Tuesday, March 23, 2004

Recommended Reading

Are Richard Clarke's charges to be believed? Here, arguing for them, are Fred Kaplan and William Saletan. And here, arguing against them, are William F. Buckley and Mansoor Ijaz. Take your pick.

• Posted at 3:51 PM · LINK

Slight Correction

The Bush list of tax increases I mentioned in the previous message wasn't compiled against Michael Dukakis in '88 but against Bill Clinton in '92. Well, I knew it was a Democratic governor.

The point is: Counting the number of tax increases, even if you score them correctly, is meaningless. Some so-called tax increases only apply to a tiny sector of the population and in many cases, they're actually a matter of instituting "use fees," meaning that people pay or co-pay only when they receive government services. Many folks who are for lower taxation (and I'm one) are in favor of voluntary "use fees" in lieu of certain taxes. And of course, not all tax increases are of the same magnitude.

One correspondent also reminds me that both Bushes have also used a bit of creative phrasing. Saying that your opponent has "voted 350 times to raise taxes" is not the same thing as saying that the guy has supported 350 tax increases. Often, a representative votes on a dozen procedural matters that collectively yield one tax increase. But stating it the way the Bushes have makes it sound like twelve tax increases.

• Posted at 3:36 PM · LINK

Recommended Reading

Michael Kinsley on the G.O.P. assertion that John Kerry has voted "350 times" to raise taxes. I wish I could find an online source to link to an article Kinsley did back when the previous Bush was running against Michael Dukakis. That Bush had a similar list of supposed tax increases endorsed by Dukakis and Kinsley did a great job of dissecting it as illusory...for example, counting an increase in the gasoline tax as several separate tax increases because it applied to Unleaded, Super Unleaded, Diesel, etc.

But the big thing that's always wrong with these lists is that they take the position that a tax increase is a tax increase, regardless of amounts. If one elected official votes for five 1% increases and another votes for one 10% increase, the former is pilloried for championing five times as many tax increases as the latter. If you were for lower taxes, which of those two guys should you support?

• Posted at 12:02 PM · LINK