Cons On Tax Enforcement: “Pass”

DAVID SIROTA: In response to Harsanyi’s latest, my apologies for not having seen his previous column calling Hick’s bond plan “reasonable” - I was away trying my best to catch Pacific salmon in 14-foot seas (not easy for an uncoordinated stiff like me). I agree with him (a rare occasion!) on the bond issue and I have no doubt he’s taken his share of heat for his position from fellow conservatives. That said, I stand by my statement that the Right will probably try to mount some kind of campaign against the ballot initiative.

Now, onto the other stuff.

I’m sure David’s written columns about taxes and budgets - who said he hasn’t? What I said was that conservatives are frantic to avoid a debate over taxes and budgets in the wake of the Minnesota bridge disaster and specifically relating to that disaster. Please - let’s not descend into selective editing now, Dave.

More importantly is what Harsanyi doesn’t address. As an anti-tax crusader against the so-called “nanny state” - I’m still waiting to hear if he thinks we should do a better job of collecting the taxes are owed in the face of a huge tax gap? To do that, it would require an investment in tax collection programs, an investment in - gasp! - Big Government.

You took a pass the first time when I asked this question, Dave…will you take another pass? Or should we assume your first pass was a sign that, like many self-declared conservatives, “law and order” only means cracking down on poor people and immigrants, but not on wealthy tax evaders.

I hear the crickets chirping…

Bookmark/Search this post with: