SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Donkey's Inn -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (2648)2/5/2002 4:23:37 PM
From: Mephisto  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 15516
 
Did you HEAR ABOUT EYEMAN? (off topic)



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (2648)2/5/2002 4:24:39 PM
From: Mephisto  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 15516
 
Anti-Tax Leader Confesses He Used Campaign Money
The New York Times
February 5, 2002

By SAM HOWE VERHOVEK

SEATTLE, Feb. 4 - As the driving
force behind several tax-cutting
initiatives, Tim Eyman has sometimes
been called the "unelected governor"
of Washington State.

But in a confession that stunned his
supporters and opponents alike, Mr.
Eyman, a 36-year-old businessman,
said today that he had lied when he told reporters in recent days that he had never
profited personally from the fund-raising drives he conducted for his initiatives.


At a news conference this morning, Mr. Eyman fought back tears as he announced
that he had diverted at least $45,000 he had raised for his tax revolt, and said he
would send a letter to supporters, "asking them what is the right thing to do" with
other money collected for the cause.

Mr. Eyman's confession came after he faced persistent questioning from The
Seattle Post-Intelligencer about his diversion of $165,000 in campaign donations to
a private account over which he had sole control. After days of denying that he
benefited personally from the move, Mr. Eyman called The Associated Press on
Sunday night to say that his statements to the newspaper constituted "the biggest
lie of my life."

"The fact is, it is true that I made money in past campaigns and planned to make
money on future campaigns," he said, criticizing himself for what he called his
"ugly and stinky and disgusting" behavior.

He said the $45,000 "went into the black hole, the family
budget," and he added: "It sounds so clichéd. But
everybody does it. Literally, everybody makes money in politics. I wasn't honest
about not being able to do initiatives for free."

Fellow members of Mr. Eyman's anti-tax group, Permanent Offense, said they were
shocked.

"He fooled me like he fooled everybody else, and I feel just as betrayed as
everybody else, and outraged," said Monte Benham, a group leader in eastern
Washington.

Mr. Benham also said he was proud of Mr. Eyman for coming forward and showing
"nerve and a lot of courage" in his confession.

Mr. Eyman, who runs a small company that makes wristwatches for fraternities
and sororities, had told The Post-Intelligencer that he made "plenty of money" at
his business and had no need to dip into campaign funds.

But at the news conference today, he said that running the tax-cut movement,
which has included campaigns for initiatives that rolled back state taxes and fees
and as recently as last November capped local property-tax increases, had
consumed an inordinate amount of time and hampered his business.

Because state campaign-finance laws give fund-raisers fairly broad discretion over
how money is spent, it is not clear that Mr. Eyman broke the law in paying himself,
since the money could be construed as a campaign expense for his salary. But he
could be in legal trouble if he lied about it on disclosure forms, said Doug Ellis, a
spokesman for the state Public Disclosure Commission.

Mr. Eyman, reached by telephone at his business today, said he had no further
comment. In his earlier remarks, he said he had done nothing illegal, adding: "The
biggest thing I'm guiltiest of is an enormous ego. Hubris."

And, he said, "This entire charade was set up so I could maintain a moral
superiority over our opposition, so I could say our opponents make money from
politics and I don't."

Mr. Eyman also said he did not believe the revelations would hurt the anti-tax
effort because, he said, "the initiatives were always about ideas, not about me."

Mr. Benham, the group member who criticized Mr. Eyman, agreed with that notion
and suggested that the flap had been stirred up by opponents of the tax-cutting
movement.

"They have bruised our cause," he said, "but they haven't killed us. We will come
back, and perhaps stronger than before."

nytimes.com



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (2648)2/5/2002 4:48:26 PM
From: Mephisto  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 15516
 
Bush budget marks the end of fiscal restraint. Clinton will be remembered as the most fiscally
conservative President of the modern era.

"Line on fiscal restraint hard to hold

Democrats seem ready to join the deficit parade


By Glenn Kessler
THE WASHINGTON POST

The following are excerpts:

THE BIPARTISAN EFFECT

"The president’s budget documents are filled with tough words about
accountability and better performance by government agencies. But having
already proposed a deficit,the administration will be hard-pressed to complain
about Congress’s profligate spending. "

2001 PORK

The administration’s decision to abandon the old constraints
on spending the payroll tax surpluses is a significant change from the
fiscal policy set in place by the Clinton administration and the
GOP-controlled Congress four years ago.

DEBT PAYOFF DEFERRED

Over the next 10 years, the administration projects that the budget
will continue to eat into Social Security and Medicare payroll tax
revenue every year, even if the budget overall returns to surplus.
This means the goal of paying off the nation’s public debt — which a
year ago appeared possible in the next five years — has been indefinitely
deferred. The failure to reduce the debt as planned will force
the government to pay an additional $1 trillion in interest costs over
the next decade.

The administration yesterday abandoned
year-by-year projections over the next decade, arguing they were unreliable.
Congressional Democrats, however, suggested the
numbers looked too grim in the later part of the decade.

Meanwhile, the president is pushing to make his signature tax cut
permanent beyond its current 2010 expiration date. But analysts
were struck by the fact that the administration chose to leave out
the one provision that would affect millions of taxpayers — extending
relief from the alternative minimum tax.
Temporary relief from the minimum tax, included in the tax bill,
expires in 2005, just when the
administration says surpluses will return.

WHITE HOUSE CONCESSION


The administration concedes that without changes, 39 million taxpayers in 2012,
compared with 1 million taxpayers in 2001, will have
to pay the higher tax, which was originally aimed at the very rich.
Virtually every tax analyst says this problem will have to be
addressed soon. But fixing it will reduce federal revenue by more
than $200 billion over the next decade — and the president’s budget
already contains nearly $700 billion in tax cuts.
Over the next five years, in projections before policy proposals
are taken into account, the White House also anticipates receiving $130
billion in higher revenue while spending $80 billion less on Medicare than projected
by the congressional analysts. The forecasts are so
tight over the next few years that such subtle disputes could mean
the difference between deficits and surpluses.