The Idea of Huckabee

It's worth keeping front and center the basic point that Mike Huckabee's policy platform, if enacted, would be a disaster for working class Americans. His views about the viability of replacing the income tax with a retail sales tax betray both an indifference to the distributive implications of tax policy, and also a frightening ignorance of economic policy similar to the ignorance of foreign policy exposed by his comments on the NIE last week. That said, Frank Rich's take on the appeal of a kindler, gentler form of conservatism seems right:

Attacked by Mr. Romney for supporting an Arkansas program aiding the children of illegal immigrants, he replied, “In all due respect, we’re a better country than to punish children for what their parents did.” [...] As governor, he decried a bill denying health services to illegal immigrants as “race-baiting” even though its legislator sponsor was a fellow Baptist preacher. [...] Unlike Rudy-Romney, Mr. Huckabee showed up for the PBS presidential debate held at the historically black Morgan State University in September. [...] The real reason for Mr. Huckabee’s ascendance may be that his message is simply more uplifting — and, in the ethical rather than theological sense, more Christian — than that of rivals whose main calling cards of fear, torture and nativism have become more strident with every debate.

Yes indeed. A lot of us non-Christian liberals have been wondering for some time when if ever the elements of Christian ethics that don't relate to sex were going to rear their heads in the Christian political mobilization. In an era where regular churchgoers are the main electoral prop of the party of aggressive war and institutionalized torture, we're still a long way from that moment. But Huckabee's rhetoric on a few key points seems to nod in the direction of the possibility of something better. It'd take someone else -- someone better-informed , with a better grasp of policy and without the record of setting serial rapists free -- to actually deliver on that promise, but I think there's no denying that it's promising.

Comments

Speaking of compassion and forgiveness, Bush just told Libby to save his time and money appealing his felony conviction. Seems he's in line for a full pardon, the lifting of the felony sanctions and regaining his ability to practice law come January 2009.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
MATT APUZZO
AP News

Dec 10, 2007 10:38 EST

Former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby is dropping his appeal in the CIA leak case, his attorney said Monday.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Just in time for Christmas!! And skeptics thought Bush's "compassionate conservative" was a ruse! Take that!!

Posted by steve duncan | December 10, 2007 10:53 AM

Matt, do you know who is going to step up and do honorable combat with Michael D. at Balloon Juice over the virtues of Huckabee's sales tax proposal?

Posted by PT&S | December 10, 2007 11:16 AM

All of these virtues are liabilities in the primary.

Posted by urkel | December 10, 2007 11:22 AM

On the issue of christian-promoted "institutionalized torture" it's worth noting that Huckabee came out a few days ago AGAINST TORTURE. He stands with McCain on this subject, and is against it. I thought that was a point in his favor. Huckabee is far from perfect, but seems to possess some genuine interest in America's future, not just his own. You gotta like that...even if you don't like him.

By the way, you can Huckabee's NEW TV ADS and a video chronicling his adult life at:

www.mike-huckabee.blogspot.com

Posted by John Morris | December 10, 2007 11:24 AM

"In all due respect, we’re a better country than to punish children for what their parents did.” [...] As governor, he decried a bill denying health services to illegal immigrants as “race-baiting” even though its legislator sponsor was a fellow Baptist preacher

Well, that was last week. This week, Huckabee's policy is that illegal immigrants will have 120 days to register and leave; else, if caught, they will be banned from the country for 10 years.

No doubt that's a safer platform for an aspirant to the Republican nomination, though obviously it undercuts Huckabee's "kinder, gentler--no, really!" selling point. But the about-face, and the way it was gone about (immigration hardliner Mark Krikorian, the author of the policy, was never consulted by the Huckabee camp), suggest that Huckabee is unserious about policy questions, and views them as nuisances. And that's probably not helpful for a guy whose appeal is somewhat outside-the-box.

Posted by kth | December 10, 2007 11:27 AM

"His views about the viability of replacing the income tax with a retail sales tax betray both an indifference to the distributive implications of tax policy..."

