Byron York of the Washington Examiner writes about a special bill named after House Ways & Means Chairman Charlie Rangel:
“Rangel Rule Act of 2009“, [is] the brainchild of Rep. John Carter, a Texas Republican who spent two decades as a judge before coming to the House in 2002. H.R. 735 would require the IRS to give everyone the same kid-glove treatment it gave Rangel. …
Under H.R. 735, if you’re caught cheating on your taxes, you would pay what you owe, then write “Rangel Rule” at the top of your return, and you wouldn’t be charged any penalty or interest. That way, Carter said when he introduced the bill, ordinary taxpayers would be “treated with the same courtesy that, it seems, the IRS is treating the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee.”
This is not a joke, York says, even though House democrats certainly see it that way:
Of course Carter’s bill doesn’t have a chance. Democrats undoubtedly see it as a joke. But the Rangel case is very, very serious.
If you don’t think so, just look at this, from the front page of the Oct. 28, 2008 Washington Post: “Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska, one of Congress’s most powerful Republicans, was convicted yesterday of lying on financial disclosure forms to conceal his receipt of about $250,000 in gifts and expensive renovations to his house. …”
Stevens’ conviction was later thrown out because of prosecutorial misconduct, but the message was clear: This is the kind of thing you can go to jail for.
Rangel appears to have hidden greater sums of money than Stevens allegedly did. Democratic leaders don’t want to face it now, but it’s just a matter of time before they’re forced to admit they have a serious Rangel problem.
Related Posts:
- Did House Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel Pull a Blagojevich?
- Representative Charlie Rangel Hires Forensic Accounting Firm to Examine his Tax Returns
- Give Me that Tax Return Charlie Rangel Before You Hurt Yourself
- No Hablas Español, Señor Rangel?
7 responses so far ↓
1 tubino // Sep 3, 2009 at 1:06 pm
I think we ought to have more bills like this. Think of the Tom Ridge Rule (okay to use fear politically, like terrorists do). Or the Cheney Rule (shoot a man in the face, avoid alcohol testing, demand an apology for getting in the way of buckshot).
The possibilities are endless. Start a war on lies, get off with the 9-11 Rule. Plunge the country into deficits with tax cuts for the wealthy, get off with the Reagan Rule.
2 Peter // Sep 3, 2009 at 1:33 pm
Tubino,
Good idea!
How about an Al Gore Rule (use fear politically on the issue of climate change, like terrorists do).
And an Al Gore Rule #2 (use fear politically by suggesting that Republicans want to return the country back to the days of Jim Crow.)
And a Pelosi Rule (use fear politically to make people fear Republican healthcare protesters as swastika wearing Nazis).
Oh, and don’t forget the Democrats favorite rule, the Frighten Granny Rule (use fear politically by telling old folks that Republicans want to take away their social security benefits).
I think you’re on to something, my friend.
3 Rabbot // Sep 5, 2009 at 8:25 am
Some pigs are more equal then others!
4 Rabbot // Sep 5, 2009 at 8:27 am
If it were buckshot the man would be dead.
period
5 Why Shouldn’t Top Tax Writer Rangel Pay Penalties and Interest? // Oct 21, 2009 at 4:14 pm
[...] [...]
6 Geithner Penalty Waiver Act of 2009 // Dec 2, 2009 at 12:04 pm
[...] [...]
7 Matt // Feb 5, 2010 at 12:04 pm
Tubino’s point is that some Republicans are bad, so its ok? That seems to be the new rule as Obama’s only term heads toward Lame Duck.
Leave a Comment