Tag Archives: Democrats

If Democrat’s Health Surtax Is 5.4 Percent, Taxpayers in Ohio would be among 39 States That Would Pay a Top Tax Rate Over 50%

By TF Staff

New taxes to fund the federal government’s plan for higher health insurance spending continue to be debated in Washington. According to a new Bloomberg report, the top surtax rate will be 5.4 percent in the House plan. That will be the top rate in a three-tiered surtax aimed at high-income tax returns:

1 percent surtax on AGI between $350,000 and $500,000 (singles between $280,000 and $400,000)

1.5 percent surtax on AGI between $500,000 and $1,000,000 (singles between $400,000 and $800,000)

5.4 percent surtax on AGI beyond $1,000,000 (singles beyond $800,000)

States have been raising taxes on this same group, leading to concern over how high the combined tax rates would be in each state, especially in the growing number of states with double-digit tax rates. Some commentators merely sum the rates at the federal, state and local level to give a statutory total tax rate. A more accurate method is to calculate the effective marginal tax rate, which takes into consideration deductions and adjustments. For a description of the difference between effective marginal tax rates and effective average tax rates, see Average vs. Marginal Tax Rates Revisited.

In Table 1 below we present calculations of the effective marginal tax rate on top earners. We use assume that the 2008 weighted local average for each state applies to 2011, the top federal taxable income rate will rise as scheduled to 39.6 percent, the top state tax rate in each state will follow current 2011 scheduled law, and a new House plan for 5.4 percent surtax on AGI earned at very high-income levels will become law.

Table 1 (Ohio)

Top Effective Marginal Rates under Proposed Health Care Surtax by State

Sorted by Combined Top Tax Rate in 2011

State

Avg. Local Rate

Top
State Rate (2011)

Top Federal Ordinary Rate

New
Surtax

Medicare
Tax

Combined
Top Rate

Rank

Ohio

1.82%

5.93%

39.6%

5.4%

2.9%

54.27%

13

To see rankings of other states, go to the Tax Foundation website.

Commentary

Taxing the rich to pay for free health care is an ploy of the rich and powerful to rob the non-rich of both their freedom and their income. Anyone familiar with Roman history will recognized the strategy. The Roman imperialists tax the nations of the world to pay for their big agendas. Caesar and the Roman Senate taxed the wealthy elites of the respective states. In turn, leaders like Herod increased local taxes on productive peasants. In order to pay, many had to borrow money. When misfortune rendered them unable to pay it back, their land was confiscated. Most were allowed to continue farming the same land as long as they gave Rome via Herod or some other member of the rich elite the required amount, usually over 50 percent.

What this means under the Democrats’ taxing scheme is this: we peasants will end up paying for the huge tax increases of the rich in inflationary costs for products and services. In fact, I recently listened to what Canadians and British people have experienced under universal health care. They have had to endure long waiting lists for care and large increases in overall cost for their health care.

In every respect, universal health care is much more costly than market based care. The highest price for socialist medicine is dying while waiting to receive the promised health care.

One woman with brain cancer was able to come to the Mayo Clinic in America to get the necessary cancer treatment. That is she is suing her government. Had she waited she certainly would have died.

Americans who love the right to life as well as true liberty does not need Democrats’ impoverishing programs or their deadly health care.

Democrats attacks school choice – thousands of children are at risk

Free choice is for the privileged and liberals
 

For years Congressional Democrats told us they were “for the children”. Their policies were “for the children”. Their tax increases were “for the children”. Recently they were given a chance in Congress to prove their pro-child philosophy. The price tag was a mere 15 million dollars, a fraction of the one-trillion dollar stimulus they just passed. But House Democrats decided they could not find $15 million to save the D.C. Voucher Program. Instead they cut the funding and are throwing 1,900 children out of the school of their choice. Kids, whose parents on average make $23,000 per year. Kids who did nothing wrong other than have the courage to make a change for the sake of their future.

At the same time in the state of Ohio, Governor Ted Strickland and the Democrat-led House are on a crusade to wipe charter schools off the map. They want to force thousands of Ohio students back into failing schools in troubled school districts.

This is the purge mentality of the Democrat Party. They despise school choice. They owe the education establishment and the unions. The payback comes in destroying the lives of kids who have done nothing wrong.

At the same time, the leader of the Democrats, President Barack Obama, has placed his daughters in the school of his choice: Sidwell Friends, the most exclusive and expensive school in D.C.

There is something you can do about this injustice. First take a look at the video from the kids in D.C. Then join their plea and call the White House switchboard at (202) 224-3121. Politely ask the President to restore the D.C. Voucher Program.

