Voice For Liberty

Tag: United States Congress

  • In Kansas fourth, Pompeo ups lead over Goyle

    A new KWCH Television and SurveyUSA poll of candidates for United States Congress from the fourth district of Kansas shows Republican Mike Pompeo increasing his lead over his primary challenger, Democrat Raj Goyle.

    The new poll shows Pompeo increasing his share of the vote from 50 percent to 53 percent, compared to the previous poll by the same organization 22 days earlier. Goyle’s share remains unchanged at 40 percent.

    Only three percent of the voters are undecided.

    Other results from the poll include Reform party candidate Susan Ducey with two percent, and Libertarian Shawn Smith checking in with two percent as well. Smith replaced David Moffett on the Libertarian Party ticket.

    A recent discussion with a veteran Kansas political reporter reminded me of how unreliable polls can be. About three weeks before the August primary election, this same polling organization showed Goyle slightly trailing his opponent. Goyle won the primary with 80 percent of the vote, with a poll shortly before the election showing Goyle leading 63 percent to 19 percent.

    Kansas fourth district Congressional pollKansas fourth district Congressional poll

  • Lynn Jenkins: The only jobs Democrats care about are their own

    Lynn Jenkins, a member of the U.S. House of Representatives from the second district of Kansas, writes that actions by Congressional Democrats are harming jobs prospects for Americans: “The American people elected us to do our jobs, but instead of focusing on that, Democrats in Washington have decided to wage a campaign against the very companies that eventually will get us out of this economic mess.”

    In particular, Jenkins mentions Wichita-based Koch Industries as a company working hard to create jobs and value in the marketplace, only to suffer criticism from President Barack Obama, his administration, and his political allies.

    Some of the attacks on Koch Industries are false. Jenkins mentions Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and his claim that Koch outsourced jobs, when the company in question was not related to Koch Industries at the relevant time. This false charge is often repeated.

    Then, there’s the income tax information about Koch Industries, which Austan Goolsbee, who was just named by Obama as Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, leaked, apparently inappropriately. The Washington Times reports this matter now being investigated by a federal inspector general.

    JENKINS: Working on excuses

    The only jobs Democrats care about are their own

    By Lynn Jenkins

    When President Obama signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act into law, the Democratic majority told us it would cost $787 billion and keep unemployment below 8 percent. Neither proved to be true. Unemployment has risen to 9.6 percent, and the Congressional Budget Office anticipates that the law will increase deficits by $814 billion.

    In addition to historically high unemployment, this year’s annual federal deficit is set to exceed $1.3 trillion, and our national debt is more than $13.5 trillion. However, instead of focusing on job creation or doing our constitutionally obligated task of passing a budget and annual appropriations bills, the president’s staff and congressional Democrats have sought out a boogeyman to blame.

    Last week, the House of Representatives passed a continuing resolution to allow members to get back to their districts to campaign for re-election. Instead of holding a vote on whether to extend the current tax rates set to expire in 2011 and eliminating the uncertainty that is crippling potential job creators of all sizes, Democratic leaders skipped town to protect their jobs rather than fighting to save jobs of hardworking Americans.

    Continue reading at the Washington Times

  • Raj Goyle tax cut votes not exactly as advertised

    In his campaign, Democratic Party candidate for Congress Raj Goyle says he has voted to cut taxes 50 times. Examination of the record shows some genuine votes against taxes, but also examples of voting with the herd, and some votes that actually increase taxes on most Kansans.

    On Goyle’s campaign website, we can read these words: “He is a proven fiscal conservative who voted to cut government spending and lower taxes on middle class families and small businesses every year he has been in office. Other candidates talk about cutting taxes, but Raj has done it. In just four years, he has voted to cut $500 million in wasteful government spending and voted more than 50 times to relieve Kansans of a total of $900 million in taxes.”

    Other material on his site promotes his “record of bipartisanship and fiscal responsibility.” So an examination of his votes against taxes is in order.

    The record of tax cut votes claimed by Goyle is on his campaign website at the page Pompeo distorts Goyle’s record on taxes. Some votes, such as his vote against the statewide sales tax increase that took effect on July 1, are actual votes against increased taxes. To which I say — even though it’s widely believed that this vote was election-year window dressing during a campaign for Congress — thank you.

