Pocahontas wants to tax 1st Amendment / people lose their minds
- Suck My Glock
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 8825
- Joined: May 25th, 2018, 3:01 pm
- Reputation: 8
- Location: Peoria
Pocahontas wants to tax 1st Amendment / people lose their minds
And as well they should. It's wrong on so many levels.
But here's the fly in the ointment;...they set the precedent with the NFA!
Either onerous and intentionally oppressive taxation for purposes beyond mere revenue is unconstitutional for ALL the Bill of Rights, or its constitutional for the 1st Amendment as well.
Stick that in your McCain hole and twist it!
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opin ... ent-rights
Warren on Wednesday unveiled a plan she claimed would end excessive lobbying by imposing a tax on companies' lobbying expenditures. The way the tax would work is that "companies that spend between $500,000 and $1 million per year on lobbying, calculated on a quarterly basis, will pay a 35% tax on those expenditures. For every dollar above $1 million spent on lobbying, the rate will increase to 60% – and for every dollar above $5 million, it will increase to 75%."
The problem with the proposal is that it runs smack up against the First Amendment, which states that, "Congress shall make no law ... abridging ... the right of the people ... to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Given that businesses have the constitutional right to lobby, Congress cannot pass a law explicitly aimed at curbing their ability to exercise that right by way of a punitive tax.
If that were the case, a federal government frustrated with media coverage could levy special taxes on publishing or could crack down on protesters by imposing a punitive tax on protesting.
As lawyer Ted Frank put it, "There’s a legal reason Republicans haven’t tried to curb abortion by taxing it, and it’s not just because they don’t like taxes."
This proposal is just your regular reminder that Warren is a policy fraud. She churns out proposals that generate oohs and aahs from the media, yet they barely stand up to the most basic scrutiny. The crowning achievement of her career — the establishment of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau — itself was ruled structurally unconstitutional in federal court.
Curbing lobbying is a worthy goal. But the way to curb lobbying is to shrink the power of the federal government over the economy, so that changes to taxes, spending, and regulations in Washington do not have such a dramatic influence on the fortunes of corporations.
But here's the fly in the ointment;...they set the precedent with the NFA!
Either onerous and intentionally oppressive taxation for purposes beyond mere revenue is unconstitutional for ALL the Bill of Rights, or its constitutional for the 1st Amendment as well.
Stick that in your McCain hole and twist it!
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opin ... ent-rights
Warren on Wednesday unveiled a plan she claimed would end excessive lobbying by imposing a tax on companies' lobbying expenditures. The way the tax would work is that "companies that spend between $500,000 and $1 million per year on lobbying, calculated on a quarterly basis, will pay a 35% tax on those expenditures. For every dollar above $1 million spent on lobbying, the rate will increase to 60% – and for every dollar above $5 million, it will increase to 75%."
The problem with the proposal is that it runs smack up against the First Amendment, which states that, "Congress shall make no law ... abridging ... the right of the people ... to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Given that businesses have the constitutional right to lobby, Congress cannot pass a law explicitly aimed at curbing their ability to exercise that right by way of a punitive tax.
If that were the case, a federal government frustrated with media coverage could levy special taxes on publishing or could crack down on protesters by imposing a punitive tax on protesting.
As lawyer Ted Frank put it, "There’s a legal reason Republicans haven’t tried to curb abortion by taxing it, and it’s not just because they don’t like taxes."
This proposal is just your regular reminder that Warren is a policy fraud. She churns out proposals that generate oohs and aahs from the media, yet they barely stand up to the most basic scrutiny. The crowning achievement of her career — the establishment of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau — itself was ruled structurally unconstitutional in federal court.
Curbing lobbying is a worthy goal. But the way to curb lobbying is to shrink the power of the federal government over the economy, so that changes to taxes, spending, and regulations in Washington do not have such a dramatic influence on the fortunes of corporations.
- shooter444
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 1790
- Joined: May 14th, 2018, 1:17 pm
- Reputation: 6
- Location: Az desert
Re: Pocahontas wants to tax 1st Amendment / people lose their minds
IMO, every Demonscat and Rino on the hill is only their for that big pay day rip off opportunity in the shadows.
The Socialist/Communists on the other hand, have come out of the closet and are straight up in our face creating a tax/fine for any reason they can think of! They have no rime or reason, or, Constitutional bases to their decisions, they just want the MONEY!!!
The epitome of all dictatorships around the world supported by the One World Government!!!
The Socialist/Communists on the other hand, have come out of the closet and are straight up in our face creating a tax/fine for any reason they can think of! They have no rime or reason, or, Constitutional bases to their decisions, they just want the MONEY!!!
The epitome of all dictatorships around the world supported by the One World Government!!!
- DrEarlCordova
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 243
- Joined: May 14th, 2018, 6:11 pm
- Reputation: 0
- Location: Arizona
Re: Pocahontas wants to tax 1st Amendment / people lose their minds
She will propose every kind of tax she can think of that the peasants will agree with so they can get all the free stuff they want.