What makes you think that he's indifferent, rather than actually intends the plan to do what it will do: shift a huge portion of the revenue base from the wealthy to the poor?

In the modern Republican party, never attribute to incompetence what can be more easily explained by malice.

Posted by Imaginary | December 10, 2007 11:27 AM

Christian-bashing has become politically correct. I suppose it filled the vacuum left when Gay-bashing become un-politically correct.

Posted by Nalora B. | December 10, 2007 11:36 AM

FairTax a Disaster?! Please reference and validate this doomsday rhetoric! By the way, Alan Greenspan, Boone Pickens, and Nobel economist Vernon L. Smith are my pro-consumption tax references. Your unaccountable tripe may be OK in liberal circles, but smart people demand the facts. GO FAIRTAX, GO HUCKABEE!

Posted by Mark M | December 10, 2007 11:59 AM

Can you point me to an argument as to why a sales tax would be a disaster, but a VAT is not? Most European governments have a VAT as the primary source of government funds.

Posted by SamChevre | December 10, 2007 12:06 PM

Most European governments also have a highly progressive income tax to go along with the VAT. You're stretching the case to call the VAT the "Primary Source" of their government funds.

Regardless, the problem with the "Fair Tax" is not that it intends to use a VAT as a major source of government funds. The problem is that the plan intends to use a sales tax as the ONLY source of government funds. Perhaps an even greater problem is that its proponents, who are some of the most dishonest swine on the entire internet, use fantastically bogus numbers to further the charade that this would be a revenue-neutral tax reform requiring no enforcement mechanisms, and might possibly even provide a free pony for every little girl in America.

Posted by LaFollette Progressive | December 10, 2007 12:21 PM

Most European governments don't have a progressive income tax in addition to a VAT? Weird. And similarities between Huckabee's 30% sales tax and European tax policy is a selling point for the Republican right? Weirder.

But hey, Alan Greenspan is apparently in favor, and from touting an increase in the regressive payroll tax, to blowing the surplus so generated on cuts in the top marginal income tax rates, to pimping ARMs as the way to go during a real estate bubble, Alan's always looked out for the common man... 'cause he'd prefer not to get common man brains on the bumper of his limo.

Posted by mds | December 10, 2007 12:26 PM

What else COULD Greenspan do to help the economy in place of a logical consumption tax in a capitalistic society?
Please have the courage to actually study and embrace this simple, yet factual concept. Unshackle businesses and individuals from coercive taxation and they'll return the favor in spades through spending with gross/overtime paychecks on same-priced items.

Posted by mark m | December 10, 2007 1:17 PM

It's worth noting that even though their economic effect is similar, a VAT is much different from a sales tax in that: (1) it is harder to evade; and (2) even evasion at one level won't reduce tax paid to zero.

One of the arguments against Huckabee's Fair Tax scheme is that because the tax will be collected at one point and will be about 30 percent-- a serious bite-- there will be a huge incentive for off the books transactions and evasion.

If you have a VAT, in contrast, only the value added at each stage is taxed, which means the tax rate isn't high enough at any particular point on the chain to make evasion particularly attractive, and even if evasion occurs at that point, VAT taxes will be collected at other points.

Posted by Dilan Esper | December 10, 2007 1:54 PM

It'd take someone else -- someone better-informed , with a better grasp of policy and without the record of setting serial rapists free -- to actually deliver on that promise, but I think there's no denying that it's promising.

Sorry, but forced giving does not qualify as the Christian virtue of Charity, any more than 'aggressive interrogation techniques' qualifies as loving your neighbor.

Posted by CFisher | December 10, 2007 1:59 PM

I realize MattY doesn't really understand these issues and is just saying what others want him to say, but would it pain him to point out that Frank Rich is spreading disinformation?

The "Arkansas program" wasn't necessarily for the "children of illegal immigrants". It was a very broad bill covering college-age students who were themselves IllegalAliens.

