A Closer Look at Senator Obama's Tax Proposals

Jason Furman and Austan Goolsbee ("The Obama Tax Plan," op-ed, Aug. 14) must believe Americans can't add and subtract, and that we are willing to accept income redistribution as public policy. Mr. Obama's spending promises date would more than double the current deficit. The plan to pay for that spending by increasing the rate on the "wealthy," where the top 1% already carry 40% of the tax burden and the top 10% already carry 71% of the country's tax burden, fails to consider what actually happens when tax rates are shifted. They wrongly assume that higher rates result in high revenue. As we have seen time and again, from Kennedy to Reagan to George W. Bush, lower rates actually result in higher revenue.

Victor Connor
Wellington, Fla.

"The Obama Tax Plan" states that Sen. Obama is going to be "asking those making over $250,000 to contribute a bit more to Social Security to keep it sound." Since he's asking, my answer is no. Last year I paid a combined federal and state income tax rate of 44% and would prefer not to have my tax rate raised to over 60%. Maybe he should ask Congress to stop wasting our tax dollars instead.

Michael O'Guin
Rancho Santa Margarita, Calif.

I now know why Mr. Obama doesn't seem to understand taxes and economics -- his advisors don't. They claim to value the contributions of small businesses to the economy, but then talk of raising their tax rates. The single largest group of taxpayers in the upper income brackets are subchapter "S" corporations and LLCs, which pay the personal rate. So when Obama talks of raising rates on upper income earners, he will be hiking rates for small business.

They also neglect to mention that it wasn't Mr. Clinton's "deficit-reduction" plan (tax increase) that drove the economy in the 1990s; it was a GOP Congress that held the line on spending.

Rick Cannon
Buffalo, N.Y.

How does a tax rollback to higher rates or the repeal of a tax cut differ from a tax increase?

What is the difference between working families and families who make over $250,000 by working? Does the work of those who make over $250,000 preclude them from being considered a working family? Is their work any less valuable to the economy? As a small business owner (who wishes to stay in business), I find it difficult to hire more workers when expenses, such as payroll taxes, go up.

Mike Harrington
Barrington, Ill.

What candidate will rescue 70-plus age seniors from artificial high tax brackets, and from paying tax up to 85% on Social Security because they are forced to withdraw increasing investments from their IRAs and similar savings? Finance for middle-class, job-producing companies is jeopardized in the process.

Walt Brewer
Lockport, N.Y.

In the various discussions of taxes, I seldom hear that money belongs to those who earn it. The other considerations should be minor ones, barring a belief that all income and property belongs to the government.

Politicians who believe that should say so. We can then make a decision based on a clear understanding of their philosophy.

Mark Stamm
Potomac, Md.

I'd never heard of Austan Goolsbee before last spring when it came out that he was the Barack Obama adviser who had met with Canadians to explain that Sen. Obama would be threatening to pull the U.S. out of Nafta because Canadians were stealing all those good, high-paying American jobs. Mr. Goolsbee told Canadians not to worry, that Obama didn't really mean it. He just had to say this kind of stuff while campaigning. Now this braintruster is writing tax policy.

Better fasten your seat belts.

Jed Skillman
Winfield, Ill.

There is no mention of the alternative minimum tax. How convenient. What would this tax plan look like after the Pelosi-Reid Congress gets through with it?

Frederick Van Bennekom
Bolton, Mass.

America's Auto Makers on the Road for the Long Term

In the op-ed "Can America's Auto Makers Survive?" (Aug. 7), Paul Ingrassia asks whether Detroit's auto makers can survive. In the case of General Motors, the answer is, emphatically, yes. And not only survive, but thrive.

There is no question the industry is facing significant pressures driven by a weak U.S. economy and rising fuel costs. At GM, we're taking the difficult and necessary steps to reduce our cost structure to be more competitive in the global marketplace and build a stronger foundation for our future.

Contrary to Mr. Ingrassia's notion that U.S. auto makers did not anticipate the risk of rising fuel prices, GM has been preparing for the shift for several years toward more fuel-efficient models and developing diverse alternative fuel solutions that will redefine the industry.

In fact, 11 of our last 13 U.S. launches have been cars or crossovers, as will 18 of the next 19. We have 17 models that get 30 mpg or better, and offer six hybrid models. Most significant is our commitment to produce the Chevy Volt, a plug-in electric vehicle that will deliver 40 miles of gasoline-free driving and a total range of about 400 miles using a small gasoline engine to recharge its electric battery. This truly revolutionary vehicle will be on the market in 2010.

