Rand Paul on Tax Reform
Sen. Rand PAUL: He's talking about giving people money they didn't pay. It's a welfare transfer payment. Is it conservative to have $1 trillion in transfer payments--a new welfare program that's a refundable tax credit?
RUBIO: First of all, this is their money. They do pay. It is refundable, not just against the taxes they pay on their federal income tax, but also it's refundable against the payroll tax. Everyone pays payroll tax. This is their money. This is not our money. And here's what I don't understand--if you invest that money in a piece of equipment, if you invest that money in a business, you get to write it off your taxes. But if you invest it in your children, in the future of America and strengthening your family, we're not going to recognize that in our tax code? The family is the most important institution in society.
PAUL: Nevertheless, it's not very conservative, Marco.
PAUL: We have to look at everything across the board and all of government needs to be smaller. I have put forward three five-year plans that balance the budget over five years, including significant tax cuts. If you want a Republican that's going to keep government the same size by having revenue neutral tax and not really cutting tax, I'm not the guy. The Tax Foundation said that my plan would create millions of jobs and that mine is the most pro-growth tax plan ever presented. [My tax plan] helps the poor and the working class because my tax plan gets rid of the payroll tax. Social Security will be paid for by businesses and not by individuals, so a guy making $40,000 a year will get $2,000 more in their check every year.
PAUL: Income inequality is due to some people working harder and selling more things. If people voluntarily buy more of your stuff, you'll have more money. And it is a fallacious notion to say that rich people get more money back in a tax cut. If you cut taxes by 10%, 10% of $1 million is more than 10% of $1,000 so obviously people who paid more in taxes will get more back.
The tax reform plan will include a 17% flat tax for individuals and businesses, making it the most competitive in the world. This would bring more businesses back to America, and leave more money in the hands of hard working Americans. The tax reform plan would also provide low and middle-income workers with an exemption from the Social Security payroll tax.
The flat tax would also eliminate every form of unfair, double taxation in the United States, including the capital gains, dividend, estate, gift, and interest tax.
My EZ Tax plan encourages our businesses to be competitive in the global economy with lower rates, while also leaving more money in the hands of the hardworking middle class.
It should include a government that protects your rights and your security. It should include a stronger, better and more agile military. It's time for a new way. A new set of ideas. A new leader: One you can trust--one who works for you.
Economic growth will come when we lower taxes for everyone, especially people who own businesses and create jobs.
Only through lower taxes, less regulation and more freedom will the economy begin to grow again. Our party is the party of growth, jobs and prosperity, and we will boldly lead on these issues.
I will not vote for a tax increase. I will not vote for earmarks. I will not vote for an unbalanced budget.
Taxpayers are sick and tired of being the scapegoat for irresponsible spending by politicians. As the budget deficit mushroom, it's Joe Taxpayer who gets stuck with the bill. Politicians campaign "Read my lips, no new taxes," but reading between lips, we find that the politicians really meant "Yes, new taxes, many new taxes.""
My distaste for the big government promoted by both parties--"read my lips, no new taxes" was George H.W. Bush's broken promise--has never wavered.
PAUL: First of all, you look at whose money is it. It's the people's money who earned the money. And we give up some to pay taxes. So I'm not seeing it as a cost to government. But I will immediately introduce bills to reduce spending so I think we should offset it.
Q: There's no way you're going to get $4 trillion by spending cuts.
PAUL: I will introduce legislation that will balance the budget. We will have a balanced budget amendment introduced if I'm elected. But about the Bush tax cuts--businesses have made calculations on these for 5 or 10 years. Business needs predictability. If you take away these Bush tax cuts, if you allow Obama to have the largest tax increase in our history, it will be a disaster for the economy.
Politicians often run for office saying they won't raise taxes, but then quickly turn their backs on the taxpayer. The idea of the Pledge is simple enough: Make them put their no-new-taxes rhetoric in writing.
In the Taxpayer Protection Pledge, candidates and incumbents solemnly bind themselves to oppose any and all tax increases. While ATR has the role of promoting and monitoring the Pledge, the Taxpayer Protection Pledge is actually made to a candidate's constituents, who are entitled to know where candidates stand before sending them to the capitol. Since the Pledge is a prerequisite for many voters, it is considered binding as long as an individual holds the office for which he or she signed the Pledge.
Since its rollout with the endorsement of President Reagan in 1986, the pledge has become de rigeur for Republicans seeking office, and is a necessity for Democrats running in Republican districts.
The Christian Coalition voter guide [is] one of the most powerful tools Christians have ever had to impact our society during elections. This simple tool has helped educate tens of millions of citizens across this nation as to where candidates for public office stand on key faith and family issues.
The Contract from America, clause 4. Enact Fundamental Tax Reform:
Adopt a simple and fair single-rate tax system by scrapping the internal revenue code and replacing it with one that is no longer than 4,543 words--the length of the original Constitution.
