricia L Way
You need to do something (Quotations, Italics, Bold etc) to the quote from the original letter so people can see where the quote ends and your comments begin. Since the original letter was written in Dec 2004, it is apparent that you have added comments in between the three distinct areas that need to be addressed.

Aside from your letter, do you really expect any politician to follow what they expect other politician to do? LOL
That's something I did do but when I uploaded it onto here it just put ALL of the text into one format. In my actual word document, my sections are indented and not italicized. I don't know why this system just took those all out. LOL I think a good tv ad would be to show those different areas and have either a voice over or Burns asking what they've done since in the majority to fix them. But, I don't have the money or the ability to supply that, so decided on my own letter. lol

I don't know. I've been told my whole life "you can't fight city hall'...I wrote the municipal court in CA and included it in my letter with payment for a parking ticket. Someone read it, looked into what I was saying and I got out of both the original fine and the late fees. I did the same with the Franchise Tax Board in CA. They said they had sent me a letter reminding me to file; I told them I resented the $75 fine for not responding to a letter I never received and proved to them I couldn't have since I had moved to FL by that time..they removed the fine AND recaculated my taxes and gave me a larger return to boot. I think you don't know who will read your letters or what the response will be unless/until you try.

Thank you for posting that here. I emailed Pelosi this very same letter last year and implored her to peruse the Fair Tax as it meets the criteria she outlines here.
That's great! Maybe if they receive an onslaught of these types of letters, showing them that SOME of us are paying attention and we DO remember, they WILL sit up and pay attention. Otherwise, we need to boot them out. Which is where a national ad compaign highlighting this letter and their lack of following through comes in...the public at large needs to be reminded of 'specific' areas where these people have not lived up. Especially since the msm is painting the tax revolters as just a branch of the tea partiers who they have managed to marginalize as just a bunch of angry racists. If we can get the specific things out there, with evidence like this letter, perhaps we can wake up the population to just what is at the root of our anger.
Are you saying that YOU support the flat tax over the fair tax? Or is that from the article as well? I think the flat tax is JUST as easy for Democrats to demagague, given their voting base and the general mindset within that crowd. A flat tax 'benefits the rich' while the poor pay the tax on 'one hundred percent of their income' yada, yada, yada. If your mindset is that ONLY others should pay to provide the government with the funds to provide for YOU...either is an easy target.
I agree with Jim: it is time for Fair Taxers to fight back and I mean with full force. We cannot educate people enough and nor should we stop until its passage. I'm so disgusted with most GOP for not getting on the Fair Tax bandwagon honestly and openly.

I met and talked with Rob Portman, Ohio candidate for US senate, last week. He says he wants to scrap the entire tax code and start over. When I asked him "with what" I couldn't get a straight answer. I asked him if he supported the Fair Tax. Another vague answer which I took to be in the negative. Grrr! I didn't let my frustration with him show. I had so hoped that he put my concerns about him to rest. He didn't.

I don't understand why the GOP can't be strong enough Fair Tax supporters to be up to the Fair Tax debate when challenged.
Oh Nancy this soooo replicates the discussion I had with my GOP "incumbent"! Been there for 14yrs., never been a cosponsor and still isn't. GOOOH!!! If they are going to STAND there and let the house burn to the ground they need to OUT!


© 2023   Created by Marilyn Rickert.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service