Wednesday, December 02, 2009
If the United States is going to send another 30,000 soldiers to Afghanistan, which means billions of dollars more in costs, then the government should have the ability to pay for it, instead of just borrowing more money or robbing other programs of their funding. This is the belief of Representative David Obey (D-WI), chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, who has introduced the Share the Sacrifice Act of 2010. The measure would add a 1% surtax on income taxes beginning in 2011 (or 2012 if President Barack Obama deems the economy too weak to impose the tax). For Americans earning more than $150,000 a year, the tax would amount to another $220. For families earning $50,000 annually, they would have to pay about $50 more in taxes.
“Regardless of whether one favors the war or not, if it is to be fought, it ought to be paid for,” says Obey, who admits his plan will have a tough time gaining support. “The problem in this country is that the only people who have been asked to sacrifice are military families, and they have had to go to the well again and again and again, and everybody else is blithely unaffected by the war.”
-Noel Brinkerhoff
'If It is to be Fought, It Ought to be Paid for' (by Walter Pincus, Washington Post)
Afghan War Surtax (by Jamie Dupree, WSB Radio)
HR 4130 (House Appropriations Committee) (PDF)
Comments