    Some of the measures Goyle voted for passed nearly unanimously. In these cases, these votes are simply him following the legislative herd. An example is his vote for HB 2264, where on March 14, 2007, he was on the winning side of a 121 to one vote. Another example given was his vote on HB 2004 in 2007, where he was again in the majority of a 117 to three landslide.

    What is more important from a public policy perspective, however, is Goyle’s votes for various tax credit programs. These programs are not tax reductions with broad application. Instead, these programs spend money using the tax system as the vehicle. Unless the legislature votes for offsetting spending cuts — and it hasn’t — other taxpayers must pay more.

    Ironically, the Center for American Progress, where Goyle once worked, has an article that accurately explains how tax expenditures (tax credits) masquerade as tax cuts. See Tax Expenditures 101: What They Are and How They Slip Under the Radar. Other information may be found at The ‘tax expenditure’ solution for our national debt.

    Here are some of the tax credits that Goyle’s campaign website says he voted for:

    Goyle Voted For A Historic Preservation Tax Credit: In 2007, Goyle voted for HB 2405.

    Goyle Voted For An Amendment Regarding Corporate Tax Credit: In 2010, Goyle voted for an amendment that would have allowed a business to receive up to $50,000 in tax credit for complying with smoking regulations

    Goyle Voted Twice For Rural Business Tax Credits: In 2007, Goyle voted twice for HB 2004. The bill continued the annual $2 million Rural Business Development Tax Credits. The bill also created a tax credit for Kansas film production.

    All of these tax credit programs increase taxes on the vast majority of taxpayers in order to convey benefits to a chosen few.

    Finally, some of the tax cuts that Goyle voted for are outright corporate welfare that benefited only one company, on in another case, a narrow range of companies. An example is this item, again from Goyle’s campaign website: “In 2007, Goyle voted for SB 240, which was a bill that established a single-factor corporation income tax apportionment formula option for manufacturers constructing a new facility in Kansas that would cost at least $100 million and would employ at least 100 new employees by December 31, 2009. The bill was designed to help keep Hill’s Pet Nutrition in Kansas.”

    Goyle’s site explains that this measure was necessary to keep this company located in Kansas, and that the company added at least 100 jobs. Perhaps it was necessary, and maybe even wise. But it wasn’t a vote to cut taxes — except for the taxes on one company. This is more properly described as corporate welfare for which other Kansas taxpayers have to pay.

    Besides Goyle, other candidates in the race are Reform Party candidate Susan Ducey, Republican Mike Pompeo, and Libertarian Shawn Smith.

  • Raj Goyle anti-outsourcing plan likely to backfire

    A plan advocated by Democratic Party candidate for Congress Raj Goyle to reduce the outsourcing of jobs from the United States is likely to produce the opposite effect, according to the Wall Street Journal.

    Goyle is candidate for United States Congress from the fourth district of Kansas. He has criticized his leading opponent, Republican Mike Pompeo, claiming that Pompeo, as president of a manufacturing company, outsourced Kansas jobs to Mexico.

    On Goyle’s campaign website, under the heading “Economy: Jobs” we find: “It’s vital to create jobs and keep jobs in Kansas. The very first thing I will do in Congress is work to immediately repeal tax cuts for companies that ship jobs overseas. We must start providing tax breaks and incentives to those who create jobs and manufacturing bases in Kansas.”

    In a “Review and Outlook” piece titled The Send Jobs Overseas Act, the Journal explains how the tax breaks Goyle wants to end actually work. This is something that probably very few people understand, so here’s the explanation: “Under current tax law, American companies pay the corporate tax rate in the host country where the subsidiary is located and then pay the difference between the U.S. rate (35%) and the foreign rate when they bring profits back to the U.S. This is called deferral — i.e., the U.S. tax is deferred until the money comes back to these shores.”

    So it’s not really a tax break — if by that we mean the corporation never pays taxes on its profits. Instead, payment of the tax is deferred, although the deferral does have value.

    The Journal notes that the only major country with a higher corporate income tax rate is Japan. The tax rate on new capital investment in the U.S. is nearly twice the average of that in OECD countries.

    This high tax in the U.S. encourages investment overseas. A report this year by the White House tax reform panel concluded: “The growing gap between the U.S. corporate tax rate and the corporate tax rates of most other countries generates incentives for U.S. corporations to shift their income and operations to foreign locations with lower corporate tax rates to avoid U.S. rates.”

    And as other countries cut their tax rates, the inventive to leave the U.S. and its high taxes becomes stronger, the report also says.