The Contract from America, clause 10. Stop the Tax Hikes:
Permanently repeal all tax hikes, including those to the income, capital gains, and death taxes, currently scheduled to begin in 2011.
[The ATR, Americans for Tax Reform, run by conservative lobbyist Grover Norquist, ask legislators to sign the Taxpayer Protection Pledge in each election cycle. Their self-description:]
In the Taxpayer Protection Pledge, candidates and incumbents solemnly bind themselves to oppose any and all tax increases. Since its rollout in 1986, the pledge has become de rigeur for Republicans seeking office, and is a necessity for Democrats running in Republican districts. Today the Taxpayer Protection Pledge is offered to every candidate for state office and to all incumbents. More than 1,100 state officeholders, from state representative to governor, have signed the Pledge.
The Taxpayer Protection Pledge: "I pledge to the taxpayers of my district and to the American people that I will: ONE, oppose any and all efforts to increase the marginal income tax rate for individuals and business; and TWO, oppose any net reduction or elimination of deductions and credits, unless matched dollar for dollar by further reducing tax rates."
Opponents' Opinion (from wikipedia.com):In Nov. 2011, Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) claimed that Congressional Republicans "are being led like puppets by Grover Norquist. They're giving speeches that we should compromise on our deficit, but never do they compromise on Grover Norquist. He is their leader." Since Norquist's pledge binds signatories to opposing deficit reduction agreements that include any element of increased tax revenue, some Republican deficit hawks now retired from office have stated that Norquist has become an obstacle to deficit reduction. Former Republican Senator Alan Simpson, co-chairman of the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, has been particularly critical, describing Norquist's position as "no taxes, under any situation, even if your country goes to hell."
|Other candidates on Tax Reform:||Rand Paul on other issues:|
Retiring in 2014 election:
Retired as of Jan. 2013:
Senate races Nov. 2016:
AK: Murkowski(R) vs.Begich(D) vs.Lamb(R) vs.Stevens(L)
AL: Shelby(R) vs.Crumpton(D) vs.Bowman(R)
AR: Boozman(R) vs.Eldridge(D) vs.Gilbert(L) vs.
AZ: McCain(R) vs.Ward(R) vs.Kirkpatrick(D) vs.Mealer(I)
CA: Sanchez(D) vs.Harris(D) vs.Chavez(R) vs.Del Beccaro(R) vs.Sundheim(R) vs.Brannon(R)
CO: Bennet(D) vs.Glenn(R) vs.Neville(R) vs.Frazier(R) vs.Keyser(R) vs.Littleton(R)
CT: Blumenthal(D) vs.Kudlow(R) vs.Wolf(R) vs.
FL: Jolly(R) vs.DeSantis(R) vs.Cantera(R) vs.Murphy(D) vs.Grayson(D) vs.Keith(D)
GA: Isakson(R) vs.
HI: Schatz(D) vs.Cavasso(R)
IA: Grassley(R) vs.Fiegen(D) vs.Hogg(D) vs.Krause(D) vs.Culver(D)
ID: Crapo(R) vs.LaRocco(D) vs.Minnick(D) vs.Pro-Life(C)
IL: Kirk(R) vs.Harris(D) vs.Zopp(D) vs.Duckworth(D)
IN: Stutzman(R) vs.Hill(D) vs.Holcomb(R) vs.Young(R) vs.
KY: Paul(R) vs.Conway(D) vs.Chandler(D)
LA: Fleming(R) vs.Boustany(R) vs.Maness(R) vs.Kennedy(D) vs.Cao(R) vs.McAllister(R)
MD: Edwards(D) vs.Van Hollen(D) vs.Flowers(G) vs.Szeliga(R) vs.Douglas(R) vs.Steele(R)
MO: Blunt(R) vs.Kander(D)
NC: Burr(R) vs.Rey(D) vs.Ross(D) vs.Wright(R) vs.
ND: Hoeven(R) vs.Marquette(L)
NH: Ayotte(R) vs.Hassan(D) vs.Rubens(R)
NV: Cortez-Masto(D) vs.Heck(R) vs.Angle(R) vs.
NY: Schumer(D) vs.King(R) vs.Long(R) vs.Gibson(R)
OH: Portman(R) vs.Strickland(D) vs.Sittenfeld(D)
OK: Lankford(R) vs.Johnson(D)
OR: Wyden(D) vs.Stine(D) vs.Callahan(R)
PA: Toomey(R) vs.Stern(R) vs.Sestak(D) vs.McGinty(D) vs.Fetterman(D)
SC: Scott(R) vs.Dickerson(D)
SD: Thune(R) vs.Williams(D)
UT: Lee(R) vs.Swinton(D)
WA: Murray(D) vs.Vance(R)
WI: Johnson(R) vs.Feingold(D) vs.Lorge(R)
Senate Votes (analysis)