(Dr. Jerome R. Corsi/Tea Party) – “Bye, Bye, Boehner,” was the message of last week’s tax revolt among House Republicans who refused to go along with the Speaker’s proposed “Plan B.”
The message was loud and clear: Republicans in the House do not want to face re-election in 2014 on a record that appeared to have raised taxes, even if Boehner’s carefully crafted Plan B technically avoided any specified tax rate increases.
Nothing testified to the strength of tax expert Grover Norquist’s “no tax increase” pledge than watching the Republican caucus in the House reject Boehner’s plea to compromise with the White House.
What last week made clear is the Tea Party antipathy to taxes is alive and well in the Republican controlled House of Representatives.
What this signals is nothing less than the rebirth of the Tea Party in 2013.
The moment House Republicans rejected Boehner’s tax compromise, the chances Boehner will be dumped as House Speaker in the new Congress increased dramatically.
What was Plan B?
Rather than getting the House to pass once again the Ryan Plan for reducing the deficit without raising tax rates, Boehner’s “Plan B” strategy involved the House voting to make permanent the Bush tax cuts for all tax for taxpayers earning less than $1 million, while doing nothing to extend the Bush tax cuts for taxpayers earning more than $1 million.
“I’m not sure the strategy will work,” Norquist correctly predicted in an exclusive interview with the author before the House Republicans in a closed caucus rejected the plan.
Norquist, president and founder of Americans for Tax Reform, distinguished that while his organization did not propose or endorse Boehner’s Plan B, the Boehner gambit does not include any tax increases of any kind, hence Plan B technically does not violate his organization’s famous no-tax pledge that Republican members of Congress have signed since 1986.
Norquist’s preferred suggestions involved urging the House to press the Senate to debate the Ryan plan already passed by the House and forcing Obama to deliver his promised transparency in government by putting the fiscal cliff debates on C-Span, so the American people could see the process first hand.
“By seeking to pass Plan B, Boehner and the Republican leadership in Congress wanted to shift the burden of the fiscal cliff back on President Obama and the Democrats in Congress,” he argued, explaining the gambit. “The Senate Democrats will have a chance to pass the bill or be responsible for the biggest tax increase in American history.”
Even though Obama has called on Congress to pass a pledge not to raise taxes on taxpayers earning less that $250,000 a year, the White House has vowed to veto Boehner’s Plan B extending permanent tax cuts to all but obvious millionaires earning more than $ 1million a year.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has publicly announced he will not allow Boehner’s Plan B to come up for a vote in the Senate.
“This is different from Reid saying claiming he has commitments from enough Democratic Senators to defeat Boehner’s Plan B,” Norquist noted. “What concerns Reid is there may be enough Democratic Senators facing tough re-election campaigns in 2014 that Plan B would pass the Senate if it came up for a vote.”
Norquist further told WND that Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has suggested there may have been a way to force a Senate vote on Boehner’s Plan B, even if Reid opposes the measure coming to the floor.
“Boehner’s goal was to force the establishment press to begin asking the Obama administration the obvious questions that need to be asked,” he suggested. “Questions such as, ‘Does the White House plan to propose a budget to Congress in the first year of Obama’s second term?’”
Norquist did not reject Boehner completely, noting that on key tests in Obama’s first term, Boehner held Republicans in the House together.
“During the $787 billion stimulus spending debate in 2009, Boehner keep every Republican in the House from voting for Obama’s spending measure, even though there were generous appropriations coming to Republican districts as part of the planned stimulus spending,” he noted.
The Obama stimulus plan, passed the House as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 on Jan. 28, 2009, in a 244-188 vote, with 177 Republicans voting against the bill and no Republicans voting for the measure, with one Republican not voting.
“If Republicans in the House had voted for Obama’s stimulus, the Tea Party may never have been born,” he said. “Americans disgusted with government spending would just have blamed both parties.”
In 2013, Norquist predicted, the Tea Party will experience a dramatic growth in numbers.
“The Tea Party was born after the stimulus bill passed because millions of Americans felt the federal government was spending too much,” he said. “In Obama’s second term, the reality is going to be that the federal government is spending too much, taxing too much, and regulating too much. That’s the same triple hit that led to the Reagan Revolution in the 1980s.”
Dr. Jerome Corsi, PhD is the founder of the 1776 Nation and chief writer for the Tea Party Research Team of www.TeaParty.org. He has authored many books, including No. 1 N.Y. Times best-sellers “The Obama Nation” and “Unfit for Command.”