Double D'oh! Another Maddow Guest Undermines Her Premise, This Time on Tax Enforcement
If this keeps up, the shrinking number of guests on Rachel Maddow's MSNBC show could dwindle even more.
For the second time this week, a Maddow invitee offered an awkward contrast to what Maddow claimed earlier in the same segment.
On her show Monday, Maddow cited three reports claiming that $61 billion in spending cuts proposed by Republicans on Capitol Hill would lead to massive job losses -- followed by economist Robert Frank telling Maddow minutes later the reductions amount to "just a drop in the bucket."
[Video below page break]
On Wednesday, Maddow talked about how government can avoid the pain of spending cuts or higher taxes by "cracking down on tax cheats" --
If this were a small business, if you were a plumber doing this, it would mean getting better at your billing. Not raising your prices, not raising your hourly rates, but just making sure that money that's supposed to be coming into you is actually coming in. That's how it would work if you were a small business. For a government, the equivalent to getting better at your billing is cracking down on tax cheats. When people owe taxes, it's getting them to pay those taxes. It is catching them when they try to evade taxes or when they cheat. It's not cutting spending or raising taxes. Sorry, you guys. (holding up puppets representing both). But it does reduce the deficit.
Every dollar the IRS spends going after tax cheats pulls in more than $10 against the deficit. It's the technocratic, good government, efficiency way to cut the deficit without raising taxes or cutting spending. Um, and Republicans want to do less of it.Republicans this year say they want to cut $600 million out of tax enforcement. How can you say you care about the deficit and then propose that? Whatever you think about these bad ideas (motioning with puppets), that has got to be the worst idea ever.
Wow -- worse than the Final Solution? That's one heckuva bad idea. Followed by Maddow's next guest, Syracuse University economist and author David Cay Johnston, referring to three specific states where tax enforcement is lax --
MADDOW: I am interested in what you alluded to actually there with your first sentence there, into what is being called fiscal policy but that is really about accomplishing other political goals. I think that's what we've had in Wisconsin, an attack on unions that's purportedly justified by the budget but it's not actually related to that budget at all. Do you, a), do you think that's the case in Wisconsin, and do you also think that's what's going on with this call to cut corporate tax rates?
JOHNSTON: I think this is going on all over the country. I've written a number of times about the former IRS official who figured out how to catch all sorts of tax cheats using computers. And I finally was told by an official in Kentucky that the governor's office had sent word that, no, they weren't going to do this because it might catch some of the donors to the governor. In New York, we have a huge amount of tax cheating going on that's easy to catch involving real estate. The state won't pursue it. In Wisconsin, we have the same thing. The previous administration fired state corporate auditors while saying we don't have enough revenue.
The "previous administration" in Wisconsin -- run by a Democrat, Jim Doyle, Scott Walker's predecessor.
In New York, the current governor -- Andrew Cuomo -- and the two who preceded him -- David Paterson and Eliot Spitzer -- Democrats all.
"The governor" in Kentucky -- Democrat Jim Beshear, who's held office since December 2007.
Had all three states been run by Republicans while turning a blind eye to tax cheats, think this would go unmentioned by Johnston or Maddow?
- Jack Coleman's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Falling viewership?
Submitted by Ashrak on Fri, 03/04/2011 - 1:09pm.
Heck, I would submit that Rachel getting spanked nightly might just increase her ratings.
Listen Rachel, when taxation is not punitive, when folks see government officials being good stewards of the money it collects, when the taxation itself is just, people do not make effort to avoid paying them. See that yet? And as for the tax cheats, are you pointing as Turbo Tax TImmy and Charlie Rangle? You sure do have a pattern of not mentioning things, Rachel.
And as you call for more IRS enforcement, are you approving of the IRS getting those shotguns? I love it when you lefties find yourselves in those situations. Trust me here Rachel, sticking to principles and values across contexts avoids those troublesome developments. Try it sometime.
And don't forget Tom Daschle
Submitted by Galvanic on Fri, 03/04/2011 - 6:37pm.
Maddow's right about cracking down on tax cheats, including rich Democrats. But she can't do the math: closing tax fraud alone won't balance the budget.
citing by party
Submitted by davidcay on Fri, 03/04/2011 - 2:12pm.
In my bestselling books, in several radio and TV appearances in recent weeks, and in my tax.com column I have repeatedly described our tax issues as bipartisan, the product of what I call the Party of the Greenback. And I have been critical of Ds and Rs by name and party.
The issue I was asked about is entirely a Republican initiative so, logically, the conversation was about how journalists erred in assuming what the governor said was accurate and then got it wrong (many because they do not understand numbers or basic principles of private property and contracts).
