The days Grover Norquist's sway over Republican Party tax policy — and by default, American tax policy — may be over.
A bill, introduced by Republican Senator Tom Coburn today, proposes to end $6 billion in ethanol tax subsidies. If passed, this would end corporate tax breaks for companies in the ethanol business.
This proposal naturally outraged Grover Norquist. Over the years, he’s obtained signatures from most Congressional Republicans, making them pledge to never raise taxes under any circumstances.
As a guest on The Last Word, Coburn said this tax pledge would not stop government officials from doing the right thing, even under pressure.
“Between now and the next year, as we go to solve this problem, everybody knows there’s going to have to be a compromise on some sort of revenue increases," said Coburn. "Grover’s old news. It doesn’t matter what he says, it doesn’t matter what he wants."
Coburn seemed optimistic, adding "We’re going to fix the country, and some of that is going to be revenue increases, that’s the only way you’re going to build a compromise and get it signed by this president."
Senate Republicans, who had signed the tax pledge, voted against Norquist and for repealing the ethanol tax credit. In total, 34 Republicans voted for the bill, though it ultimately failed 40 to 59.
Leave a Comment:
The Republicans voting to repeal the ethanol subsidy was completely consistent. They vote always for what is good for the oil companies. Eliminating the ethanol subsidy would hurt the competition. This principle trumps the "no new taxes" rule.
I,m a fan , keep up the good work.!! I'm also s veteran USMC VietNam Era Okinawa,Japan
Am I the only one that heard Pawlenty say during the debate that the ethanol industry did not need the subsidies anymore because they were (now) solid enough?! If this is the case for the ethanol industry wouldn't the same hold true for the Big Oil Industries?! Just saying....
Comment # 4 deleted. Derail.
Watching Sen. Coburn talk about the Ensign thing was awkward.
i am sure that he was granted immunity for handing over information about the ensign affair, something that he initially said he would not do.
with weiner's 'sexcapade' looming large, and his resignation called for, it is only right that others who have broken the law in a "similar fashion", be questioned about their activities. while coBurn is not accused of having an affair, he did try to help his republican colleague, ensign, cover his up.
he was granted immunity, so he turned over information about ensign to save his ass.
For me, lumping the Weiner "scandal" in together with what Senator Ensign did, is ridiculous. So one was sexually harassing and pursuing the wife of his best friend who also worked for him, while the other texted pictures of himself to strangers. There's a clear difference here (without making Rep. Weiner a saint), and it annoys me that people are equally outraged, if not MORE outraged about the Weiner non-sex event.
Coburn seemed optimistic, adding "We’re going to fix the country, and some of that is going to be revenue increases, that’s the only way you’re going to build a compromise and get it signed by this president."
Well have to give Tom credit went it is due. You sure making sense lets hope you mean it.
or is this part of your plead deal? if it is then it was wort the deal to get the country on top of the list again.
i hope he means it, too. i hope other republicans will join him, and not give that awful breitbart associate, the bully, grover norquist what he wants.
Would someone please explain to Lawrence O'Donnell that when he manages
to get Senator Coburn to talk about the vote on Ethanol subsidies that he might
stick to the subject. Tax increases and defiance of Grover Norquist are sexy
enough with out bringing up the Senator Ensign affair. To spend most of the
interview talking about old news that is in no way related to taxes is akin to
bait and switch. We did not need to hear this diatribe masquerading as an
interview.
Rocky this is all related so engage your mind. Senator Coburn new he be ask these question. I just witch Oil subsidies was on the table.
Just proves that O'Donnell knows nothing about journalism. All he trys to do is stir up trouble. Senator Coburn ate his lunch.
Congrats to Sen. Coburn to taking on the ethanol lobby. Now, will Sen. Coburn and Republicans join in taking on the oil and gas industry subsidies?
I am not a supporter of Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) but felt that you "blindsided" him last night by starting off your interview with questions regarding his involvement in the John Ensign "affair". This is old news and has been hashed and re-hashed for several weeks. The purpose of this interview was Sen. Coburn's opinion of the ethanol subsidy and other tax advantages being given to corporations and other special interests. In my opinion it is going to be difficult for you to get the "other side" to participate in on air interviews if you are going to dwell on "dirty laundry" rather than the important issues facing the country.
when coBurn signed on to help his friend ensign hide his affair, he opened himself up for questions. as far as we know, coBurn has not had an affair, but his involvement nonetheless was illegal trying to help ensign cover up his affair.
it is true and unfortunate that anthony weiner made it very easy for breitbart to bring him down. republicans and democrats can expect this kind of questioning if they can't keep their noses clean, and simply do the work of the people.
coBurn got immunity. i don't feel bad for coBurn that he will feel embarassment and shame from time to time if he is asked personal questions about his involvement in the ensign affair. if anthony weiner must lose his job when nothing illegal has been proven, i like to see the republicans squirm over past illegal discretions.
Not sure if this is the right place to write this. But I'd like to know from the GOP how not regulating corporations keeps a free market. How is it a free market if corporations lobby government to get advantages over smaller businesses who can't lobby as much? How is that fair or free? The market can be controlled or changed through subsidies and getting around laws etc... to benefit those with the most money to lobby government. But I thought a free market was when people compete based on the market, not based on who can lobby the market the most to their advantage. And if it is that way, I don't think it's right than one person get's a million or billion times more influence on the way things work than another person just because their rich. So regulation (like campaign finance reform) could make sure that people's interest are heard more equally rather than the rich having undescribebably more say in everything and could make how government works and the market more fair and free, in which case regulation would help the free market stay free, not make it an unfree market necessarily, I just think it's an interesting thought. And as lawrence has said we have FDA etc... where the government regulates things, so regulation isn't always the enemy, so yeah just some thoughts.
Don't get too excited about Coburn et al talking about revenue increases. They're likely to try and do it through fees and sales taxes which are more regressive even than current income taxes. Beware what you wish for, it may just come true. Especially if Republicans are charged with the responsiblity of making our future.