Tax Surge would give everyone a stake in the War

[Toots]

Although a substantial majority of Americans oppose the Bush* Administration's proposed escalation of the war in Iraq, Congress apparently will do nothing more than serve up non-binding resolutions expressing disagreement with Bush* policy. Cheney was quick to declare, even with the big Republican loss in November or the Administration's low public opinion rating "nothing is going to stop us".
Congress' reluctance to exercise it's constitutional budget authority to influence a foreign policy disfavored by most Americans stems from the Administration's implicit threat to brand anyone who votes to cut funds for it's war "defeatist," or worse yet, as endangering the lives of soldiers in harm's way. In short Bush* and Cheney have called Congress' bluff. Meanwhile spending for the war continues at roughly $100 billion a year, driving up record deficits and reducing policy debates about critical domestic needs, such as fixing Social Security and Medicare and decent health care for all Americans, to a zero sum game.
So why do we put up with this? Where is that outpouring of energy and indignation that forced the country out of our last foreign policy debacle in Vietnam? The answer seems simple enough. For most Americans this is an academic debate. The elimination of the Draft means that the cost in Americans lives falls on those who chose to join a volunteer Army.
As long as the press is forbidden to take pictures of the flag draped coffins coming home, we can console ourselves with the self-serving thought that they must have known the risk when they signed up. Nor has the Adminstration's war caused us the least material discomfort. For the first time in history we are waging a war based entirely on deficit spending. Far from asking sacrifice from Americans the Administration has purchased our indiferance with massive tax cuts. And incredibly most of us seem quite content to leave it to our children to figure out how to pay for our wars as well as our retirement. So here is my modest proposal; Since those in Congress who oppose escalating and prolonging the conflict in Iraq will not withhold funds for fear of being swift-boated in the next election, perhaps it is time to call the Administration's bluff for a change. Tell them that as long as American soldiers are in harm's way, no responsible, patriotic, representative could consider extending their signature tax cuts. Pass and hand to the pResident for his signature or veto a temporary "national emergency surtax" accessed at ten percent of federal tax liability. And to make it clear that the intended beneficiaries of the intended tax are those who are doing the fighting and dying, only those who have served in the military since 9-11, or survivors who have lost a loved one in military service since that date, would be exempt from the surcharge.
With personal and corporate income taxes bringing roughly $1.3 trillion into the treasury every year, a ten percent surcharge would cover the annual cost of the war with enough left over to begin impleminting the anti-terrorism recommendations of the 9-11 commission. The tax would expire as soon as the president certifies to Congress that no American service person, other than those serving as UN authorized Peace keeping missions, is in a combat zone. Call it a "temporary tax surge" And let any Senator, Representative or member of the executive department who oppose the measure be accused justly of "defeatism' and refusing to support our troops. My modest proposal would have a number of benefits. It would staunch the flow of red ink in the federal budget. It would allow the Pentagon to provide our men and women in harm;s way with proper body armor and reinforcements they should have had before being asked to do the job they are being asked to do. It would free up some of the federal budget for national priorities other than war making. Perhaps more importantly it would give all American a stake in the Conflict. Those whop object to higher taxes need only to vote for those who would promise to end the tax by bringing our people home.
Finally it would place respnsibility for the tax hikes where it belongs--on the pResident. It would reduce the risk the next president will be made the scapegoat for the failed policies of the current Administration. Indeed the President who eliminates the need for the "national emergency surtax" would be a hero of sorts..
What do you think could this one fly?

[Lucky Luciano]

1. Bad idea....

With an extra $130B, the war's budget would go from $100B per year to $230B per year....much of that diverted back to the 1000 or so people that own this country.