    The piece also cites an earlier tax reform from 1986 where the U.S. eliminated tax deferral on shipping income. This is the same reform Goyle touts as good for the entire U.S. economy. But the Journal notes this reform was “a real disaster for U.S. shipping,” with U.S. shipping capacity falling by 50 percent over a period of years following this reform.

    The path advocated by Goyle — President Obama wants this too — would be a disaster for America. “CEO Steve Ballmer has warned that if the President’s plan is enacted, Microsoft would move facilities and jobs out of the U.S.”

    The best solution for job creation in the U.S. is to reduce our corporate income tax rate to match or undercut the rate of other developed countries. This would spur investment in America, not only by domestic companies, but by foreign companies, too. Goyle’s plan to raise taxes on American corporations will only harm job creation both here and abroad.

  • ‘Fire Pelosi’ bus in Wichita

    Yesterday the Fire Pelosi Bus Tour stopped in Wichita, primarily to support the candidacy of Republican Mike Pompeo in the race for United States Congress from the fourth district of Kansas.

    Listen to Pompeo’s remarks:
    [powerpress]

    In his remarks, Pompeo referred to commercials run by his Democratic party opponent Raj Goyle, which he said were “half-truths at best, and intentional misdeception at worst.” The ad uses a fragment of a paragraph — a sentence taken out of context — to distort Pompeo’s position on the role of the federal government in job creation.

    Reporting from the Wichita Eagle, which contains a response from Goyle’s campaign, is at RNC chairman stumps for Pompeo.

  • Kansas fourth district poll shows Pompeo lead, little change

    A KWCH Television and SurveyUSA poll of candidates for United States Congress from the fourth district of Kansas shows little change from a similar poll about a month ago.

    The poll shows Republican Mike Pompeo leading Democrat Raj Goyle by 50 percent to 40 percent. These numbers changed just slightly from the previous survey, which had Pompeo leading 49 percent to 42 percent. Neither of the changes are statistically significant.

    Four percent of the voters are undecided.

    Other results include Reform party candidate Susan Ducey with four percent, and Libertarian David Moffett with three percent.

    SurveyUSA’s commentary is as follows: “Compared to an identical SurveyUSA poll released 1 month ago, Pompeo is up an insignificant 1 point; Goyle is down an insignificant 2. Pompeo has gained ground among the oldest, traditionally the most reliable voters, where he had trailed by 16, now leads by 4. Goyle offsets this by cutting into Pompeo’s lead among middle-aged voters, where Pompeo had led by 34 points, now leads by 20. 18% of Republicans today cross over to vote for Goyle, down from 22% last month; 12% of Democrats cross over to vote for Pompeo, up from 6% last month. Independents today lean slightly toward Goyle, favoring the Democrat by 7 points, up from a nominal 2-point lead 1 month ago.”

    Goyle’s campaign has released the results of its own poll from last week, which shows Pompeo leading Goyle by 46 percent to 44 percent, a closer lead than the KWCH/SurveyUSA poll. No details of its methodology were released.

    During the primary election, Jean Schodorf’s campaign released surveys that showed her to be leading. In the end, the KWCH/SurveyUSA poll correctly predicted Pompeo as the winner, although it understated the vote he actually received.

    During the period between the two KWCH/SurveyUSA polls, Goyle has been actively advertising on television. The Pompeo campaign started advertising on September 9th, just before this poll was conducted.

    Kansas fourth Congressional district poll resultsKansas fourth Congressional district poll results

  • Raj Goyle fundraising plea: wrong facts

    Recently candidate for U.S. Congress from the fourth district of Kansas Raj Goyle sent out a fundraising email that distorts facts in order to stir up protectionist fears about the world economy.

    The email pokes fun at Republican rival Mike Pompeo using so-called facts that were shown to be false and misleading during the primary election campaign.

    The Goyle email mentions Kansans who “lost our job to Mike Pompeo’s factory in Mexico.” Goyle and his campaign believe that Kansas jobs were shipped to Mexico at Pompeo’s direction.

    What was found to be true is this: A company that Pompeo once managed created a small number of jobs in Mexico, at the request of a client. It was a condition of obtaining the contract.

    Doing that not only allowed a Kansas company to gain a new contract and new business, it also created more than twice as many jobs in Kansas.

    We have to recognize that manufacturers compete globally. Goyle may not recognize this, or he may not care.

