Iowa’s Rod Blum and Dave Young were among the 86 Republicans who essentially supported a tax increase in order to advance Obamatrade.
Did some Republicans in Democrat districts (Blum – Dubuque) and marginal districts (Young) give a throwaway vote on a measure destined to fail? Or would they do anything to advance TPA and TPP?
Will TPP Enter USA into a ‘New Trans-National Union ?
A rose by any other name . . . it was a tax increase vote
Here is why TAA is said to be a vote for a tax increase. For the reasons stated in the article we believe such “fines” are the essence of tax increases. GOP Leadership’s Latest Obamatrade Ploy Revealed: Small Business Tax Hike That Violates GOP’s Anti-Tax Pledge We would add that “fines” and “fees” could be adopted by politicians to get around any number of tax limitation provisions in law, or no tax increase pledges made. They scrupulously avoid the “T” word and talk of “revenue enhancements.” Such a process might involve regulating a new or existing activity. It would be done on some rubric on something essential to the economy or various industries. the politicians might then impose a permitting fee in order to engage in it.
Or, a fine might be imposed on something there is no serious intention to stop, as no other civil penalty for noncompliance is attached for such activity. It is something for which no alternative exists for the business or industry. The fine is leveled at rate that is treated essentially as a cost of doing business. With such maneuvers politicians can get around increasing income or sales taxes.
In the exigent case a late fee or fine is raised on a common filing frequently late because it was impossible to comply with on a timely basis, or low enough to be ignored. However, it could be that persons, business, or industry are able to make adjustments such that what was previously treated as a minor cost of doing business is now carefully avoided. What happens to revenue? It ends up falling and no pay as you go exists for whatever it was that was to be “paid for”. Likely, politicians know full well that such revenue will not come anywhere near what they pretend. What is to be funded becomes deficit spending.
What are the politics behind the Blum and Young vote?
We are not here defending Blum’s or Young’s action (at least not to the same degree) as both voted to “fast track” (TPA) giving Obama additional trade leverage and inhibiting congressional discretion. However, as previously posted, Blum did vote against key rule manipulations necessary to make all this happen.
The TAA both Young and Blum voted for is an additional benefit for workers supposedly displaced by trade legislation. The benefit is to be paid for with an increase in fines on unrelated matters in order to say they found the revenue for such action (“pay as you go”). Increasing welfare benefits (any allegedly displaced worker would still be eligible for unemployment and other benefits) and increasing taxes are supposed to be anathema to Republicans (we know better) and enshrined by Democrats.
Democrats largely don’t want TPP for their various factional reasons. However things were wired so as TAA was must pass legislation in order to move TPA forward, and TPA is necessary (so it is claimed) to move TPP forward. So killing TAA would kill TPA ,which Democrats don’t like much although they might perhaps give it to Obama were it not to be used to grease the way for TPP, which they definitely do not want.
Democrat congressional leadership and labor groups decided to pass the word — kill the TAA baby to prevent TPP. Voting against TAA will not be held against them. The Democrat strategy was well-known on the floor and, combined with “traditional” Republican (safe district) opposition to such a measure, it could be anticipated that TAA would be overwhelmingly defeated.
Some Republicans would do anything to advance TPA and TPP for unfortunate or misguided reasons. They would vote for TAA to do that. Congressman King and Young voted for the rule machinations arranging for TAA which was necessary for TPA and TPP. Blum voted against the “rule” machinations. King voted against TAA when it came up. Blum and Young voted for it. All three voted for TPA (fast track). Trans Pacific Partnership[ (TPP) is yet to be voted on in the House.
We feel that any thought that voting for TAA in a supposed throw away atmosphere will enable Young or Blum to parry Democrat labor opposition is delusional. Support for TAA will not be considered a pro-labor vote, indeed it was opposed by labor under the circumstances. Blum and Young can advertise their support for “displaced workers” all they want but it will not take hold based on what Democrats will say about their records.
Young has done the Republican establishment bidding by and large so he will get their support. Blum has been a problem child (to his credit) and the vote will not help him with leadership given his rules vote, his vote against Boehner as speaker, and more.
Republican leader on the trade legislation, Paul Ryan voted for TAA, like Young and Blum, but Boehner voted against it. That might have been done by Boehner for parliamentary reasons to enable a vote to reconsider, which must come from the prevailing side. That can serve to keep TAA alive, which we are told it is, along with the whole sequence necessary for Obamatrade to be implemented. Thus our previous post with a graphic and link to call and e-mail Congress.
Here is a commentary from Americans for Limited Government which opposes TAA, TPA and TPP. A link to the vote on TAA referenced above is included as well.
86 House Republicans who voted to increase taxes to pay for Obamatrade
Americans for Limited Government President Rick Manning issued the following statement blasting 86 House Republicans who voted for trade adjustment assistance, legislation that will increase taxes to make payments to unions affected by the Trans-Pacific Partnership:
“It is almost incomprehensible that 86 House Republicans were so desperate to make an Obamatrade deal that they voted to increase taxes to pay off big labor — all to make Obamatrade more palatable to Democrats. No deal was better than a bad deal, and yet these 86 Republicans decided the trade bill was more important than increasing their constituents’ taxes to make payments to labor unions. Any member considering voting for trade adjustment assistance next week should well consider the political consequences of voting to increase taxes to pay off big labor to grant Obama more power to regulate the global economy.”
Here is the list of 86 House Republicans who voted for trade adjustment assistance, June 12, 2015 at http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2015/roll361.xml :
Regarding the implications of Trans Pacific Partnership — read this article at Breibart.com
TPP Enters USA into a ‘New Trans-National Union’
R Mall
