Toomey: New revenue won't break Norquist pledge
Sen. Pat Toomey (R., Pa.), one of the most staunchly conservative members of the Senate when it comes to taxes and spending, said today he would not violate Grover Norquist's "no tax pledge" but also left the door open to increasing revenues.
Toomey: New revenue won't break Norquist pledge
Sen. Pat Toomey (R., Pa.), one of the most staunchly conservative members of the Senate when it comes to taxes and spending, said today he would not violate Grover Norquist’s “no tax pledge” but also left the door open to increasing revenues.
“I don’t intend to violate any pledge,” Toomey said on CNN Tuesday morning. “My pledge is not to support higher taxes. What we’re faced with in just a few weeks is a massive tax increase. If I can help ensure that we don’t have that tax increase, then I believe I’ve fulfilled my pledge to fight for the lowest possible taxes.”
In saying that he’s fighting for “the lowest possible taxes,” though, Toomey left the door open to some type of added tax revenue, but on a much smaller, more targeted scale than the massive tax hikes scheduled to take effect as part of the fiscal cliff looming at year’s end. In fact, long before some Republicans began disavowing their pledges to Norquist to never support tax hikes, Toomey had proposed ways to raise tax revenue without increasing tax rates. He reiterated those ideas on CNN, calling for raising revenues by closing loopholes and eliminating some deductions in exchange for lower marginal tax rates and a simpler tax code – a plan he first outlined in July.
Toomey is an influential fiscal conservatives in the Senate, making his stand one to watch as President Obama and top lawmakers try to negotiate a deal that satisfies both sides but can also pass through both houses of Congress.
UPDATE: His language about the "lowest possible" tax hike hews closely to something the Wall Street Journal wrote in an editorial about Norquist, arguing that "President Obama's re-election means that taxes for upper-income earners are going up one way or another. The Bush rates expire on December 31 unless Mr. Obama signs an extension ... If taxes are going up anyway because the Bush rates expire, and Republicans can stop them from going up as much as they otherwise would, then pledge-takers deserve some credit for that."
Said Toomey: “The concern that I have is that we are now just a few weeks away from a massive tax increase and I am trying to find a way to avoid inflicting that damage on our economy and going through that. So if we’re going to have to have some revenue increase, which this president seems determined to do, I would hope that we could at least do it in a way that does the least economic harm.” He added, "Then at least you could hope you could have that you’d some pro-growth policies in your tax code that would offset the damage done by greater revenue.”
Toomey said any tax hike could damage the economy, but that Obama “seems absolutely determined to inflict a tax increase on the American people.” Recognizing that reality, Toomey said he would favor new revenues only if it is accompanied by lower tax rates and reforms to entitlement programs – meaning Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.
“If we’re going to do something on the revenue side, for gosh sakes let’s not damage the economy any more than we have to,” he said.
Obama has argued that families making more than $250,000 should pay higher taxes to help balance the federal budget, and that taxes should be held steady for incomes below that threshold. He will be taking his case to Montgomery County on Friday.
The White House has been skeptical of plans such as Toomey’s that call for raising new revenue solely by closing loopholes.
“I’m not aware of a realistic proposal that reduces deductions and tax expenditures more generally by enough to address our fiscal problems,” said Alan Krueger, chairman of Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers.
Obama spokesman Jay Carney told reporters Monday that closing loopholes and increased tax rates on income above $250,000 are both needed to raise enough revenue to fairly balance the budget.
This comment has been deleted.— sharkmeat- You are actually missing the point here, Sharky. The pledge is made to the constituents - it is not made to Norquist.
And most of those who signed the pledge were elected after having signed it.— jfar86 - I don't care which path they take, as long as they reform the tax code to make it simple and stop playing favorites.— everydayguy
- The personal income tax rate from 1951-1962 for income over $900K was 90%. The corporate income tax rate was 53% as opposed to today's 35% and didn't have near the corporate welfare breaks. We built the interstate highway system and got a foothold in space. It's no coincidence that those feats happened when the wealthy paid a REAL tax rate, UNIONS were strong, and "investment" banks (ie Ponzi schemes) were isolated in their own little pig stye. Add their country's tax history to the list of topics which amerikans are completely ignorant.— CiceroSpuriousDeodatusTheSecond
- Reagan raised taxes about 11 times, so why don't the GOP tell Norquist to go take a hike. Who is Norquist anyway, except a frat house type holding the country hostage so he can glean a living from the ultra rich. He is a sycophantic lap dog and deserves to be exposed as one. Who in the GOP has the courage to dismiss him, similar to how centrist Democrats had to dismiss Jesse Jackson before going onto win elections? To the GOP: this is not rocket science. Use the Jesse Jackson model. Those who attack and expose Norquist and his hidden interests, will win elections and become true statesmen.— ricciaje
- What some of you don't understand is that raising taxes in a weak economic state will always have an adverse effect. In order to counter that, spending on subsidizing the poor will have to be cut as well. If that doesn't happen, it is basically socialism and our country will shrink, financially speaking. We need to create jobs!! Not permanantly give the poor a crutch by taking from the rich. Welfare fraud is out of control bc of unemployment, and Obama is going to enable this psuedo European welfare revolution even further if we take off the Obama tinted glasses.
sharkmeat, you aren't fooling anyone. CPUSA can't be paying you that much? Or, are you really that ignorant? Or, evil? I can't tell.— mayspot20 - This comment has been deleted. — sharkmeat
- Is that all you do? Resort to insults to put a veil over your extreme ideology.
I think you are misunderstanding my opinion. Tax rates should be raised, IMO. But, if you are going to do that in this ecomoic climate, you have to fix welfare (the largest driver of national debt in this country) which has the proverbial 'hole in the bucket' and cut military spending as well. All of that said, if you raise rates on the wealthy, the tax code needs to be changed, bc we can't in our right minds think taxing small businesses more is going to help out. It's a give and take, not, lets take money from the wealthy to help plug a gaping hole in the welfare bucket to curb our deficit in the short term.
You're living in a fantasy world if you actually believe welfare is good the way it is. All you have to do is look across the Atlantic. Don't try and minimize the importance of this issue, bc you seem well equipped at it when speaking to the uneducated.— mayspot20 - Mr Toomey the voters of PA will remember your pledge to Grover Norquist over the needs of America.— Jeff C.
- Why do I care what promises the Senator made to a muppet?
You all in Congress voted for this "cliff". If it was so bad - why did you?
Let them expire - then maybe you'll pass laws good for more than two months.
Seriously - I'm supposed to get upset over a crisis that isn't one.— Poit - Toomey, your pledge is to uphold the constitution; not to any lobbyist, including Norquist. I'd advise you to rethink this as many of us libertarians will go elsewhere.............— Northcountry
- do your job or you will be gone Norquist is not a elected member of the Government— The Democrat
- During our last fiscal cliff-hanger, I called Senator Toomey's office and had an interesting conversation with one of his aides. It was news to her that we used to raise taxes to pay for wars.— philapat
Jonathan Tamari is the Inquirer’s correspondent in Washington, where he follows the Philadelphia area’s interests and representatives. Tamari comes to D.C. after two years as a beat writer reporting on the Philadelphia Eagles and the NFL (where, a political source once told him, there are at least rules against hitting below the knees). He previously wrote about politics and government from Trenton, reporting on the characters and color of New Jersey state government.Jersey born and bred, Tamari now lives in the capital city, where he is looking for stories, places to run, soccer bars and good meals.
Reach him at jtamari@phillynews.com.
Follow Jonathan on Twitter: @JonathanTamari.