    Free trade, too, benefits all parties. This transaction is evidence of this: creating new jobs in Mexico also created new jobs in Kansas. The choices made available to Pompeo’s company did not include placing all new jobs in Kansas. The choices were: A) some new jobs in Mexico and twice as many new jobs in Kansas. Or: B) no new jobs at all, anywhere.

    Goyle may not be aware of the competitive pressure that manufacturers face. After all, his job in the Kansas Legislature can’t be outsourced. But beyond not having an understanding of economics and the realities of the way the world works, we still ought to be able to expect one thing: that Raj Goyle will tell the truth.

    Other coverage: Goyle assails Pompeo over aviation jobs, outsourcing at Old Town labor rally.

  • Pompeo, Congressional candidate, to address Pacyhderms

    The speaker at this Friday’s meeting (September 3rd) of the Wichita Pachyderm Club is candidate for the United States Congress from the fourth district of Kansas Mike Pompeo.

    Pompeo, a Republican, is challenged by Reform party candidate Susan Ducey, Democrat Raj Goyle, and Libertarian David Moffett.

    All are welcome to attend Wichita Pachyderm Club meetings. The program costs $10, which includes a delicious buffet lunch including salad, soup, two main dishes, and ice tea and coffee. The meeting starts at noon, although it’s recommended to arrive fifteen minutes early to get your lunch before the program starts.

    The Wichita Petroleum Club is on the ninth floor of the Bank of America Building at 100 N. Broadway (north side of Douglas between Topeka and Broadway) in Wichita, Kansas (click for a map and directions). You may park in the garage (enter west side of Broadway between Douglas and First Streets) and use the sky walk to enter the Bank of America building. The Petroleum Club will stamp your parking ticket and the fee will be $1.00. Or, there is usually some metered and free street parking nearby.

  • Social Security: A good and moral deal?

    Social Security and its future have been in the news lately. Supporters promote it as one of the best examples of successful government programs, and denigrate its critics as pessimists.

    Locally in the campaign for United States Congress from the fourth district of Kansas, one candidate promises to defend the current system, while another has spoken approvingly of Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan and the reforms recommend in his Roadmap for America’s future.

    Many of the arguments in favor of Social Security and strengthening the system revolve around the issue of fairness, even casting a moral tone. So what about the fairness of the Social Security system?

    In Slaying Leviathan: The Moral Case for Tax Reform, author Leslie Carbone looks at the economic impact of Social Security and its payroll taxes on middle income people:

    Payroll taxes actually have the bizarre effect of leaving families less able to ensure what they are specifically purported to provide — security in old age. According to The Heritage Foundation, Social Security’s inflation-adjusted rate of return is a paltry 1.2 percent for an average household of two 30-year-old earners, each making just under $26,000, with children. This family will pay about $320,000 in Social Security taxes (including their employers’ share) and can expect to receive about $450,000 back in payments (1997 dollars, before taxes, assuming that they begin collecting at age 67). Had this typical family allocated the same amount to conservative private investment vehicles, such as traditional retirement accounts, they could expect to enjoy a real rate of more than 5 percent per year before taxes, or $975,000 (1997 dollars). Social Security taxes of $320,000 cost this family $525,000.

    Social Security is not a very good investment, as we now see. It’s even worse — cruel and unfair, we might say — when workers pay into the system for years and then die shortly after starting to receive benefits. If people owned their own retirement savings, they could pass these assets on to their heirs or anyone else they choose.

    An argument often used against privatizing the Social Security system is that people will have to make investments in stocks and bonds. Securities markets sometimes go down, as they have recently, and sometimes do not perform very well for long periods. So the Social Security supporters ask: Do we want Americans’ retirement security dependent on such uncertain investments?

    It’s true that markets go up and down. But over the long term, the direction has been up. Young workers do not need to be concerned about the performance of the market over the next few years. Their time horizon is measured in decades.

    Furthermore, over long periods of time, the performance of securities markets is closely tied to the performance of the American and world economies. If markets do not perform well over time, it is almost certain that the economy is underperforming too. Such a poor economy makes it even more difficult for young workers to pay the taxes necessary to pay the Social Security benefits that retirees will demand. Those young workers will have to pay, as there is no Social Security trust fund that can be drawn upon, despite the claims of its backers.

    It’s contrary to economic freedom and personal liberty for the government to force Americans to participate in a retirement program. Forcing us to participate in one that performs as poorly as Social Security is a tragedy, not a mark of kindness and moral superiority.