It is time to end the NAACP's tax exempt status.

Are you suggesting that the Republicans may know BETTER what works for the African American community than they do themselves? It isn't like we are talking strictly about poor un-educated black folks. Some of them are Senators, businessmen and women, doctors, lawyers, scientists. I would argue that they are capable of making that decision for themselves.

 

I think my last post answers that question. I think that in general, limiting goverment is superior to expanding government. If that contradicts your belief, or the belief of 90 percent of a voting bloc, then yes, I think I know better than them.

Don't you share that belief? I'm presuming you oppose large tax cuts, Jeff. Are you saying you think, "Well, Brian knows better than I do, but I oppose them anyway"...?

If you don't think your solution is right, why would you favor it...?

 

Do they honestly believe that, or do they just feel they're supposed to vote that way? Can you look at the party platforms and tell me why one should be more favorable to 95% of one race over another? I mean, to my knowledge, hispanics don't vote 90+% for the same party. What specific issue would cause a black person to vote differently than a hispanic, just based on race? I realize that Democrats are more for affirmative action, but to my knowledge, only half of blacks are for that anyway. What other issue is there?

 

That's really ideology, though. If that is the case, there are many African Americans who will simply never agree with your perspective and, conversely, think you are wrong believing what you do. No big deal. That is part of democracy. We all get to say what we think.

I understand what you are saying. It is more about one whole party versus and entire segment of the population.

I think mrpaige pretty much nailed it. Most republicans have no interest in catering to African Americans because it is cheaper and easier to turn out their own voters and win that way. That is just the reality.

To answer your question, my mind isn't fixed in one place. It can be changed. Hell, I was once an anti-abortion, conservative, Bible-thumping born again Christian. My opinions changed. I just try to stay open to the possibilities, but that isn't always easy on here when I'm fighting to defend my own opinions so often! I'm too damn stubborn and self-righteous!!!

 

Latinos are still approximately 75/25 in terms of supporting Dems vs. Republicans but they can vote all over the map. That is mainly due to the fact that there are immigrants from all over Latin America and people from Mexico have different ideologies than people from Chile or Argentina. Their viewpoints tend to range all over the political specturm because their cultural heritages range all over it as well. It can be easy to forget this, but it is an important distinction. Just like in the Asian community where you might have Koreans, Chinese, Japanes, Taiwanese, Vietnamese, etc, different Hispanic nationalities can have wildly divergent viewpoints. But, generally, they are democrats more often than conservatives.

Honestly, I think it has less to do with race than it does with class. Most African Americans are still in favor of affirmative action, but that isn't the big number one issue it used to be. Most of the African American groups push hard for equity at all levels of the socio-economic spectrum. They want better support for the poor. They want a TON more support for the education system, particulary in inner cities. They want equal pay for equal work. They want better and more convenient voting systems. They want better public health and transportation systems.

Their primary concerns are really more based issues that support the poorest of their community because the level of poverty in the black community is still MUCH higher than in the white community.

 

That's just it. If the only way to get blacks to vote for me is to essentially become a Democrat, well, that sort of defeats the purpose of my running for office. I would want to serve so that I could implement conservative policy, because I believe that's what would make America a better place.

 

And as a Republican, I see many ways where my ideology would go hand-in-hand with those you've mentioned here, Jeff. But unless I go to the community and tell them and perhaps show them how it all works, how do they even know I care or know that by supporting these things, I'm doing so in an effort to make things better in their community (and possibly beyond).

It's hard to explain, but I look at it as sort of doing the right thing for the wrong reasons. If a Democrat does something I happen to support but never says he's doing these things in part because it will help me or my community, I may well consider it just a happy accident that something I support was also supported by a Democrat. I wouldn't change my voting habits based on that, though.

But if said Democrat came to my community and said, "I'm doing this, in part, because I believe it will help in this way" and therefore shows me that it wasn't accidental he was doing something that supported my views, maybe I do consider voting for the guy come next election.

I know I'm not explaining it well, but hopefully someone can decipher that and see kind of what I'm saying.

 

Hey, everbody, it's OK to be self-righteous. Jeff is!

What percentage of the black population that are those "Senators, businessmen and women, doctors, lawyers, scientists" vote Republican instead of Democrat? That should be an interesting statistic especially when compared to the overall voting pattern for black Americans.

 

Interesting question but not the answer you are looking for. I spoke with numerous African American community leaders last year and the year before. The numbers are fairly clear. In the African American community, like most of the rest of the country, the vast majority of those who vote regularly are older and have more money than those who don't.

I helped set up an auto dialer for a get-out-the-vote effort last year specifically directed at the black community and, while they desperately wanted poorer, inner city blacks to turn out, the vast majority of those who did were affluent or at least middle class.

In those elections, the left-leaning issues and Democratic candidates (running against Republicans) got 95 percent of the African American vote. That community is extremely solid in its consistency of voting whether they have money or not. The reality is, their politics are just very different from the politics of conservative Americans.

