Anatomy of How Money is STILL the Most Important Factor in American Politics

[CJJ]

Monday Nov. 12th: Grover Norquist, head of the influential lobbying group Americans for Tax Reform who has bound hundreds of Republicans to a pledge never to raise taxes, showed support for raising a carbon tax in exchange for a cut in income taxes:

The new carbon tax would be paired with a cut in the income tax—something Republicans have long sought. The idea essentially would be to cut the tax on income and move it over to carbon pollution—keeping the proposal revenue-neutral.

“It’s possible you could structure something that wasn’t an increase and didn’t violate the pledge,” Norquist told National Journal.

To be clear, Norquist is not in favor of a carbon-tax policy, but if it is used to trade for reducing income tax, he agrees it would not violate the pledge.

Tuesday Nov. 13th: The Institute for Energy Research releases a study which soundly pans the idea:

In recent years, more and more self-described conservatives, who generally embrace the free market and are suspicious of taxation and government regulation of business, have come out in favor of a carbon tax
<…>
The best literature on the topic actually argues that a revenue-neutral carbon tax swap would make the tax code more inefficient and would hinder economic growth. Some estimates suggest that this ‘tax interaction effect’ is so powerful that the theoretical size of a new carbon tax should be cut almost in half, once extra damage to the economy is taken into account

The American Energy Alliance–a pro-fossil-fuel think tank–was even more blunt: “Grover, just butch it up and oppose this lousy idea directly. This word-smithing is giving us all headaches.” Needless to say, both groups rely on funding in large part from Charles and David Koch.

Later that same day: Grover Norquist immediately changes his position on the carbon-tax swap:

“The creation of any new tax such as a VAT or energy tax — even if originally passed with offsetting tax reductions elsewhere — would inevitably lead to higher taxes as two taxes would be at the disposal of politicians to increase taxes. Two smaller tapeworms are not an improvement over one big tapeworm. Tapeworms and taxes grow.

There is no conceivable way to add an energy or VAT tax to the burdens American taxpayers face that would not violate the pledge over time. If someone first passed and implemented a constitutional amendment with 2/3 of the House and Senate and 3/4 of the states concurring to forbid the restoration of the income tax, we might more safely consider passing a VAT or energy VAT. And then it would be foolish and economically destructive thing to do.”

Many have speculated that–given the failure of Karl Rove and other Super PACs to deliver much in the way electoral results for the metric shitload of maney they received–that the influence of money in politics is on the wane. Guess again; the rich are still driving the political process, and if their paid policy serfs step one millimeter out of line, they’ll hear about it.

[elucidator]

Any chair Grover sits on has to be dry-cleaned to get the lube stains out.