A U.S. senator said on Thursday that he would hold up a massive year-end spending bill if it included a ban on Internet-access taxes that he and several colleagues fear would harm state and local finances.
Delaware Sen. Thomas Carper, a Democrat, told reporters he would try to keep the omnibus bill from coming to the Senate floor if the ban was included in its present form, which he said infringed on the rights of state and local governments to raise revenues.
The Congressional Budget Office estimates these jurisdictions would lose $195 million that year but said the true cost of the provision could not be determined and could be much higher.
It sounds like Caper is acknowledging the 10th Amendment of the Constitution. It’s probably just a phase.
The last sentence is a good argument for proving a Left-wing media. "The true cost of the provision could not be determined." The provision to ban taxation doesn't cost anything. Cost is what you have to give up to obtain something of value.
Government getting less money doesn’t cost them anything. Does it cost the Wal-Mart anything when I decide to shop at Target? This land has survived without Internet taxation since Christopher Columbus. Delaware will probably not sink into the Atlantic Ocean without it.
Calling the ban proposal an unfunded mandate on states and a massive tax break for the telecommunications industry, Republican Sen. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee said he and his colleagues had proposed a compromise two-year ban.
An unfunded mandate is when the government demands that a state spend money on a program without providing the money. Banning taxation is hardly the same thing.
And the telecommunications industry isn't getting a massive tax break. Taxpayers who use the industry are getting the tax break. Can Alexander name anyone he knows who doesn’t use the telecommunications industry?
No comments:
Post a Comment