What’s the Truth About Taxes?

Last week Mr. Tiahrt sent out a letter to his supporters that said, “I have never voted for a tax increase. Never, not a single time. And you have my word that I will continue to oppose tax increases and support tax cuts in the U.S. Senate.” He continued to criticize his opponent (Rep. Jerry Moran) for continuously voting to increase taxes and for failing to vote for the Bush tax cuts.

On a policy note, this letter makes me wonder what Mr. Tiahrt’s plans are for paying for the massive size of our federal government. One of the most troubling issues that America faces today is the growing national debt, and a budget that is nowhere close to being balanced. If Mr. Tiahrt isn’t willing to raise taxes, what specific government programs does he want to end? Is he willing to end his massive and irresponsible pork projects in an effort to balance the budget?

While the policy implications of Mr. Tiahrt’s letter are certainly questionable, the real problem with this letter is that much of what he writes is completely false. As the Dodge City Globe pointed out, Mr. Tiahrt has actually voted in favor of tax increases as recently as last month (on a measure that Mr. Moran actually voted against). Furthermore, Mr. Tiahrt’s claim that Moran voted against the Bush tax cuts is clearly false. Mr. Moran actually voted FOR the Bush tax cuts.

It’s still relatively early in this campaign, but it has become obvious that there is no lie that Mr. Tiahrt won’t tell in order to get ahead. If Mr. Tiahrt is willing to obviously LIE to his supporters about his and Mr. Moran’s records, what else is he willing to do? If we can’t trust Mr. Tiahrt to be truthful with the people that are already supporting him, how can we trust him to be a truthful representative for all of Kansas?

The truth is that we can’t trust him.

Publius

Who Says Pigs Can’t Fly?

Earlier this week Citizens Against Government Waste (a conservative think tank whose objective is to create a more fiscally responsible government) released its Pig Book “Oinkers” of 2010 awards that, “Recognize Dogged Perseverance in the Mad Pursuit of Pork.” The organization presents these awards to the Congressmen that most represent the grand tradition of extraordinarily wasteful Washington spending.

Coming as no surprise to this blogger is Mr. Tiahrt’s appearance on the list (along with Senators Roberts and Brownback) under the “Plane Waste Award”. The three representatives are criticized by CAGW for $3,500,000 in federal funds that were used to build the National Institute for Aviation Research. This spending was particularly criticized because its clients are all major aerospace companies that could (and SHOULD) pay for this program on their own.

Yet again we are witnessing Mr. Tiahrt’s actions not match up to his words. Time and time again he makes claims about being a true conservative, but time and time again we hear about congressional watchdog groups giving him poor ratings for his excessive and wasteful spending in Washington. How can we believe this rhetoric?

What makes matters worse is that the announcement of the “Oinker” award came one day before Mr. Tiahrt was actually endorsed by the Tea Party Express. Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t the entire point of the Tea Party movement to encourage smaller government with less waste? How does Mr. Tiahrt and his pork barrel politics represent the values of the Tea Party movement?

All together, the endorsement and the oinker give me a very troubling view of the Tea Party Express’s means for vetting candidates it should endorse, as well as the problem with rhetoric in our country. Tea Party Express seems to be endorsing Mr. Tiahrt NOT for his conservative principles (which truly don’t exist) but for some sort of nebulously rhetorical reason that I can’t quite understand.

In any event, if Kansans (especially members of the Kansas Tea Party movement) want a true conservative to represent this state in the Senate, it seems impossible at this point to believe that Mr. Tiahrt is the man for the job.

Oinking All the Way,

Publius

It’s Not Always about Partisanship

Over the past month I’ve written a lot about Mr. Tiahrt’s alleged ethics violations and subsequent acquittal from the House ethics committee (and the subsequent House resolution asking to look into that acquittal), and I have read a lot of your feedback in the comments sections of this site. While I am always supportive of healthy political discourse, one recurring comment/complaint that I have seen is about the legitimacy of the Office of Congressional Ethics as a non-partisan office. Some complaints include:

“He has been targeted by Pelosi's pet committee. Why can't conservatives see through this?”

“Only CONSERVATIVES are yet to be cleared, It's not fair to your readers to leave out facts.”

“The OCE was created by Nancy Pelosi and 5 of the 8 board members are democrats.”

“The fact is OCE made this political.”

If there is one thing I hate, it’s when people use the word facts when they fail to site actual facts; and if there’s another thing I hate, it’s when people create partisanship out of issues that are decidedly non-partisan. While it is true that the OCE was formed in a Congress led by Nancy Pelosi, and it is true that the independent leader of the OCE is a registered Democrat, the FACTS just do not support claims that the OCE acts with political motivations.

Last year the OCE recommended twelve cases to the Congressional Ethics Committee for further review. Of the 12 Representatives that were recommended for further review, 10 were Democrats and only 2 were Republicans (one being Mr. Tiahrt). Given these FACTS, there is no logical way to conclude that the OCE is acting in a political and partisan manner unless you believe that it is working against the Democratic Party.

It’s not always about partisanship. Just because Nancy Pelosi worked to create the committee does not mean that it is a corrupt and evil Democratic institution out to conquer the world. The fact of the matter is that examining what the OCE has actually done reveals that any bias against Republicans (or shadowy control by Nancy Pelosi) is simply not evident in the actions of the Office, and anybody that tries to contend differently is clearly being ignorant of the facts.

Factually Yours,

Publius