From: clw1@ix.netcom.com (C. L. Williams) Subject: Re: And now it's back to the LEFT!! zepp@snowcrest.net (Zepp) wrote: >jlinder@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Jeffrey Scott Linder) wrote: >>zepp@snowcrest.net (Zepp) wrote: >>>clw1@ix.netcom.com (C. L. Williams) caused us all to grin by saying: >>>>There is no real commitment, but if you look at how he operated in '93 >>>>when he thought he could do anything he wanted, he was off to the >>>>left. Gays in the military, proposed VAT tax, proposed national sales >>>>tax, proposed BTU tax, largest tax hike in history, gun laws, all >>>>within the first few months. Luckily, we have checks and balances in >>>>Congress now. >>>>C.L. Williams >>>Um, Clinton didn't propose VAT or national sales taxes, and such >>>regressive taxes are generally regarded as right-wing ideas. Sorry, >>>but "left" isn't defined as "anything you don't like the sound of". >>Um.... Sorry, Zepp, you're wrong yet again. The Clinton >>administration did indeed float the idea of a VAT tax in ADDITION to >>the taxes we pay already. >So somebody in the Clinton administration presumably said, at one time >or another, that they were looking at a VAT as a possibility for some >thing or other. Does that mean it's a formal proposal? If you'll >check, you'll find that Clinton has never proposed a VAT. That's a >right-wing loony pipe dream. I'll tell you what, Zepp. I will admit that it wasn't being formally proposed, if you'll read the following article and admit it was being seriously considered. As usual, numerous lies, retractions, and waffles are documented. The proposals were all within the administration, and they decided against it because they didn't think they could sell it to Congress. Some more research turned up Clinton's Feb. 1994 plan to tax welfare benefits. Care to talk about regressive taxes? Hmmm? Sounds like mean-spirited war on the poor to me. Clinton also proposed a federal gambling tax at one time. So now we're up to a National Sales Tax, BTU tax, Ammo Tax, Welfare Benefits Tax (I love that one), VAT tax, Sin Tax Hike (cigarettes and alcohol, as if they aren't taxed enough already), and Gax Tax Hike. Some were considered (some of you dispute the word "proposed"), some implemented. There's probably some I left out, but it's hard to keep track of all the taxes Clinton has wanted over the years. Oh, yeah, I nearly forgot. Recently, Bruce Babbitt wanted to tax binoculars. These guys are so far off to the left, it's comical. C.L. Williams THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN New York Times News Service 15-Apr-1993 Thursday WASHINGTON -- The White House said yesterday it was considering a value-added tax -- an indirect form of sales tax -- to help pay for President Clinton's health-care package. But Clinton aides insisted that the president had not made any final decision on such a sweeping new proposal to raise revenue. President Clinton first broached the idea of a value-added tax (VAT), which is imposed on goods and services at each stage of production but ultimately paid for by the consumer, in February, then backed away, calling it a "radical change" that only could be looked at in years ahead. But in the past two days, the Health and Human Services secretary, Donna Shalala, and the deputy budget director, Alice Rivlin, said in separate statements that such a tax was being considered to pick up some of the cost of Clinton's health-care plan, estimated at $50 billion to $100 billion a year. The White House communications director, George Stephanopoulos, confirmed Shalala's statement, which she made in an interview published in USA Today. "This is something that is being looked at, but no decision has been made," Stephanopoulos said. Stephanopoulos' acknowledgment came during a heated question-and-answer period with reporters in which he initially tried to avoid confirming that a value-added tax was being considered by the administration. In doing so, he contradicted a statement by Clinton on Feb. 19 that such a tax "is not something that is now under consideration; if we start considering it, I'll tell you." Caught in a situation in which he either had to say that Shalala did not know what she was talking about, or that the president was not aware that the task force headed by his wife, Hillary, was considering it, or that the president had changed his mind, Stephanopoulos conceded that the tax was one of several being considered by the task force. But he said that no firm proposal had been presented to Clinton. The president is not expected to unveil the components of his health-care package, aimed at providing every American a minimum level of health insurance, until mid-May. "They have examined the possibility of a VAT," Stephanopoulos said. "Has it been presented to the president? Has he made a decision? No, he has not." One reason the White House is so reluctant to concede that such a tax is under discussion is the fear it will divert attention from the president's efforts to sell his $16.5 billion jobs package, which has been trapped in the Senate by a Republican filibuster. Part of the Republican argument against the bill is that Clinton is calling for too many new taxes. Any talk of a value-added tax would undercut White House efforts to focus public attention on Republican opposition to the jobs bill. Nevertheless, shortly after Stephanopoulos spoke, Rivlin told a gathering of the National Manufacturers Association that a value-added tax was very much on the table. "A VAT is clearly a possible candidate," she said, apparently unaware of how the White House was trying to play it down. "I think a VAT has a good deal to recommend it." Rivlin acknowledged that such taxes, unlike progressive income taxes, fall most heavily on the poor and middle class. Therefore, such a tax "must be designed so as not to be painful to lower-income groups," she said. Administration officials said that the reason such a tax is under consideration is because the proposed tax increase on alcohol and cigarettes being looked at by the health policy task force would be insufficient to pay for the universal health-coverage package being drawn up. In the interview in USA Today, Shalala said: "We've talked a lot about sin taxes. Certainly, we're looking at a VAT tax." She went on to say: "But all of this would have to be phased in, and what we first must do is have the mechanisms in place to slow down existing spending." Rivlin noted that because state and municipal governments rely on sales taxes to help finance their budgets, they would likely oppose a federal value-added tax, so "there would have to be an accommodation to state and local governments." Asked about the administration's apparent change of position on the value-added tax, Stephanopoulos said: "I think what the president's concern is to make sure he gets the best health-care proposal possible. He's concerned at making sure that they have the most thorough process for examining all the possible alternatives.