I have written pieces highly critical of Obama (that includes the very first piece after his inauguration by an nationally known journalist and it ran less than ten days after he became president at cjr.org) and of the Clintons (including how they broke her pledge on book royalties and paid more than twice the required income taxes, which prompted them to change how they filed their next tax return to maximize benefits to charity and not get any for themselves) and of Carter and and of all sorts of Democrats in Congress and other offices.
Indeed, my work has ended the careers of several Democratic politicians, but only one Republican (who was also disbarred), so since I am a registered Republican (and business owner) I suppose the Ds (and labor) could accuse me of bias, too. And, indeed, they have.
In New York, the Pataki administration (Republican) repeatedly refused to go after the real estate tax cheating that can easily be detected, which is what I referred to; in Kentucky both D and R governors have refused. Indeed, the only governor whose administration has used the techniques was Pennsylvania under Rendell, a Democrat.
The cutting of state auditors to look into corporations occurred under Gov. McCallum, a Republican.
@ ashrack, no IRS agent has ever fired a gun (check the official reports if you don't believe me), but we have had a number of IRS agents murdered (like Vernon Hill, over a tax break for IBM that hurt him and many thousands of others entrepreneurial programmers in high tech, a story that I have written about repeatedly over the last 16 years and no one else has picked up on and that Congress under both D and R majorities has not fixed); we have had local law enforcement mistaken for IRS agents murdered; we have had a number of cases of bombs sent and in some cases going off at IRS offices. But never a single gunshot in all these decades going the other direction.
And, again, on other shows in the past ten days I have specified both Ds and Rs and will again. There was no intent here to avoid pointing to Ds and in the very short time I had to answer the subtleties of Pataki and then who was governor when in Ky and that a D was in Penn. are just too detailed for television in such a short time period.
Here is a question for you -- how come I write columns that show how small businessmen get hurt (by in just one example the law known as Section 1706) and you folks ignore that. Are you biased against small businessmen in high tech? And in those stories I showed that it was a D who sponsored the law.
david cay
Submitted by Radical1979 on Fri, 03/04/2011 - 2:32pm.
The website is about media bias, not government bias against business. It's the bias in the reporting that's relevant.
Although you may indeed, go after both sides with an equal vigor, Maddow doesn't.
Tip for Maddow: stick to the old Olbermann guest list
Submitted by SickofLibs on Fri, 03/04/2011 - 2:29pm.
They're not doing much these days and will never, ever embarrass you like this.
You need an economist? Howard Fineman.
You need a legal expert? Howard Fineman.
You need an energy expert? Howard Fineman.
Thanks for clarifying, Dr. Johnston
Submitted by Jack Coleman on Fri, 03/04/2011 - 2:30pm.
An entirely reasonable inference on my part that your reference to "the previous administration" in Wisconsin was that of Gov. Jim Doyle.
In response to your question about Section 1706), not aware of it until now but I am opposed to any government policies that hurt small businessmen, in high tech or otherwise.
Liberals rarely fail to cite party affilation when criticizing Republicans for wrongdoing, negligence, etc., but are decidedly spotty on this when it comes to Democrats.
just to be clear...
Submitted by davidcay on Fri, 03/04/2011 - 3:25pm.
I am not a "Dr." and while I teach at a law schiool and a graduate school of business, and have taught at other universities, I am not a college graduate, although I have an excellent college and postgtraduate education.
Mr. Johnston it is
Submitted by Jack Coleman on Fri, 03/04/2011 - 4:11pm.
And kudos to you for a willingness to comment here
You think Rachel gets her hair cut at Great Clips?
Submitted by redright88 on Fri, 03/04/2011 - 5:03pm.
I'm guessing she goes with the # 3 clipper.
The intellectual capacity of a Fruit Fly
Submitted by Injest on Sat, 03/05/2011 - 6:17am.
Madsow :It's not cutting spending or raising taxes. Sorry, you guys. (holding up puppets representing both). But it does reduce the deficit.
Errrrrrrrrr what?
The “deficit” is the PLANED spending above the EXPECTED tax money.
Taxes are paid at the END of the year, not at the START of the year.
Meaning those who “evade taxes and/or cheat” have ZERO effect on the “DEFICIT"!
Those who “evade taxes and/or cheat” add to the DEBT! Not the DEFICIT!
Madsow once again proves she has “The intellectual capacity of a Fruit Fly”!
Madsow : Every dollar the IRS spends going after tax cheats pulls in more than $10 against the deficit.
No, it goes to DEBT!
Madsow : It's the technocratic, good government, efficiency way to cut the deficit without raising taxes or cutting spending.
Ah no, you cut the DEFICIT by not spending more than you take in, it's called a Budget!