From billions to trillions; Obama is campaigning to move up the tax-raising food chain.

After a busy primary season it's time to get back to Obama Watch, the series we started back in February to show why Americans will reject Barack's far left agenda in November.  We've known for a long time that this would come down to a McCain-Obama showdown, but now it's official.  With the departure of Hillary Clinton from the presidential race the Democrats have officially picked a candidate from the far left as their nominee for November.  As we've already proved in the past, Obama's votes and his positions on issues are out of touch with the majority of the electorate. I think that's the poison pill for him in the General, not his association with anti-American preachers (though that doesn't help either).

Not surprisingly, the majority of the bad votes in Senator Obama's record happened in 2003, right after the Democrats gained control of the State Senate.  In specific, I chose the period between March and June of that year.  In Obama's short political career this was the first time his party was "in charge".  Obama's votes during that three-month period is good foresight into what Barack would do if elected President (with a Democrat controlled Congress carrying the legislation).  Researching his record on taxes was fun.  Reading transcripts from legislative sessions is usually a bore, but not here.  Illinois Republicans didn't take well to watching the Democrats, in a matter of months, destroy much of the good they had done during the past decade.   

The first vote marks the first of a series to create exceptions to the "tax cap" legislation that was passed in 1991. Ignoring that this was the most popular reform in Illinois in the past 15 years, the first chance the Democrats had a chance to, they began poking holes in the system.  Without further ado:

March 6, 2003 - SB83 (Link): Obama voted "AYE" to create the first in the series of exceptions; Senator Lauzen (R-Aurora), led the charge against the bill because of a last minute amendment by Senator Link (D-Lake Bluff) which allowed the Cook County Forest Preserve District to borrow one hundred million dollars without asking the voters, by creating an exception to the tax caps:

Why would we not ask the voters? What's your philosophical concept of why not ask the voters before we obligate them with a hundred million dollars' worth of additional debt?

Once the rest of the Republicans took notice of the amendment, they called for a caucus meeting for fifteen minutes.  The Democrats fought it, but were ultimately pushed into complying with traditional Senatorial rules and procedures.  Nonetheless the bill passed, and so it began.   

March 26, 2003 - SB22 (Woolard): Obama voted "AYE" to create another exception to the tax caps; this bill was camouflaged as "security for our kids" legislation, with a tax increase.  Once again Senator Lauzen, to no surprise, rose in opposition and asked the Democrats why they didn't believe the public should have a voice in this decision:

Why don't we have confidence enough in our parents, in taxpayers, that you ask us for whatever improvements needs to be done to protect the life and safety of our children, we're going to vote no on that in a referendum? Why don't we just ask the voters??

The Democrats had a hard time arguing against Lauzen on the merits of the voters' will, but chose to ignore it anyway.  As Obama sat quietly on the sidelines, Senator Woolard (D-Benton) articulated his party's position:

We believe that if, in fact, the voters in that particular district request that that vote be taken, we -- we've reduced the number of registered voters that have to sign a card to five percent.  And if that comes forward, then it's mandated that the school board does go to referendum, and I believe that addresses the concerns that you have.

In other words, if the voters don't want their taxes raised they're the ones that have to start a referendum, not the other way around as the law intended.  The burden is on the taxpayers.  What a twisted view of Democracy.

April 4, 2003 - SB1049 (Walsh): Obama voted "AYE" on another exception to the tax caps; this one for school districts, specifically for contributions to the IMRF fund, for Medicare A & B coverage, and coverage under the federal insurance contributions.  At this point the Republicans knew they couldn't stop most of the Democrats' tax increases but rose in opposition anyway.  Senator Roskam (now a Congressman representing Illinois' 6th CD) spoke about the Democrats' hypocrisy on tax caps:

Senator Walsh put it well when he acknowledged that taxes are going to go up.  There's no doubt about it.  And we don't get it both ways in this Chamber.  We don't get to say "We support the tax cap, except." We don't get to do that.  We either support the tax cap or we throw the tax cap under the bus.

Obama voted aye, the bill passed, and taxes went up.  Again. 

April 9, 2003 - SB315 (Viverito): Obama voted "AYE" on another tax cap exception; this one being sold by the Democrats as "security for our waterways"; the water district in question had not held a referendum in thirty years, but Democrats chose to go around the tax cap instead of asking the voters, with Obama's crew giving the nature of the "emergency" as a reason to raise taxes.  We're familiar with that one in California...

Note that all those votes to go around the tax cap could have been accomplished by giving the voters a choice through a referendum.  The tax cap legislation was built that way for a reason.  If Obama thought these taxes were so important and urgent, as his party's talking points clearly illustratre, why wouldn't the voters agree?  Well, Barack and his friends weren't done yet.  One day would top off their three month tax-raising crusade. 

The title of this post includes a reference to one day; one infamous day.  In this case it was May 31, 2003.  The day Obama and his colleagues passed one and a half billion dollars worth of new taxes; most of it in less than fifteen minutes.  The day Obama voted for one of the most despised taxes in America: the death tax.  Here are the back-to-back votes, carried by the "Tax Tag Team":  

Concurrence Vote on HA04 to SB1733: Obama voted "AYE" on an amendment that created the Gas Use Tax Act.  At a time when natural gas prices had tripled in the state in the last four years Obama and his friends decided that adding an extra 5% wouldn't hurt. Prices have doubled since then.

Concurrence Vote on HA02 to SB1774: Obama voted "AYE" on an amendment that increased the liquor tax collection discount, and increased the license fee imposed on liquor retailers from $174 a year to $500, with $250 of the increase going straight to the general fund.  It also abolished any end of year balance being credited to licensees.  To top it off it also forced cigarrette sellers to pay the "tax stamp" on behalf of consumers before they actually made the sale of those cigarrettes.  I specially liked a line by Democrat Senator Teddy Link (self-admitted member of the "tax tag team") about how they're "just trying to change the taxes in this state to make 'em fair to everybody".  Please.

Concurrence Vote on HA02 to SB 1725: To say that Barack and his friends saved the best for last would be an understatement.  To end the day Obama voted "AYE" on an amendment that effectively created the "death tax" in Illinois by decoupling it from the federal tax.  Republican Senator Dave Sullivan described his party's disgust:

Ladies and gentlemen of the Senate, death should not be a taxable event.  In three bills tonight we are raising approximately 1.2 billion dollars in tax increases on about fifteen minutes of debate.  That's eighty million dollars per minute.  Even by State spending standards that's obscene.  The public should be outraged by what is going on here tonight.

Eighty million dollars per minute.  To borrow a line from Senator McCain: even a drunken sailor would resent that.

Of course none of these votes would have passed if the Republicans would have been able to swing enough Dem votes in the Senate to pass SJRCA57 back in 1998; which would have required any new tax increases in Illinois to pass a 3/5s vote of both houses.  For the record, Obama voted "NAY" on that one in case you were wondering. 

With the Democrats in the House and the Senate promising at least one trillion dollars in new tax increases, can we afford to have the only person with the veto pen going from billions to trillions by sitting on the sidelines? I think not.