Today we continue our series on the Texas governor’s race by looking at one of the most important issues facing our state: taxes.

http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/09/bill-white-says-releasing-tax.html

Unfortunately, Bill White’s position on taxes is not a good one. No, I’m not referring to his tax plans for the state. I’m talking about his refusal to release his personal income tax returns. As a measure of transparency, public officials routinely release their tax returns so that the voters can see who they have invested with, where they have money, and if they’ve paid their income taxes. Unfortunately, Bill White refuses to release his tax returns from the years that he was serving in the Clinton administration. Kind of suspicious, don’t you think?

And if we can’t trust Bill White with his own taxes, why should we trust him with ours?

Today we continue our series on renewable energy. Unfortunately, there is some bad news to report:

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2010/08/11/renewable-energy-backers-wince-as-congress-raids-doe-coffers/

President Obama and Congressional Democrats just passed into law new spending for teachers and government employees. And from where did the extra money come?

“The $26 billion bill President Barack Obama signed Tuesday may spell relief for teachers’ unions and other public-sector employees, but it’s the latest blow for renewable energy backers. To help pay for the aid bill, lawmakers cut $1.5 billion from the Department of Energy’s renewable energy loan guarantee program. It’s the second time in roughly a year that Congress has raided the program to fund other priorities. Last summer, lawmakers cut $2 billion from the DOE’s renewable energy loan account to extend the highly popular Cash for Clunkers program. Congress has not repaid the agency that $2 billion, despite frequent promises by its leaders to do so. Taken together, the cuts have whittled the program’s budget down to $2.5 billion, less than half the $6 billion Congress appropriated in early 2009.”

Not only is this money being wasted on salaries for civil servants, but it’s taking money out of vital renewable energy programs. We need to be spending less money on government bureaucrats and more money on renewable energy projects that will help us build the future.

Perhaps no issue is more important in an election than taxes. This is where most of us have our greatest interaction with the government. The taxes we pay fund necessary programs. But they also can sometimes fund unnecessary ones.

That’s why it’s important to hear more from Bill White on taxes:

http://www.rickperry.org/release/higher-taxes-texans-hidden-taxes-bill-white

Sadly, Mayor White has yet to do two important things on taxes. First, he has not yet released his own income tax returns (as most candidates for public office do). And second, he has not ruled out the need to raise taxes.

I hope that Mayor White will reconsider his position on these two important issues. Being Texas governor is a privilege that must be earned. And being honest about his taxes and reasonable on our taxes is what Mayor White needs to do.

Another unintended consequence of the new health care law? Paperwork. Lots of more paperwork:

http://www.redstate.com/brianfaughnan/2010/07/11/irs-new-health-care-law-imposes-significant-new-burdens/

To help pay for this massive new bill, the administration is trying to increase the amount of money collected through taxes. And that means you and I better get ready to start filling out lots of new paperwork:

“The new regulations, which kick in at the start of 2012, require any taxpayer with business income to issue 1099 forms to all vendors from whom they purchased more than $600 of goods and services that year. That promises to launch a fusillade of new paperwork: An estimated 40 million taxpayers will be subject to the requirement, including 26 million who run sole proprietorships, according to a report released this week by National Taxpayer Advocate Nina Olson…”

So health care reform turns out to mean more regulations and more paperwork for the little guy. Another unintended consequence.

Here is another reason why I believe we can still fight back on health care: because the real law hasn’t even been written yet.

Here is something interesting that many people don’t know about the legislative process. Once a law is passed by Congress, it then has to have accompanying regulations that are written by the relevant agency. In this case, the Department of Health and Human Services will write what are called “rules” that explain exactly how the law will be implemented and enforced. And typically, the bureaucrats writing these rules have great discretion.

So I encourage anyone reading this blog who is concerned about the new health care law to contact the Department of Health and Human Services today and voice your concern. Go to www.dhs.gov and let the government know you how feel before it’s too late.

Today we are back on our topic of what can be done about the new health care law.

And we’re going to talk briefly about the action being taken by the attorneys general of several states. Essentially, they are filing a lawsuit that argues that the federal government does not have the authority to regulate whether an individual purchases a product or not. This would be the first time in history that it’s happened. It turns out, the Commerce Clause of the Constitution gives the federal government the authority to regulate “interstate commerce,” that is, business transactions between companies doing work across state lines. It says nothing about individuals.