 

I am surprised.

BTW, I didn't mean anything with the self-righteous crack. That's something I get accused of, so I was just trying to ride your coat-tails...

 

I get tired of hearing the Republicans are the "little government party" and "bill of rights" party, and democrats are not. That is all propaganda and no substance. Truth is, both the Repu. and Democrats right now are "Big Government" parties--just in different ways. The Repu. want more federal money spent on the military, drug interdiction, home defense, federal business and energy infrastructure--those are "Big Government" items. The Demos want to spend too, but less on these things are more on some others. The main fiscal difference between the parties right not in either parties level of federal spending they desire but IMO the repu. are slightly more inclined to spend while passing the buck to later generations (increasing or maintaining spending while reducing revenue). That is more honest depiction of the differences in their fiscal policies than saying the Democrats are the Big Government party.

As for the cafeteria plan for the BoR, the demos may not be particularly strict on gun ownership, but the repu are less strict on illegal searches and seizures, free speech, separation of church and state (to a slight degree maybe). Likewise both of them are all for "states rights"--but only when what a state wants to do is right or left of the going federal philosophy. So pick your poison if you want the party with the broadest interpretation of the BoR. In sum the parties are more pragmatic and constitute oriented than reflecting a consistent ideology based in the constitution or anything else.

As for the issue at hand, though I admit I havn't thought about it a lot, probably the fairest option is to make all organizations (churches included) pay taxes.

 

Certainly the policy of the Republican Party is not to pass the buck, as you said. It's simply that a large portion of the Republican Party truly believes that cutting taxes helps the economy grow faster and that you can achieve the same level of revenues at a lower tax rate as you can with a higher tax rate.

That has been backed up somewhat by revenue growth during the '80s. Sadly, said revenue growth was far outpaced by large increases in spending across the board. The deficits were coming down toward the end of the Reagan presidency, though.

And then that whole S&L thing happened and really screwed up the expense side of the Federal budget. But that has nothing to do with the revenue side.

But here's another one of those issues where the Republicans have obviously not done a very good job of explaining how all this works because there are huge misconceptions about why the Republican Party is, in general, pro-tax cuts. I would venture to guess that the only place most people have even heard of the Laffer Curve is in Ferris Bueller's Day Off.

 

That has been backed up somewhat by revenue growth during the '80s. Sadly, said revenue growth was far outpaced by large increases in spending across the board.

True to an extent. It could also be argued that revenue growth was created because of a strong economy that was created by massive deficit spending. That is, the economic growth wasn't caused by tax cuts, but by the federal government dumping billions of dollars into the economy by spending it.

Since they both happened, its really difficult to tell the actual causes there. It's very possible that, had the increases in spending never happened, the economic growth wouldn't have either.

The problem I have with the Republican philosophy of "cut taxes now and revenues will increase" and the Democratic philosophy of "spend more and revenues will increase" is what happens if revenues DON'T increase (for example, now). Someone has to come back and be responsible and raise taxes or cut spending and whoever does that is screwed politically. It's an extremely short-sighted approach, in my opinion, but also politically popular so both parties do it.

 

You make good points, Major. I just wanted to counter the notion that Republicans like tax cuts because they want to pass the buck to future generations. That is not the case at all. Whether their theory of tax cuts and tax receipts holds water is a completely different debate.

 

I didn't think you did. I actually meant to add one of these in my response:



It's hard not to be self-righteous on this BBS. I feel so full of pomposity sometimes!

 

I just wanted to counter the notion that Republicans like tax cuts because they want to pass the buck to future generations. That is not the case at all. Whether their theory of tax cuts and tax receipts holds water is a completely different debate.

Yeah, I forgot what thread we were in. Didn't mean to try to drag this thread in another direction!

 

I guess I should make a distinction between intent and effect--I believe the effect of their policies (mainstain or increase spending, cutting taxes) will be to pass the buck. Not that the democrats won't pass the buck as well (but maybe to a lesser degree). My larger point is that total spending isn't the big fiscal difference in the parties actions (calling one Big Government and the other not doesn't work), the taxes side is the bigger fiscal difference.

The repu. rhetoric about taxes of recent is primarily that the inheritance tax is morally wrong in all forms at all income levels, that taxes are too high based on some mystical proper level, and that you and me deserve more in your wallet--so I guess you are right they havn't been communicating the larger economic reasons for their pro-tax cut philosophy like you say they should.

MrPaige and Major--I enjoyed your comments and sorry to others about highjacking the thread. It is just the "Big Government" and "Cafeteria BoR" statements I viewed as very inaccurate and in need of checking. I can accept checking my inaccuracy or misleadingness (and Mr Paige you catching it) as well if I stated or implied Repubs actually desire is to pass the buck. Maybe some do (really consciously choose to pass the buck because they think spending more now while cutting taxes now is a good short term election strategy for them irregardless of long term consequences for our nation), but I can't say for sure whether that is a fair generalization for Repubs in general.