Spartanburg, South Carolina After a series of debates in which foreign policy and national security issues received little attention, Republicans spent Saturday evening here debating everything from the Arab Spring and Pakistan to foreign aid and China currency manipulation. The candidates largely agreed on the big issues – Obama is bad, terrorists are dangerous, Pakistan is a conundrum – but some interesting differences among the leading candidates surfaced over the course of the 90 minutes on stage and in the spin room afterwards.
Herman Cain had a difficult night, his halting and hesitant answers seemed to reflect a lack of depth on foreign policy issues. That might be understandable for someone who has spent his life in business, but it matters. In the first question of the night, Cain was asked about the recent IAEA report on Iran’s rapidly advancing nuclear program. The question conveyed a sense of urgency but Cain answered with policy prescriptions more appropriate for addressing a long-term problem – changing U.S. energy policy, aiding the Iranian opposition and tightening sanctions. Cain effectively ruled out military action. “The only way to stop them is through economic means,” he said.
Mitt Romney provided a dramatic contrast – on that answer and over the course of the night. If he came into this debate wanting to look strong and resolute – a good bet – he succeeded. On Iran, Romney, like Cain, mentioned sanctions and the Iranian opposition when asked about steps he would take to keep Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. But he made clear that those were merely first steps. “If all else fails, of course you take military action,” he said, lamenting the diminished meaning of “unacceptable” in U.S. threats against Iran. “If we elect Barack Obama, Iran will have nuclear weapons. If you elect Mitt Romney, if you elect me, they will not.” (more…)
Rick Perry says Texas is the most successful state in America. He’s right. Texan economic output exceeds Mexico’s and Australia’s and rivals India’s. Rick Perry has been governor of Texas for nearly 11 years. Does the logic of politics lead us to conclude that the governor of the nation’s most successful state, ipso facto, is the best man to be president of the economically gasping United States?
We are about to find out. Getting lost, however, among the governor’s adventures in the lovely hamlets of New Hampshire is that Texas, with or without him, has a story the rest of the U.S. should hear—the parts of the country that want a better economy than they’ve got now.
Texas, unlike California, isn’t America’s most beautiful state. Through October this year, parts of Texas had 90 days of 100+ temperatures. Yet companies and people keep moving into the high heat of Texas.
Martin Kozlowski
Rick Perry’s argument for himself is rooted in accounts of his efforts to bring companies to Texas. But the desire of businesses to sample Texas trail dust pre-dates Rick Perry. In 1990, one of the world’s biggest companies, Exxon Mobil, left New York City for Dallas. Exxon’s former CEO, Lee Raymond, says the move in part was indeed about costs and New York State’s notoriously overbearing tax authority. But it was also about working amid a culture of competence. “It’s just the attitude in Texas of getting things done and doing them well,” he says. (more…)
On some things, virtually all the Republican presidential candidates agree: President Obama’s health-reform plan must be scrapped. Government spending is far too high. Taxes should be lower. Washington needs to be reined in, and more power should devolve to the states.
But many differences remain, especially on how to create jobs and fix the economy. Rick Perry recently unveiled an economic plan meant to put him on a par with on-and-off front-runner Mitt Romney, whose own plan, a carryover from the 2008 presidential campaign, has been the baseline for much of the GOP debate over the economy. Comparing the two plans side-by-side helps clarify each candidate’s distinctive views.
Romney, though he’s loath to admit it, is an establishment candidate who’s reluctant to shake things up too much and mindful of the consistent and predictable economic climate that businesses appreciate. That’s not surprising given that Romney spent most of his private-sector career in the financial industry, running private-equity firm Bain Capital, which bought, sold, and helped run dozens of businesses while Romney was there. That makes Romney corporate America’s favored candidate–a huge help with fundraising.
Perry, by contrast, seems to be trying to accomplish two things with his plan. First, he’s staking out Tea Party turf by endorsing many positions backed by the GOP’s rightward flank. Second, his flat-tax plan follows the lead of former pizza-chain CEO Herman Cain, whose 9-9-9 plan has resonated with voters thanks to its simplicity and its catchy, promotional ring. Perry says that filing taxes under his plan would be so easy it would take just a moment or two. And he now brandishes a hypothetical, postcard-sized tax form that gives the Texas governor a marketing gimmick of his own to woo voters with.(more…)
Michael Vick went to prison for staging dogfights, but for presidential debates, it’s legal.