It's also important to note that the auto industry has a significant impact on the U.S. economy -- by directly employing a quarter of a million people and providing health care and pension benefits to millions. The auto industry has invested a quarter of a trillion dollars in the U.S. over the last 20 years, spends $12 billion a year in R&D and is the largest purchaser of raw materials and computer chips in the U.S. The future of the auto business is important to America, and we are dedicated to seeing that GM continues to be a significant part of the American landscape for decades to come.

Fritz Henderson
GM President and COO
Detroit

Partisanship Slows Court Confirmations

Regarding your editorial "The ABA Plots a Judicial Coup" (Aug. 14) that discusses the increasing politicization of the judicial confirmation process: Over the past 20 years, partisanship has increasingly plagued judicial confirmations. With each new administration, the party that does not control the presidency ratchets up the retaliation tactics. In 2004, I proposed a nonpartisan resolution dictating a schedule for consideration of all judicial nominees, which would ensure that each nominee receives a hearing and a vote. I reintroduced a similar resolution on March 4, 2008. On July 14, 2008, I chaired a forum examining the breakdown in the judicial confirmation process that included testimony from several experts explaining how this politicization has damaged the federal judiciary and the country.

Despite my efforts to promote a nonpartisan solution, the Senate has continued to slow-walk President Bush's judicial nominees. The Senate has confirmed only 312 of President Bush's nominees as compared to the 370 judges the Senate confirmed during President Clinton's tenure. This year the Senate has confirmed only 19 federal judges and has failed to act on 37 judicial nominees, some of whom have been waiting for years for a hearing or a vote.

I am still hopeful that senators from both sides of the aisle can work together this year to ensure an up-or-down vote for all of this President's judicial nominees, but the window of opportunity for compromise is rapidly closing. Failure to act on the pending judicial nominees will likely result in further erosion of the confirmation process, which the Framers designed to best provide this country with a superbly qualified and independent federal judiciary.

Arlen Specter (R., Pa.)
Washington

Are There Limits to Legislation?

I suspect Thomas Frank will take a lot of undeserved flak for his "The Audacity of Nope" (Tilting Yard, Aug. 13), but he is prescient in his hope that "public opinion will simply harden into a cynicism toward government generally." C. S Lewis tells us why: Regarding "the modern theory of sovereignty," as against the higher sovereignty of God's Natural Law, Lewis observes, "On this view, total freedom to make what laws it pleases, superiority to law because it is the source of law, is the characteristic of every state; of democratic states no less than of monarchical. That doctrine has proved so popular that it now seems to many a mere tautology. We conceive with difficulty that it was ever new because we imagine with difficulty how political life can ever have gone on without it. We take for granted that the highest power in the State, whether that power is a despot or a democratically elected assembly, will be wholly free to legislate and incessantly engage in legislation."

Messrs. Lewis and Frank saw the State incessantly legislating a lower sovereignty by devising new rules, schemes, services and bureaucracies that govern every corner of private life. As Mr. Lewis put it, "Rulers have become owners," and "We are less their subject than their wards, pupils, or domestic animals." To confirm this, simply examine the platforms of the presidential candidates.

Ronald L. Trowbridge
Conroe, Texas

More Than Arab Apologies Needed

In response to Judea Pearl's op-ed "Why Al Jazeera Owes an Apology" (Aug. 16): I am surprised at Mr. Pearl's mild response to the mass celebration by Hezbollah and Lebanese leaders upon the return of Samir Kuntar to Lebanon. The people of the free nations of the world do not need an apology from Al Jazeera, they need unconditional condemnation of Mr. Kuntar's barbarism and the disgusting glorification of his welcomed return.

A more meaningful apology should come from Israeli leaders for releasing Mr. Kuntar, knowing full well what would follow at the public square in Beirut. As well, the civilized nations of the world should also direct their condemnation to the citizens of Israel for tolerating Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and his cabinet, who have lost their ability to recognize the nature of Israel's enemies.

David R. Frazer
Scottsdale, Ariz.

It's Great to Hear Of Pride in America

Kobe Bryant's remarks about our country touched me deeply (" 'Our Country Is the Best,' " (Review & Outlook, Aug. 18).

It is so refreshing to realize that love and pride in one's country has not gone completely out of style.

William Houghton
The Woodlands, Texas