Tag Archives: Social Conservatism

Fewer people are paying taxes because fewer people are married

Here is an interesting essay from The Family in America.

Here’s the problem:

Just two days before Tax Day this year, the Heritage Foundation was quick on the draw with a Backgrounder by Curtis S. Dubay citing IRS data showing that the bottom 50 percent of tax filers pay less than 3 percent of all income taxes. According to Dubay, “the rapid increase in the number of nonpaying tax filers caused by tax credits is leading the country to a dangerous tipping point.” Like other conservatives and libertarians, he fears that once the bottom half of tax filers pay no taxes whatsoever, they “could vote themselves an increasing share of government benefits at no cost to themselves.”

And here’s what’s causing the problem:

More important, this relatively new concern about the growth in the number of Americans paying no income taxes overlooks the social roots of the problem, particularly the decline of the most economically productive segment of the population: the married-two parent family.5 Consequently, few economic conservatives seem willing to connect the dots between the changing demographics of the American taxpayer, which Hodge at least acknowledges,6 and the growth of Americans paying no taxes. They seem more eager to blame the latter on the addition and expansion of refundable credits, especially the child tax credit, not changing demographics. Yet Roberton Williams of the Tax Policy Center, a joint project of the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution, estimates that married couples are far less likely to be non-taxpayers in 2009 than single filers or head-of-household filers. In this last category, his model shows 72 percent paying no income taxes, the highest percentage of all tax filing categories. Only 38 percent of married-joint filers, and 26 percent of married-separate filers, pay no taxes.7

Indeed, the Tax Foundation’s own analysis of IRS data documents the decline in the proportion of married filers from 65 percent of returns in 1960 to 41 percent in the years 2000–02, and the dramatic growth of head-of-household filers, representing largely unwed mothers, from 2 percent to 15 percent during the same period. Moreover, looking at data from 2002 returns, the foundation finds that married couples, while they file less than half of all tax returns, pay nearly three-quarters of all income taxes paid by the American people.8 Even though the analysis does not include changes that might arise from the doubling of the child tax credit to $1,000 in 2003, the numbers nonetheless suggest that the growth in the number of Americans who pay no income taxes is driven more by the retreat from marriage than by the proliferation of credits in the tax code, as problematic as that might be. The numbers further suggest that if conservatives are serious about tax reform, they can no longer ignore the elephant in the room—the retreat from marriage and family life—that undermines the very economic growth they seek. Nor can they presume that a flatter tax system with lower rates and a wider base, favored by the  libertarian wing of the GOP, will lead to smaller government, as analysis by economist Gary Becker shows that countries with flatter tax systems tend to have larger governments.9 They must therefore be open to tax reform proposals that recognize the natural family as the social and economic ideal as well as reinforce the recovery of marriage and the child-rich family—not economic growth for its own sake—as centerpieces of American life.

This is yet another reason for fiscal conservatives to take notice that you cannot have economic growth if the traditional family is replaced with single-mother families. Single motherhood is not a situation where men are responsible and work hard as providers. It infantilizes men and rewards them for acting like nomads and barbarians. And the children who are raised without fathers are not going to be as mentally healthy or productive as the ones raised with fathers. The traditional family, with children raised by biological parents who are attached to them, is an important part of future economic growth. It’s all linked together – social conservatism and fiscal conservatism.

Arkansas Senate votes to block taxpayer funding of abortion

State Sen. Cecile Bledsoe
State Sen. Cecile Bledsoe

Republican state senator Cecile Bledsoe is making headlines in Arkansas.

Excerpt:

The Arkansas Senate voted Thursday to prohibit insurers in new markets set up under the federal health care law from offering coverage for abortions except in cases where the mother’s life is at stake — a move that opponents say will make it virtually impossible for women to get abortion coverage.

The Senate voted 27-8 to approve strict limits on when abortion would be covered in the new insurance markets that will be set up starting in 2014 under the federal health care overhaul. The legislation would prohibit abortion coverage by insurers in those markets even in cases of rape and incest.

Coverage for abortions could be obtained through separate supplemental policies.

The bill’s sponsor, Sen. Cecile Bledsoe, R-Rogers, said it was aimed at preventing publicly funded abortions in Arkansas in the new system. Under the reform law, some people participating in the new networks will receive tax credits to subsidize their health insurance coverage.

“This is about tax dollars and Arkansans have said overwhelmingly we don’t want to spend tax dollars on abortions,” Bledsoe told the Senate.

[…]Bledsoe’s bill now heads to the House. Gov. Mike Beebe, a Democrat, said Thursday night he’d prefer to see an exemption for rape and incest in the bill, but would not say whether he’d oppose the legislation in its current form.

Notice how the Democrats try to water down a good law by raising an exception that happens in a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a percent of cases. Also note that babies that are conceived as a result of rape or incest are still human beings, and deserve a right to life. She/He should be allowed to live and then placed for adoption after birth. Why should the innocent baby be punished for a crime that she/he did not commit? To deter rape and incest, we can pass even tougher criminal laws against them, and offer the woman assistance while she carries the child.

Related posts

Republican Governor Rick Perry demands sonograms before abortions

Unborn baby scheming about moving to Texas
Unborn baby scheming about moving to Texas

From Life Site News.

Excerpt:

Texas governor Rick Perry is throwing his weight behind legislation to require doctors to show women a sonogram of their unborn child before having an abortion, declaring the issue a legislative “emergency.”

As an emergency item on the legislative agenda, the state congress will have the option of voting on the measure within the first 30 days of the current legislative session.

In addition to the sonogram, the bill would also require doctors to give mothers a detailed description of their child and his state of development, including the presence of limbs and internal organs. Mothers will also listen to their children’s heartbeat, and must be given information about abortion alternatives no less than 24 hours before the abortion occurs.

Perry’s decision to fast track the legislation was announced at a speech before the Texas Rally for Life, held on Saturday in Austin, the state capital.

“Nearly 40 years have passed since the tragedy of Roe vs. Wade was decided by the United States Supreme Court, and since then, fifty million, fifty million children have lost their chances,” Perry told the crowd.

“That is a catastrophic number.  That’s twice the population of this entire state. It’s pretty hard to imagine people of good conscience sitting idly by through this, and in Texas we haven’t. We have actively worked against that Roe vs. Wade decision.  We have taken great strides in protecting the unborn.”

After listing previous legislative measures, such as parental notification and parental consent laws, Perry added, “today I am pleased to announce that I am designating the sonogram bill an emergency item for the 87th legislative session.”

“A woman seeking an abortion must be given a sonogram, ensuring that she understands the full impact of her decision, a decision that can scar her physically and otherwise for the rest of her life. When you consider the magnitude of that decision, ensuring that someone understands what is truly at stake, seems to be a small step, in my opinion.”

The Republican party is the party of social conservatism. We believe in marriage and family.

Everyone who is a social conservative who votes for left-wing parties because of fiscal or foreign policy concerns really should ask themselves whether they have taken the time to understand the conservative view of fiscal and social issues. The conservative view is correct across the board – it’s one seamless garment. If you learn more about the facts on economics and foreign policy, you will be a conservative.

Related posts