Iam faced with a real dilemma when it comes to the Presidential election.
Hereis my problem. I am a tax professional,and as a result the issue of taxation is very important to me – and I do notmean this selfishly. I am a vocal supporterof true tax reform and simplification. Ibelieve the purpose of the federal income tax is to raise money to run thegovernment – period. It should not beused to distribute social welfare subsidies or to redistribute income.
Itis clear from the individual proposals of the two candidates and Parties thatonly the Republicans support true tax reform – rewriting the Tax Code fromscratch to make it much simpler. I trulybelieve that under Obama and the Democrats the Tax Code will become more of amucking fess, regardless of the “lip service” they may give to tax reform.
PresidentObama, like Dubya before him, established a panel to research and report on taxreform. The panel came up with anexcellent report, and some very good suggestions. It basically suggested that we shred thecurrent Tax Code and start over again by initially eliminating all “tax expenditures”and adding back only those that are absolutely appropriate. However, like Dubya before him, Obama totallyignored the report and banished it to gather dust in the government archives.
Sosolely from the point of view of federal tax policy, and perhaps economicpolicy in general, I support the Republican Party.
However,I oppose the policies of the Republicans in just about every other area.
Iwas pleased when Mitt Romney was selected as the Republican candidate forPresident. Of all the potentialcandidates he was, based on his past history, the most “centralist”. Actually, none of the other potential Republicancandidates were even marginally acceptable to me.
However,in my opinion, Romney has, like his predecessor of 4 years ago, “shot himselfin the foot” by selecting Tea Party sympathizer Paul Ryan as his running mate.
WinstonChurchill Is credited with having said – “Ifyou are not a liberal at 20, you have no heart. If you are not Conservative by40, you have no brain.”
While,at age 58, I consider myself to have both heart and brain, I do tend to be more“true” conservative than “true” liberal.
ButI do not support what passes for conservatism today – especially when it comesto incorporating religious beliefs into public policy. I am an enemy of the “religious right”. And therefore, as well as because of theirinability to cooperate or compromise, I am an enemy of the Tea Party movement,and oppose any candidate who belongs to or courts this “movement”.
Ihave posted in the past –
Religious belief is personal andindividual. It should not be legislated,or used as the basis for legislature.
If your religious beliefs instructyou that abortion is bad – then do not have an abortion. You can certainly bring to the attention ofthose who might consider such an act the various other options available. But you cannot force your religious belief onyour inconveniently pregnant neighbor, regardless of any sincere desire to saveher from the “fires of hell”.
A good example of “best practice” inthis area is the Amish. They have verydistinct and unique religious beliefs that govern every aspect of their dailylife – but they do not require that all others accept their beliefs, nor dothey condemn those who do not believe as they do. It is a personal choice. I do believe (and correct me if I am wrong)that they allow their matured children the opportunity to choose forthemselves.
Murder is not illegal because Godsays “Thou shalt not kill”. It isillegal because it denies one of the right to life, liberty and the pursuit ofhappiness. Is not the charge of murderon a federal level considered “violating civil rights”?
It is very easy for many individualsto accept a strictly doctrinized organized religion – because the extremeprotocol allows them to avoid the discomfort of individual thought andreasoning. “If the Bible says this iswhat we must do then this is what we must do.”
One’s religious beliefs may cause aperson to become involved in political activity as a way of helping society andone’s “fellow man”, but one’s religious beliefs should NOT be made into law.
WhileI like Obama, and his actions as President, on several levels, I am certainly not his biggest fan. Yet, because of the danger of giving anycredibility or potential power to the Tea Party movement and similar ilk, whileI may like Mitt Romney I cannot wholeheartedly support his run for thePresidency.
Imust decide if the benefit of the potential for true tax and economic reform ismore important than the danger of the religious right – and I think I know theanswer.
TTFN
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder