I decided to venture down to Warwick on Monday evening to hear Mike Huckabee address Rhode Islanders and appeal for their vote. It was an interesting crowd, and I only recognized a few faces who were there mostly out of curiousity like myself. The majority of the crowd seemed to be average, working class Americans who were inspired by Huckabee’s American dream life and decided to support his candidacy. One man I talked to had even driven three hours from New York to hear Huckabee’s speech.
This was the third time I’ve heard Huckabee speak in person, and like most politicians with comfortable talking points, it was the third time I’ve heard the same message. However, this time I started thinking about his platform and how it is ideally in line with many conservatives, yet it is not practical or realistic.
Consider what defines him as a candidate.
- He supports a Constitutional Amendment defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman.
- He believes in the Fair Tax which calls for repealing the 16th Amendment and will abolish the Internal Revenue Service.
- He also wants a Constitutional Amendment that protects the right to life.
During his speech in Warwick, these are the issues that he highlighted that make him stand apart from John McCain. Mike Huckabee does have some beliefs that resonate with me and other conservatives. He supports a line-item veto, will make the Bush tax cuts permanent, will not set a time table for Iraq, wants to build a border fence, and believes in energy independence with free market solutions. But it is not these issues that he talks about. Most of these are very similar to John McCain’s platform, so he uses the extreme to distinguish himself.
The fact of the matter is that these three self-defining issues are not practical. I am a Constitutionalist who believes that our constitution is not there to legislate morality, rather it is there to define our most basic fundamental liberties. I agree with Mike Huckabee in that I am pro-life and do not think homosexual marriage should be allowed. However, amending the Constitution should not be the vehicle to prevent this activity. Changing this behavior starts with society and strong families. In addition, amending the Constitution to include these amendments is nearly impossible. This would require 2/3 vote of both the House and Senate, then 3/4 of the states to approve it. Or, there could be a Constitutional Convention called by 2/3 of the states legislatures, but also this will need 3/4 of the states approval. These are divisive issues and I do not think he has the slightest chance of getting it passed through our Democratic Congress and mostly Democratic state legislatures. Mike Huckabee is as unrealistic as Obama’s platform of “hope,” whatever that might be.
Secondly, Mike Huckabee will not succeed in abolishing the IRS and implementing a Fair Tax. This consumption tax and revenue neutral tax is a bad idea that will not fly with most Americans. He will face the same Constitutional difficulties of repealing the 16th Amendment that defines our income tax. So one would have to wonder if we would end up with an income tax and a consumption tax at 23%. He says this will allow us to abolish the IRS but he is forgetting that someone will have to oversee who is spending what so that the monthly rebate checks for people below the poverty line and for all purchases of necessities are distributed properly. This may not require a 67,000 page tax code, but it will require some tedious oversight and accurate record keeping.
I like Mike Huckabee a lot as a person and I, too, am inspired by him. He is a product of the American dream. But I am also a realist and do not think he offers real solutions for America. My ideology is not far out of line from his, but his methodology to enact it is not practical.
I think most Americans have already realized this since he is all but out of the election right now. However, for my Huckabee friends in Rhode Island and Ohio who have yet to cast their vote, I hope you think again.
3 responses so far ↓
Matt // February 28, 2008 at 2:44 am
If McCain has the nomination locked up, what has he got to lose with 1 debate? Free air time for him. But if he refuses he looks bad.
Anita // February 28, 2008 at 5:45 am
I agree with you that it may be difficult to get the marriage amendment to the constitution. I’m not so sure about the right – to- life amendment. It wasn’t that long ago that we got the pro-abortion amendment.
As for the Fair Tax- I don’t think you are well informed about it. I would recommend reading the two Fair Tax books by Neil Boortz and Jon Linder to become informed. The books are written so you do not have to be an economics major to understand the Fair Tax proposal. I think if most Americans were properly informed and not ’sound bite’ informed from the media- they would push for the Fair Tax.
For example the monthly PREbate checks are based on household size not income. Once that new baby is born you apply for an SSN and your monthly prebate is adjusted for your new addition. Prebates are given to every household regardless of your income to ensure that no legal American family pays federal taxes on spending up to the poverty level.
The IRS as we now know it would be abolished- once they were done collecting back taxes from the before Fair Tax years. There would some sort of small agency that would be responsible for issuing the prebate checks- which if done properly should not be tedious or a nightmare.
Anyway- I like Huckabee – he has my vote when the primary is held in my state in May.
Tommy // February 29, 2008 at 10:17 pm
Anyone who understands a fiat monetary system, our system, knows that most retirement funds lose real value and are not exactly what
a person hopes for at the end of their worklife. Some are, andthose typically go to people in the public sector. We contribute greatly to those through a myriad of taxes.
Adding a tax to your retirement is simply another way of saying to the American people, you’re so damned stupid that we’re going to
keep doing this until we drain every cent from you. That’s what the Speaker of the House is saying.
Nancy Pelosi wants a Windfall Tax on Retirement Income. This woman
is a nut case! You aren’t going to believe this. Madam speaker Nancy Pelosi wants to put a Windfall Tax on all stock market profits (including Retirement fund, 401Ks and Mutual
Funds! Alas, it is true – all to help the 12 Million Illegal Immigrants and other unemployed Minorities!
Boy, are we in trouble… This woman is frightening. She said ” We need to work toward the goal of equalizing income in our country and at the same time limiting the amount the rich can
invest.”
When asked how these new tax dollars would be spent, she replied :
“We need to raise the standard of living of our poor, unemployedand minorities. For example, we have an estimated 12 millionillegal immigrants in our country who need our help along withmillions of unemployed minorities. Stock market windfall profits taxes could go a long ways to guarantee these people the standard
of living they would like to have as ‘Americans’.” This lady is out of her mind and needs to be stopped ASAP!