And since individuals are not allowed to purchase health care plans outside of their state, there is no way this new law meets the Constitutional standard.

Let’s hope the court recognizes this and rules this new health care law uncontitutional.

This week our blog will focus on where we go from here on health care. And believe it or not, this battle is far from over.

There is plenty that state governments and local citizens can do to change the new health care law.

We’ll explain how this week on the blog.

Today we conclude our series on what’s in the health care bill by looking at something that many in the media have missed: health savings accounts.

HSAs were signed into law by President Bush in 2003. They allow individuals to set-aside money into an IRA that is tax free. So, rather than pay for medical expenses with insurance, the HSA allows you to grow money tax-free and then use that money to cover whatever medical expenses you may need. Typically, individuals still purchase catastrophic insurance to pay for major medical emergencies.

HSAs seems to be working. So why would we want to scale them back? Yet that’s exactly what Obamacare does. It limits the amount of money that an individual can contribute to an HSA to $2500. That’s not nearly enough money to make HSAs work for most families, which frankly, is why that dollar amount was chosen. The creators of Obamacare don’t want people paying for their own health care with savings.

Did anyone read this bill before we made it a law?

Here is something else that is bad about the new health care law: the reforms start later; the taxes start now.

That’s because the administration deliberately set the new changes to begin after the 2012 election; but to cover the costs over a ten-year period, the administration will start their new fees and taxes immediately.

http://www.heartland.org/healthpolicy-news.org/article/27359/Obamacare_All_Pain_No_Gain.html

As the article notes:

“The 10 percent tax on tanning salons starts this year. Beginning in 2011 our drug bills will rise because of a $2.5 billion tax on name-brand drugs and removal of the tax exemption for over-the-counter drugs purchased using a Flexible Spending Account. The penalty for nonmedical Health Savings Account (HSA) distributions will also double. Seniors will begin losing benefits as a result of cuts in the Medicare program. The average Medicare Advantage Plan enrollee will lose nearly $200 in benefits in 2011—rising by a dozen times that amount ($2,437) by 2019. Seniors in traditional Medicare plans will lose only $22 in 2011, but this will rise to $1,137 by 2019.”

Again I ask: did anyone think this through before we passed this law?

Young people voted in record numbers for President Obama in 2008. In 2014, they will pay for it:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hLAMW_KTqY_JVMQF-gNn3O0_uUcQD9EOIBQO0

That’s because that’s the year all Americans will be required to purchase health insurance. According to a study by the Associated Press, young people purchasing their own health insurance on the open market will likely face an increase in their premiums of “17 percent on average, or roughly $42 a month….”

Why is this? As the article notes:

“The law relies on…young adults to shoulder more of the financial load in new health insurance risk pools. So under the new system, [young Americans] could expect to pay $300 to $500 a year more.”

In other words, to help pay for older Americans’ health care, Obamacare will make young people pay more than they are paying now. Much more.

Again I ask: did anyone think through this before we made it a law?

Uh oh. Can you say “unintended consequences”?

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gmzNv5LYXOA6UM_XmUHdOe9augtQD9ELVL3G1

So the new health care law is supposed to reduce costs, right? It won’t. Basic economics teaches that companies pass on their extra costs to others. So all the new regulations and mandates are going to get passed onto you and me in higher premiums.

But as the article above notes, even the health care coverage you get at work is going to change:

“In the first two days after the law was signed, three major companies — Deere & Co., Caterpillar Inc. and Valero Energy — said they expect to take a total hit of $265 million to account for smaller tax deductions in the future. With more than 3,500 companies now getting the tax break as an incentive to keep providing coverage, others are almost certain to announce similar cost increases in the weeks ahead as they sort out the impact of the change.”

By reducing the health care tax deductions companies can file, the federal government has inadvertently reduced the health care coverage these companies will offer.

Did anyone not think this through before passing this new law?

This week we continue our series on the new health care law and some of the items that you might not know about.

Today, we focus on a constitutional aspect of the law. Remember when we talked last week about the bill requiring individuals to purchase health insurance? Did you know that this marks the first time in American history that the federal government has required an individual to purchase a product?

