Archive for December, 2007

Why we need the Fair Tax – Part 1 – School Vouchers

One of the best tax reform proposals current being discussed in the United States is the FairTax proposal. You can read all about it at http://www.fairtax.org/. I am going to begin a series explaining how the FairTax can help address some of the current issues in today’s news.

One recent issue that has come up lately in this year’s Presidential election is school vouchers. Some have argued that school vouchers will improve education overall by enabling parent choice and forcing competition being public and private schools. On the other hand, opponents argue that school vouchers will weaken public schools who already have limited budgets by forcing them to compete at a regulatory disadvantage. Some private schools, particularly parochial schools, worry that the voucher system would force them to succumb to increase Federal regulation.

The FairTax proposal would greatly improve a family’s ability to afford a quality education of their own choosing. The FairTax would make the education costs close to half of today’s costs due to the fact the education expenditures are treated favorably under the FairTax system. Under current law, no deduction is given for payment of primary and secondary educational expenditures; however, under the FairTax system all education expenses would be made from pre-tax dollars. In addition, schools would no longer have income or payroll tax for their teachers and employees. This cost saving would be passed on to consumers of education in the form of lower tuition rates.

The FairTax would enable more families to afford private education if they so choose while at the same time allow private schools to remain free from increased government regulation. For more information, please visit The Impact of the Fair Tax on Education.

Great Email from Tony Perkins

To: Friends of Family Research Council
From: Tony Perkins, President
December 10, 2007 – Monday

A Reverse Religious Test

Over the weekend I had flashbacks of the brutal judicial confirmation hearings that took place between 2003 and 2005 where certain nominees like William Pryor, Janice Rogers Brown, Charles Pickering, and others were filibustered by the Democratic minority because of what Sen. Charles Schumer called their “deeply held personal beliefs.” Those “beliefs” were the religious convictions that led them in part to hold a position that abortion was wrong. There was a reverse religious litmus test applied. A subtle message was being sent that a person had to choose between an active, life-impacting faith and public service. It was wrong then and it is wrong now as it is being applied to Mike Huckabee. Let me preface what I am about to say by first recalling what I wrote last week (Dec. 3, 2007) explaining why I had not endorsed a presidential candidate and at present have no plans to do so. I remain undecided and what I say below does not imply a change in those plans; however, I feel compelled to rise to the defense of Mike Huckabee. The media had been toying with and even promoting Mike Huckabee, thinking he would go nowhere; however, after FRC Action’s Values Voter Summit he began a steady rise in the polls. In my opinion it was not because he finished a close second in the straw poll to Mitt Romney, but because he came out for the first time at our event, co-hosted by Focus on the Family Action and others and spoke unabashedly and unequivocally conservative on all the core social issues. He began to compete for territory that had been ceded to Gov. Romney. That message has resonated and he has not only climbed to first place in Iowa, but nationally he is second only to Rudy Giuliani in the most current polls. There is apparently fear now among the elites that his rise could be real and not a creation of the media. Enter the reverse religious test that is being applied. In various settings over the last few days Huckabee has been confronted with articles from nearly a decade ago containing statements on the morality of issues like HIV-AIDS, homosexuality and even the need for spiritual awakening in America. He was basically asked to recant. I am pleased to say that he did not recant. This morning, for example, the lead story on Drudge was a 1998 article from the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette reporting on a speech that Huckabee gave at the annual meeting of the Southern Baptists calling on the church to wake up following a rash of school shootings. The Drudge headline touted, “Take this nation back for Christ,” a subtle but clear warning to secular elites. Columnist Richard Cohen wasn’t as subtle last week when he said Huckabee is climbing in the polls because of “his obdurate and narrow-minded religious beliefs.” There is clearly a reverse religious standard being applied to Mike Huckabee, a standard that says there will be no defining religious beliefs. I would hope the other candidates, including the Democrats, would clearly and absolutely denounce this reverse religious test and keep the media from going further down this path. If not, I predict that bible-believing Christians will step over policy differences they have with Mike Huckabee to stand by and support a candidate who is being attacked because he believes, as they do, that their Christian faith should actually impact the way they live. If that happens, the recent meteoric rise of the Huckabee campaign in the polls could look minuscule compared to the tsunami of support that he will get from Christians who are tired of the elites who belittle their beliefs and attempt to rob them of every public reflection of their faith.

Double Standard for Christian Candidates

I have noticed an increasingly obvious double standard when it comes to Christian political candidates, which as really been hammered home over the last week. Candidates whose religion is not consistent with mainstream Christianity, such as Romney’s Mormon beliefs, are applauded for their fervent faith. I have heard the reports of how no one should be influenced not to vote for Romney because he is Mormon; rather we should embrace these diversities. Charles Krauthammer in his column, “Huckabee Plays the Religion Card,” even suggests that not voting for Romeny because he is Mormon is in violation of Article VI of the Constitution.

On the other hand, Huckabee is being admonished for even bringing up that he is a Christian. His ad stating that he is a “Christian Leader” has been portrayed by the media as a direct shot at Romney. For the MSM, candidates can be Christians but they must not ever state that anyone else is not a Christian. For example, when Huckabee appeared on Hardball a few days ago, Chris Matthew hammered him by asking if he believes Mormons and Jews are going to heaven. The media attempts to force Christians into a secular inclusive stance of saying that while they are a Christian everyone has their own path and all these paths may lead to heaven. This same standard is not applied to other religions. Have you ever seen Romney asked if he believes Huckabee is going to heaven?

Christians believe Christ’s word in John 14:6, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No man comes to Father but through me.” This does not mean that we force this on anyone else; rather, we believe that people must freely choose to follow Christ. Obviously, everyone has the right to believe whatever they want to believe and they only have to answer to God on this. But this does not translate that we must accept all religions as Truth. If all religions are true, then no religion is true as all (or at least most) religions believe they are true.

I am proud of Huckabee for not compromising his faith. He has been given every opportunity to deny Christ yet he has remained faithful.


SEO Powered by Platinum SEO from Techblissonline