Day: February 17, 2012

Activists ram gay marriage bill through House

Today was a dark day for those who believe marriage should be between a man and a woman, as the gay rights crowd – a definite squeaky wheel in the overall process of life – elbowed aside tradition and browbeat the House into passing HB438 by a vote of 72 for and 67 against. (Initial reports had it 71-67.)

After killing off several amendments earlier in the day, one of which would have been to substitute the phrase “civil union” for marriage and another to automatically send the bill to referendum first, the House this evening moved the bill on to the Senate, which is expected to pass it.

Last year the Senate passed the bill initially only to see the House effort fail when enough votes could not be found late in the session. Strangely enough, the House composition is essentially unchanged this year but several key Delegates have changed their votes in the interim. Delegate Heather Mizeur, a key proponent of gay marriage, tweeted that opponents of gay marriage have pursued “ugly charges of deal making and shady morals” but there are indeed allegations of jobs being promised to opponents who change their vote, among them Delegate Wade Kach, a Republican, and Democrat John Donoghue.

Obviously we will see what happens in the coming weeks with these Delegates and others who had their arm twisted.  Meanwhile, it’ll be easy to spot who flipped their votes from 2011 to this year* once the tally is placed online.

The Senate should take up the bill in the next couple weeks; in the meantime the referendum process will be getting underway as opponents organize for what is expected to be a bitter and caustic fight leading up to a vote this November. It’s likely the gay marriage referendum will share the ballot with a referendum on the Maryland DREAM Act, a bill passed last year to give in-state tuition to the children of illegal aliens.

As for HB438 proponents, I have seven words: where do I sign the referendum petition?

* I stand corrected. The House last year didn’t vote on SB116 (the 2011 version of the gay marriage bill) as Delegate Vallario made a motion to recommit to committee, which when passed killed the bill.

Update: The Washington Post has an AP tally of the votes. Eastern Shore delegates were 9-0 against the bill. The two Republicans who voted “yes” made a big part of the difference – think the Democrats will give them any credit for that two years hence? Not gonna happen.

Harris doesn’t fall into trap – too bad so many others did

Today is a bad day for those fighting the American decline, on two fronts. One is the prospect of gay marriage passing in the Maryland House of Delegates – if it gets past that hurdle, the Senate is likely to quickly follow suit.

But more germane to this post is the fact the House passed a payroll tax cut extension by a 293-132 vote, with Andy Harris voting in the minority. Why would he vote against a tax cut? Because there was no compromise by the other side:

I support the tax cut element of the proposal. However, the other parts of the bill increased spending in 2012 by $45 billion, while taking 10 years to pay it back.  That’s the kind of bad fiscal policy which got us into the mess we’re in – Washington has to stop spending money we don’t have.

While I certainly support Andy in this stance – even though I know the Democrats will use this against him in the 2012 campaign – it also leads me to ask why couldn’t House leadership just have a “clean” bill? The payroll tax cut is one section out of 20. We have that little bit of power, why not use it?

On the other hand, Rep. Allen West of Florida has a more eloquent statement:

Americans are exhausted, out of work and many have simply lost hope in the political system. They have been struggling now with nearly five consecutive years of record job stagnation, increased foreclosure rates and an economy that continues to struggle.

All of these reasons are why I cannot in good faith vote for this payroll tax cut deal. It is not that I don’t believe Americans should have relief in their paychecks or be afforded a safety net of unemployment insurance, it is because, unlike some on Capitol Hill, I am looking beyond this election cycle.

I am looking at the ramifications of adding billions of American taxpayer’s dollars to a trillion dollar deficit with no answers as to how or when we will pay for this bill.

I am looking beyond immediate gratification and instead looking at an American political system willing to cave to political pressure to give Americans a temporary Band-Aid that in the long run only makes things worse for their future.

The facts are simple.  This supposed payroll tax decrease is really a backdoor tax increase on homeowners and first time homebuyers. The deal is being paid for by added fees on FHA-backed loans. Homeowners with FHA-backed mortgages represent more than one-third of mortgages in the United States. Those Middle Class Americans will be footing the bill for this political gimmick.

Homebuyers with a $200,000 standard 30- year loan will have to pay an extra $10,000 over the course of their loan. It would take roughly 250 paychecks with $40 extra from the payroll tax holiday to pay for the added increase to the life of an FHA-backed mortgage loan. That represents ten years of consecutive employment.

In addition, some may argue the payroll tax deal will not affect Social Security. This could not be further from the truth. The federal government’s general operating account will be used to compensate for the lost revenue in the Social Security Trust Fund, which will increase the deficit and add to the nation’s debt.

My position on the Payroll Tax Extension has not changed. In December of 2011, I supported a responsible one- year extension that was fully paid for, and would have put money back in the pockets of American workers while protecting homeowners, Social Security, and not adding to the deficit and our ever-increasing national debt.

This current deal is not good policy – but it is political posturing.

The payroll tax cut deal is a result of politicians telling Americans what they want to hear, while seriously harming them and our nation in the long run. Americans sent a new wave of leaders to Capitol Hill in 2010 to stand up for conservative principles and turn this country around. I will continue to be a voice for those Americans. (Emphasis in original.)

And people wonder why West is a TEA Party favorite and mentioned as a dream pick for Vice-President? He seems to be one of the few who calls out Barack Obama for what he is. (Maybe it’s because the Left can’t use the race card on him, aside from calling him an “Uncle Tom”, “Oreo”, or any other similar derogatory name.)

But I believe he and Andy Harris made the right choice today. All we are doing is “giving” (read: taking less from) people on the one hand but punishing them with the other. Unfortunately, until Washington has more bold leadership like Harris and West, it’s not going to matter how much or little we’re taxed because the spending will far outpace whatever is taken in.

It’s not about money, it’s about control. Learn that lesson well.