And there is a reason why it’s the first time: because it’s not constitutional. The Commerce Clause of the Constitution gives the federal government the right to regulate companies that transact business across state lines. But it says nothing about requiring individuals to purchase anything.

That’s why several states have already filed suit. Obamacare may well be unconstitutional.

Today we end the week of blogs about health care by talking about one of the biggest tragedies of all in this new law: abortion.

Democrats say the new health care law will not create taxpayer funded abortion. But it will. Here is how: now that everyone will be required to purchase insurance, people will be buying all kinds of plans, including some that cover abortion services. But since many people will not be buying insurance plans with federal subsidies, in effect, the taxpayers are covering their expenses should they ever need an abortion.

The “fix” that Democrats proposed for this was for President Obama to issue an executive order saying that abortions can not be paid for with taxdollars. But executive orders can be changed by any president. A law is a law and can only be changed by an act of Congress.

That’s why I think it’s likely we will see taxpayer funded abortion. And what a shame that is.

Today we end our series on taxes with a call to action.

This weekend the House of Representatives will vote on the Obama health care bill that will include new taxes. But you can do something about it. Call the Congressional switchboard and ask to speak to your representative. The number is:

(202) 224-3121

Call today and say “no thanks” to this new health care plan and these new taxes.

So let me get this straight: the president of the United States is going to try and raise taxes by using a procedural move that avoids the House of Representatives even voting on it?

Yes, you read that correctly. The president wants to pass his health care bill (which includes tax increases) using a process called “deem and pass.” It essentially “deems” that the Senate bill is good enough and just sends it onto the president for his signature. The House doesn’t even vote on it.

Are you kidding me? The Constitution specifically gives the House of Representatives the responsibility for all tax measures. So any vote to increase taxes must be voted on by the House. And yet the president wants to find a way around this because he knows he doesn’t have the votes in the House.

Whatever happened to change we can believe in?

This week we’ll be talking about something else that’s been in the news a lot: taxes. You may have read about the carwash in Sacramento that was audited for four cents!

What’s going on with the IRS? Why does the government need so much in tax dollars and yet still run such huge deficits? That’s what we’ll be talking about on the blog this week. So check in each day.

This week, we continue our series on what’s next for President Obama. And the timing couldn’t be better.

President Obama will soon unveil his new budget. I’ve got some ideas on what should and shouldn’t be in there. After all, politics is about money. So the budget is the place to look to see how a president wants to lead and where he wants to go.

Check back in each day this week for more on what President Obama should do next.

As a conservative, I believe in gradual change rather dramatic reform. Evolution instead of revolution, if you will. That’s why I support President Obama on carbon credits. Let me explain.

If there is a broad consensus that something should be done about carbon emission, the question becomes how do we do it. As a conservative, I think it makes sense to reward, rather than punish, private businesses. Plus,by incentivizing the carbon market, the government could set off an explosion of private sector research as companies try and figure out better and cleaner ways of handling emissions.

That’s a much better approach than the other option: carbon taxes. Again, my conservatism tells me this is a bad idea.

Let’s help encourage companies that create a clean environment rather than punish companies for making the environment worse. That’s a conservative way to create gradual change that will work for businesses and the environment.

What can we expect this year in the world of business? Continued growth in the stock market.

After surpassing 13,000 in 2007, the Dow collapsed in 2008 and is only now making its comeback. But comeback it will continue to do. Yet we should not equate the resurgence of the stock market with successful policies in Washington. We can’t tax our way and spend our way to growth.

Instead, the stock market’s comeback shows that American capitalism is alive and well and can endure any policies from Washington.

Just think how much more the markets would be growing if we would cut taxes and spending.

This week we continue our series on what’s in the news.  A few days ago, I blogged about the federal government giving pay raises to its employees while the economy is in a recession.  Well, the story just got even more bizarre:

http://www.wtop.com/?nid=428&sid=1838232

Evidently, the federal government can’t get these same employees to pay taxes!  As the article notes:

“Federal workers owe more than $3 billion in income taxes they failed to pay in 2008. According to Internal Revenue Service documents, 276,300 federal employees and retirees owe $3,042,200,000.”

Incredible.  While the rest of the country is suffering, civil servants are getting a pay raise and yet still can’t pay their taxes!