According to the bipartisan 9/11 commission, much of President Bush's trillions in tax shifts will need to be repealed.
I've only had a chance so far to read the executive summary of their report, and nowhere in that summary does the panel say, in so many words, that Bush's tax deferments must be overturned. But the panel's recommendations will not be cheap, and it seems abundantly clear that our unborn grandchildren — already subsidizing us to the tune of $450 billion a year — won't be able to pay for this on their own.
The executive summary does make occasional reference to funding all of its recommendations, but generally in the passive voice — e.g., "The NID should receive a public appropriation for national intelligence …"
That public appropriation comes from public funds, which come from taxes. If we want to keep pretending that taxation is somehow illegitimate, then we need, for the sake of consistency, to insist that such "public appropriations" are likewise illegitimate.
If we want to keep "tax cuts" as our No. 1 priority and to continue shifting the cost of such appropriations onto future generations then we must be prepared to cross our fingers and continue trying to provide ad hoc "homeland security" on the cheap. (1,046 days without a massive domestic attack!)
I can't say, after an initial reading of their summary, whether or not the panel's recommendations are the best, wisest, most effective or most efficient steps for protecting America from future terrorist attacks.
But I can say that whatever course is ultimately chosen, it had better take priority over fealty to the irresponsible idea that wanton tax cutting is the foremost task of those sworn to "establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity."
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In