By DANIEL HENNINGER
Politics, like any guilty pleasure, breeds nightmares. One of late is that we’ll soon elect an American president based mostly on what people know from reading Yahoo! headlines and the three lines below them.
The nightmare got worse. The Yahoo! headlines started to look like a deep dive after Twitter’s 140-character tweets started to define the political debate.
This being politics, it got worse yet. After watching umpteen debates, it looks as if the Republican Party may choose someone to run for the presidency of the United States based on who can explain the world and all its troubles in 30 seconds.
The TV debates create buzz and interest, and that’s good. But most people don’t eat seven appetizers and call it a meal. The debates are producing half-baked versions of candidates running for the presidency.
Chad Crowe
Did I say candidates? I misspoke. The U.S. has a long tradition of fringe candidates like Dennis Kucinich or Ron Paul, but no previous system forced us to endure them once the laughing stopped. Two debates ago, I started surfing over to ESPN whenever Ron Paul talks. Yeah, let Iran have its own bomb. (more…)
In a conference call today sponsored by the Heritage Foundation, Paul Ryan answered some questions regarding the Perry plan for an optional flat tax. Ryan once proposed an optional flat tax, with two brackets of 10 and 25 percent. “I can tell you this: it would grow the economy,” Ryan said of the Perry plan. “This enters the good stage of the campaign . . . where the candidates are putting forth actual ideas and bold solutions.”
Ryan made two counter-arguments, one practical and one political, against the concern raised by Shannen Coffin and others that an optional flat tax will increase the complexity of the tax code instead of reducing it. “The practical argument is, people have their lives organized around the current code . . . You’ve got to give people time to adjust and prepare. When you completely convert over to a system by halting a tax expenditure, you [introduce] a lot of economic dislocation to the economy . . . You can smooth that transition.” (more…)
The folks in Washington might not like to hear it, but the plain truth is the U.S. government spends too much. Taxes are too high, too complex, and too riddled with special interest loopholes. And our expensive entitlement system is unsustainable in the long run.
Without significant change quickly, our nation will go the way of some in Europe: mired in debt and unable to pay our bills. President Obama and many in Washington seem unable or unwilling to tackle these issues, either out of fear of alienating the left or because they want Americans to be dependent on big government.
Related Video
Kim Strassel explains the Texas governor’s tax reform plan.
On Tuesday I will announce my “Cut, Balance and Grow” plan to scrap the current tax code, lower and simplify tax rates, cut spending and balance the federal budget, reform entitlements, and grow jobs and economic opportunity.
The plan starts with giving Americans a choice between a new, flat tax rate of 20% or their current income tax rate. The new flat tax preserves mortgage interest, charitable and state and local tax exemptions for families earning less than $500,000 annually, and it increases the standard deduction to $12,500 for individuals and dependents. (more…)
The nightmare on Main Street — the federal income tax code — is ending, which is fantastic news for our beleaguered economy. Dramatically simplifying this monstrosity would unleash a powerful wave of prosperity and job creation.
Thankfully in 2012 we will get a mandate to make this happen. Presidential contender Herman Cain vaulted to the head of the Republican pack when he proposed his 9-9-9 plan — a flat 9% income tax, corporate tax and national sales tax. Even better, Texas Gov. Rick Perry will, in a few days, unveil his version of a flat tax, a concept that I have long advocated.
To put things in perspective: Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address, which defined the character of the American nation, is only 272 words; the Declaration of Independence, 1,500 words; the Constitution with all its amendments, 7,200 words; and the Bible, which took centuries to put together, 773,000.
The federal income tax code and all its attendant rules and regulations — almost 10 million words and rising.
The code has been changed 14,000 times since 1986; last year alone there were 500 changes. The cost of compliance is horrific. The IRS itself calculates that we spend more than 6 billion hours a year filling out tax forms, the equivalent of almost 3 million full-time jobs. The Tax Foundation calculates that by 2015 annual compliance will be costing the American people some $483 billion a year. (more…)