Next, for those residents of Ohio, contact Ohio Governor Ted Strickland. Let him know you support charter schools in Ohio. Tell him you want more choice in education, not less. They may give you a bunch of rhetoric about “for profit” management companies that run charter schools. That’s a smokescreen. They want all choice eliminated. They are picking on the management companies today. The rest will follow.

Source: American Policy Roundtable eNewsletter

Senator Boxer Asks State Department to Expedite U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child

The U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), which opponents say could destroy American sovereignty by imposing international rulings on American law, could reach the Senate within 60 days. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) says she wants a 60-day timeframe for the State Department to complete its review so the Senate can move toward ratification of the UNCRC. During the Senate Confirmation hearing between Boxer and UN Ambassador-designate Susan Rice held on January 15, 2009, Boxer told Rice the UNCRC would protect “the most vulnerable people of society.”

Opponents vehemently disagree. Under the Supremacy Clause (Article VI) of the U.S. Constitution, ratified treaties preempt state law. Since virtually all laws in the U.S. regarding children are state laws, this treaty would negate nearly 100% of existing American family law. Moreover, it would grant the government authority to override parental decisions by applying even to good parents a standard now only used against those convicted of abuse or neglect.

In the hearing, Rice promised to review the treaty but noted “challenges of domestic implementation.” Rice also resisted a strict time frame: “I don’t have a sense of how long it will take us, in light of the many different things on our plate,” she said.

Calling it a “complicated treaty,” Rice expressed her commitment to the treaty’s objectives, but when Rice concluded that she could not meet the Senator’s strict time frame, Boxer said they would take it up with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

For more articles about this issue, visit UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article by Article at Parental Rights.org. This organization is also seeking an introduction and passage of parental rights amendment.

Obama’s Campaign Ends: Federal Judge Orders DNC Remove Obama From All Ballots

By Daniel Downs

After reviewing evidence presented by Attorney Philip Berg, US District Court Judge Honorable R. Barry Surrick has ruled that Barak Hussein Obama was not a “natural born” or “naturalized” citizen and is ineligible to run for and/or serve as President of the United States.

Judge Surrick then ordered the Democratic National Committee to cease all campaign activity on behalf of their candidate for President. He further ordered Obama be removed from all election ballots.

Before jumping to conclusions, the civil action brief of Attorney Berg begins by identifying himself as a life-long Democrat who is proud of his party. It cannot be said that Berg is a right-wing zealot grasping at any accusation to prevent the oppositional party from being elected. No, Berg is here fulfilling his oath to uphold the Constitution.

In addition to his defense of Constitutional integrity, Berg also says his purpose is to defend the integrity of his Party. Many people have given of their money and time in support of Party goals, which include “to restore accountability, honesty, and openness at all levels of government”, to “restore the Constitution and protect the civil rights and liberties of all Americans,” and to “uphold the Constitution.” Berg continues, “[t]o uphold the Constitution includes making sure that the candidate is eligible to serve as President pursuant to Article II, Section 1 of our United States Constitution and that such candidate runs a fair and legitimate campaign.”

As for the evidence, Berg investigation discovered Obama was born in Kenya. His father was a citizen of Kenya. His was 18 years old at the time. Even though a child born to a U.S. citizen could acquire natural born citizenship, his then 18-year-old mother did not meet U.S. law governing citizenship. Obama became a citizen of Kenya. He was schooled there under the name of Barry Hussein Soetoro, the name of his father Lolo Soetoro. His citizenship in Kenya was confirmed from school records.

Attorney Berg and Judge Surrick have proven that Constitutional Democracy in our Republic of states still works as intended by this nation’s Founders. Thank God.

Source: Berg v Obama, et. al., Civil Action No. 08-cv-04083 (E.D. Pen. Oct. 22, 2008).

Ohio Democrats Seeks Ohio Supreme Court’s Help to Violate Voter Law

Democrats in public office have a problem with abiding by our laws. When they cannot get laws passed (that is if they even try to get laws passed) by consent of the governed by means of their representatives, they seek the court’s assistance in making them by judicial fiat. This is what Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner is doing ion behalf of Gov. Strickland and the Democratic Party.

The Plain Dealer reported that Brunner is attempting to make it possible for citizens to vote and the same time of their registration. Ohio law requires a 30-day period must pass before new registrants may vote. The reason is to give county and state officials time to verify registrant information like their driver’s license or identification card. She and her Democrat backers are seeking to discard the law through the courts.

“On Tuesday, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati sided with the Ohio Republican Party and ordered Brunner to set up a system that provides names of newly registered voters whose driver’s license numbers or Social Security numbers on voter registration forms don’t match records in other government databases.”