- shooter444
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 1790
- Joined: May 14th, 2018, 1:17 pm
- Reputation: 6
- Location: Az desert
Re: Pocahontas wants to tax 1st Amendment / people lose their minds
Every con man since the time of Christ has prayed upon the greedy, wanting something for nothing,.... just one of the many weaknesses that makes up, human nature. It almost always works, and, probably will exists as long as their are human beings walking the earth,... imo.
Re: Pocahontas wants to tax 1st Amendment / people lose their minds
So Trump's running against Santa Claus in 2020.
- shooter444
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 1790
- Joined: May 14th, 2018, 1:17 pm
- Reputation: 6
- Location: Az desert
Re: Pocahontas wants to tax 1st Amendment / people lose their minds
Margaret Thatcher,... "The trouble with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money."
-
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 545
- Joined: February 24th, 2019, 11:15 am
- Reputation: 4
- Location: East Side
Re: Pocahontas wants to tax 1st Amendment / people lose their minds
Yes, please tax Free Speech....by the word....start with politicians...then we will finally get the Dems to STFUp.
Re: Pocahontas wants to tax 1st Amendment / people lose their minds
So let's see. Lie-a-watha wants to tax lobbyists.
Okay, where do the lobbyists get their money? From companies who want to sell a product or service. And where do the companies who want to sell a product or service get their money?
From the people, so the companies pass along the tax because they don't pay taxes, they collect them and the citizens get to pay for yet another tax and most aren't smart enough to even know it.
Okay, where do the lobbyists get their money? From companies who want to sell a product or service. And where do the companies who want to sell a product or service get their money?
From the people, so the companies pass along the tax because they don't pay taxes, they collect them and the citizens get to pay for yet another tax and most aren't smart enough to even know it.
- shooter444
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 1790
- Joined: May 14th, 2018, 1:17 pm
- Reputation: 6
- Location: Az desert
Re: Pocahontas wants to tax 1st Amendment / people lose their minds
WE the People ,... pay for everything!!!
Always has been,... always will be!!!
And then, some wonder why politicians are all about the money!!!
Always has been,... always will be!!!
And then, some wonder why politicians are all about the money!!!
Re: Pocahontas wants to tax 1st Amendment / people lose their minds
You know what's scary is she has people who believe in what she says. That's disturbing.
Re: Pocahontas wants to tax 1st Amendment / people lose their minds
It's scary that around half the country is dumb enough to support any Democrat.
On the other hand, remember what George Carlin once said (I know, he's a progressive but he said a couple of smart things.)
He said:
Think about how stupid the average person is. Then think about the fact that half the population is more stupid than him.
On the other hand, remember what George Carlin once said (I know, he's a progressive but he said a couple of smart things.)
He said:
Think about how stupid the average person is. Then think about the fact that half the population is more stupid than him.
- shooter444
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 1790
- Joined: May 14th, 2018, 1:17 pm
- Reputation: 6
- Location: Az desert
Re: Pocahontas wants to tax 1st Amendment / people lose their minds
I miss George Carlin, began listening to him in my teens!
- 1bardan+
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 364
- Joined: February 17th, 2020, 11:11 am
- Reputation: 12
- Location: cave creek
Re: Pocahontas wants to tax 1st Amendment / people lose their minds
The court also set a precedent with making poll taxes unconstitutional. So if one enumerated right can't be taxed, how can another be taxed.Suck My Glock wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2019, 5:28 pm And as well they should. It's wrong on so many levels.
But here's the fly in the ointment;...they set the precedent with the NFA!
Either onerous and intentionally oppressive taxation for purposes beyond mere revenue is unconstitutional for ALL the Bill of Rights, or its constitutional for the 1st Amendment as well.
Stick that in your McCain hole and twist it!
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opin ... ent-rights
Warren on Wednesday unveiled a plan she claimed would end excessive lobbying by imposing a tax on companies' lobbying expenditures. The way the tax would work is that "companies that spend between $500,000 and $1 million per year on lobbying, calculated on a quarterly basis, will pay a 35% tax on those expenditures. For every dollar above $1 million spent on lobbying, the rate will increase to 60% – and for every dollar above $5 million, it will increase to 75%."
The problem with the proposal is that it runs smack up against the First Amendment, which states that, "Congress shall make no law ... abridging ... the right of the people ... to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Given that businesses have the constitutional right to lobby, Congress cannot pass a law explicitly aimed at curbing their ability to exercise that right by way of a punitive tax.
If that were the case, a federal government frustrated with media coverage could levy special taxes on publishing or could crack down on protesters by imposing a punitive tax on protesting.
As lawyer Ted Frank put it, "There’s a legal reason Republicans haven’t tried to curb abortion by taxing it, and it’s not just because they don’t like taxes."
This proposal is just your regular reminder that Warren is a policy fraud. She churns out proposals that generate oohs and aahs from the media, yet they barely stand up to the most basic scrutiny. The crowning achievement of her career — the establishment of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau — itself was ruled structurally unconstitutional in federal court.
Curbing lobbying is a worthy goal. But the way to curb lobbying is to shrink the power of the federal government over the economy, so that changes to taxes, spending, and regulations in Washington do not have such a dramatic influence on the fortunes of corporations.