Since the FrankRich/MattY formulation keeps being used, I suspect it's more than just simple incompetence but a deliberate attempt to mislead.

And, MattY might also want to apply his Harvard-league thinking abilities to the fact that there are only so many college discounts available, and what happens when even just one IllegalAlien gets a discount. Since that's probably going to be too difficult for him, here's a helpful animation:

youtube.com/watch?v=WZkvEmSy1vk

Posted by TLB | December 10, 2007 2:01 PM

Sorry, but forced giving does not qualify as the Christian virtue of Charity, any more than 'aggressive interrogation techniques' qualifies as loving your neighbor.

Yes, we've reached the point in our downward moral spiral as a nation where taxation is analogized to torture.

What else COULD Greenspan do to help the economy in place of a logical consumption tax in a capitalistic society?

Other than push a regressive tax increase on the working class, then bless giving the collected money away to the richest Americans, and then turn around and pimp adjustable-rate mortgages during a period of very low interest rates? Yeah, I'm stumped; that does pretty much exhaust all possible ways to help the economy.

Posted by mds | December 10, 2007 2:14 PM

You can have Huckabee if you want him. Take the Neocons back, while you're at it.

Posted by Shinyk | December 10, 2007 2:17 PM

I'm not aware of any European government with no income tax, but the income tax is quite small relative to VAT and payroll taxes.

Per INSEE, for France:

Payroll tax--"social contributions": 40% of revenue--all designated for "social security", which includes pensions, disability, healthcare.
VAT: 35% of revenue
Income, corporation, and property tax: 25% of revenue--about half is income tax.

This income tax IS very progressive, but it's a pretty small portion of government revenues.

Posted by SamChevre | December 10, 2007 2:17 PM

European countries generally have more regressive taxes, though, because labor & capital is much more mobile than in the United Stats.

Posted by Peter H | December 10, 2007 3:57 PM

The "Arkansas program" wasn't necessarily for the "children of illegal immigrants". It was a very broad bill covering college-age students who were themselves IllegalAliens.

So what? Your typical illegal immigrant MINOR is someone who didn't choose to come to this country or to cross the border illegally. In some cases, he or she might have even crossed the border in his or her mother's arms. In some cases, the person has had no contact with Mexico to speak of since birth, and may not even speak Spanish at all or very well.

Part of the bigotry of many opponents of illegal immigration is that they pretend the actual circumstances of particular immigrants is irrelevant to the issue. There is this category, "illegal immigrants", and like any racist, the opponents of illegal immigration believe "they are all alike".

But they are not. Huckabee was helping a group of illegal immigrants that are particularly sympathetic-- kids whose parents brought them to this country had no choice in the matter, and should be able to get an education in the country they grew up in, especially if they have so little contact with their birth country and/or if all their relatives are here.

Anyone who refuses to look at the circumstances of PARTICULAR illegal immigrants before making blanket pronouncements is acting from prejudice, not any valid policy concern.

Posted by Dilan Esper | December 10, 2007 5:26 PM

Shorter Dilan Esper:
1. I have no argument.
2. Who cares about the truth?
3. Who cares about U.S. citizens?

See my nifty paint.exe graphics here explaining the last:

youtube.com/watch?v=WZkvEmSy1vk

Even MattY can understand that. He doesn't have to care about U.S. citizens, but it'd be great if he at least acknowledges that part of which he, by extension, supports.

Posted by TLB | December 10, 2007 7:05 PM

I'm not aware of any European government with no income tax, but the income tax is quite small relative to VAT and payroll taxes.

Isn't a patroll tax an income tax by another name?

Posted by Glaivester | December 10, 2007 7:25 PM

Starting a tax dialogue with a referance to rape lacks any degree of objectivity.

Posted by WCook | December 11, 2007 12:53 AM

1. rule: dont attack without backing up your points.
especially huck- he might send chuck after you!
lol
ps. but seriously; no ad mominim attacks, please.

Posted by jack s. | December 11, 2007 3:00 AM