Why did the Court of Appeals agree with the Republicans? The Court found the current means of screening eligible voter insufficient to prevent voter fraud.

Ohio’s Democrat officials do not have a problem with the likelihood of voter fraud. They are more concerned about 200,000 registrants whose driver’s license and social security records do not match government’s records. I have had my social security information not match the government’s records. It took a few days to get the problem resolved. But, Democrats wants all of us to feel tolerant towards those people and let them vote anyway. We should not disenfranchise those who might vote for Obama. Who cares about the possibility that they maybe among those enlisted by ACORN to get out and vote.

Democrats do not care about voter disenfranchisement. If that were the case, they would have attempted to pass legislation that changed voter law. Instead, Democrats seek to employ their famous Roe v Wade tactic–making law by law breaking judges. Obama agrees with those judges that saw the right of women to kill their babies in public places like clinics and hospitals as a fundamental privacy right guaranteed by Constitutional law. The problem is the privacy rights stated in the Constitution has nothing to do with sex or killing the unborn. The same principle applies here. The laws exist to prevent fraud and injustice. The laws were not meant to be violated by public officials, political vote seekers, or anyone else. They exist because some people have in the past and will likely do so in the future, especially if they believe they can get away with it. Ohio Democrats continue their practice of creating tolerance and unconstitutional rights for breaking laws in order to achieve their goals. In this case, their effort is to give Obama a better chance of winning the election.

I can hear some Democrats saying something like this: Well, so do Republicans. Do you remember Blackwell? Yes. I also remember Republicans creating redistricting law that gave their candidates a more favorable chance at winning elections in some districts. They did not blatantly seek to break the law by using the courts. They simply remade legitimate law. They actually did something Democrats often do not: They honored the rule of law, and representative of Ohioans not courts makes our laws.

Source: The Plain Dealer October 16, 2008

Ohio Led-Democrats Trample Down Law to Get More Votes

According to a report by the Washington Post, the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati ruled late Tuesday to deny the Ohio Republican Party’s emergency motion for an injunction limiting same-day early voter registration and voting. Under the direction of Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, a Democrat, county boards of election are allowing voters to register and vote on the same day, during a one-week window from Sept. 30 through Oct. 6.

Republicans argue that because state law requires voters to be registered for 30 days before casting a ballot, the procedure should be banned. Brunner said the process should continue because the votes will not be counted until Election Day. The Supreme Court of Ohio and a federal district court in Cleveland on Monday agreed with Brunner.

Politicians making it easier to register and vote is good policy. Shredding current law with the blessing of the Courts is another, which what SS Brunner and her blacked robed supporters sitting on high did.

Is it really to reduce long lines or to enfranchise more voters? Not really. Violating current law can never be justified by great political schemes. Scheming democrats know leftist activists are in the hoods convincing people to register and vote. The hint is that if they do their brotha’ will help them become more middle class through better community welfare programs. This is standard policy of get-out of poverty by voting for their Democrat (read it quick and cough a few times) benefactors.

This practice has been going for a long time and the poor are still poor. They still have the same issues with blighted neighborhoods, poor city services, low-income, crime on every street corner, little good health care, poor diets, and on and on. Unless they are true believing dependents on sugar daddy uncle Sam, they still have the same problems they have had for decades.

Some of advocates like ACORN, and others are seeking to help the poor. Sometimes they do. They helped them get loans and mortgages that they cannot not pay. They often have had to pay 3-4 times more to get payday loans for quick cash. Some inner-city poor actually work hard but still have little hope to achieve the American Dream. Many are single parenting moms, who should vote.

The problems is–and I have worked for ACORN while living in another state–multimillion dollar activist organizations like ACORN do not help people move beyond poverty they maintain. It’s true they make being poor a little better. With the cooperation of Washington politicians and rich elites, many poor are enabled to enjoy much of the good life, meaning having a decent place to live, cars, cell phones, computers, nice clothes, good food, and other stuff. It must be wonderful to have all that stuff only for the price of human dignity, much dependency, and little freedom.

Leading Ohio Dems desire to continue their paternal role over their poor benefactors. They also want the blessing of the superiors in party and on Capitol Hill. I’m sure Obama and company will shower may blessing on them and their grateful children.

I think the poor would show less prejudice by voting for McCain and Palin. They would be better off if while doing so they speak with one voice their demand for serious investment in their community, more justice economic policies to assist all willing to work to move out of poverty in order pay their own way. And just think, real prosperity and productivity would increase the local tax revenues and circulation of earned money, more consumerism, more employer-employee purchased health care insurance, paid more genuinely qualified loans, and the economic and political elites would still see the wealth trickle up into their coffers.

Wouldn’t that make a better world in which to live?