Skip to main content

Yes, this makes me mad.  How are we going to convince the public we stand for the little guy when we provide the margin of victory for the republicans all the time?  From David Sirota!

Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D) last night offered her legislation to ban government contracts from going to companies that abuse offshore tax loopholes and evade U.S. taxes. In 2002, DeLauro actually passed this legislation as part of the bill creating the Department of Homeland Security, as Democrats stayed unified, and Republicans capitulated (unfortunately, it was later removed in the final bill). This year, however, 28 Democrats sold out to Corporate America, and helped defeat the legislation outright.

That's right, when DeLauro offered her legislation this time around, she attracted 20 Republican votes - plenty to pass the legislation if her own party had stood up and done the right thing. However, 28 Democrats voted against the legislation, siding with the companies that have the nerve to openly abuse tax loopholes. These companies want to be able to get fat off government contracts, even though they are ripping off U.S. taxpayers at a time of war and record deficits. Yet, instead of prohibiting those contracts from going to these unpatriotic companies, 28 Democrats joined with 203 Republicans to sell out and say bilking America is A.O.K.

Particularly confusing/disappointing was Rep. Rahm Emanuel's (D-IL) vote against DeLauro's legislation. He actually penned a 2003 op-ed in the Wall Street Journal where he advocated "an aggressive attack on the tax code" that "should start with corporate expatriates" (you can also see the op-ed here). He rightly chastised President Bush for "block[ing] Democratic efforts to stop American companies from incorporating through a postal drop in island tax-havens" and said he was appalled that "some corporations are actually rewarded with federal contracts while they move their corporate headquarters to Bermuda" - the very thing that the legislation he voted against would have stopped.

Emanuel also trumpeted himself as a great fighter against these loopholes, telling the Christian Science Monitor that "I think we should be the party of tax reform, massive tax reform, because the code is skewed to those who have lawyers, accountants, and people who can think of schemes. I know of no middle-class family that sets up a shelter in Bermuda to pay for college education for the kids." Yet, his vote against DeLauro's legislation puts him on the side of those who support rewarding these companies that abuse tax loopholes with government contracts.

Delauro had 20 republican votes, and the 28 dems blocked. It is that simple.

Originally posted to NoAlternative on Sun Jul 03, 2005 at 04:19 PM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Who, specifically? (none)


    by NorCalJim on Sun Jul 03, 2005 at 04:24:06 PM PDT

  •  Plain and simple (none)
    This stinks.

    This was part of Kerry's campaign platform last year.  What the hell are these traitors doing sabotaging it?

    It is a very mixed blessing to be brought back from the dead.

    by Steven D on Sun Jul 03, 2005 at 04:24:27 PM PDT

  •  Roll Call (none)
    Green, Gene
    Lofgren, Zoe
    Miller (NC)
    Moore (KS)
    Moran (VA)
    Price (NC)
    Sanchez, Loretta
    Scott (VA)
    Thompson (CA)

  •  Charters versus abuse (4.00)
    An amendment to prohibit use of funds in the bill to enter into any contract with an incorporated entity where such entity's sealed bid or competitive proposal shows that such entity is incorporated or chartered in Bermuda, Barbados, the Cayman Islands, Antigua, or Panama.

    As best as I can tell, this is the text of the DeLauro amendment.  The problem that I see with it is that it presumptively assumes that charter in Bermuda, Barbados, the Cayman Islands, Antigua, and Panama is de facto abuse of tax laws.  I think that the language could have been better framed.  Why these countries and not others?  What if Bermuda changed its tax laws next month to prevent this sort of abuse?

    DeLauro should go back and get better language for this restriction.

    But as a general principle, you are correct.  Democrats in the House better start voting together.

    The revolution starts now--in your own back yard, in your own home town

    by TarheelDem on Sun Jul 03, 2005 at 04:32:56 PM PDT

    •  Any language problem (none)
      could have been cleared up if the Senate passed its version.

      Now it's not likely the Senate controlled by the GOP would have passed such a bill, but why should we be giving the GOP political cover on this is my reaction.

      It is a very mixed blessing to be brought back from the dead.

      by Steven D on Sun Jul 03, 2005 at 04:39:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I agree (none)
        But if you are the one sitting in the House chamber, it probably does not look so clearly an open and shut case.

        I am sure that before each vote, each Democrat in Congress sees every possible negative ad that can be made out of the vote.  I'm not sure that they see it in "political cover" terms yet.

        It just makes me a little more angry at the Democrats in the North Carolina delegation.

        But the legal principle is really shaky.  It would be much better to restrict contracts to companies incorporated in the US.

        The revolution starts now--in your own back yard, in your own home town

        by TarheelDem on Sun Jul 03, 2005 at 04:50:50 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Barney Frank MA (none)
      speaking about the Republicans new eminent domain law said (approximately) I disagree with the language of parts of this legislation.  However, if I indulged myself in voting based on my literary critiques of legislation, I would never vote for any legislation.

      Barney is right.  Vote on the substance and straighten it out in committee.

  •  THIS drives me nuts. (none)
    Thank you for diarying this, especially on the weekend of the Fourth.  What a scam.

    I'm not versed in tax law but how, on God's green earth, can U.S. corporations dodge taxes by moving offshore?

    Does anyone have a list of corporations that do this?

  •  Phone Numbers (none)
    Blumenauer (OR) (202) 225-4811
    Boren (OK) (202) 225-2701
    Boswell (IA) (202) 225-3806
    Boyd (FL) (202) 225-5235
    Butterfield (NC) (202) 225-3101
    Dicks (WA) (202) 225-5916
    Emanuel (IL) (202)-225-4061
    Etheridge (NC) (202) 225-4531
    Green, Gene (TX) (202) 225-1688
    Hooley (OR) (202) 225-5711
    Jefferson (LA) (202) 225-6636
    Lofgren, Zoe (CA) 202-225-3072
    Matheson (UT) (202) 225-3011
    Melancon (LA) 202-225-4031
    Miller (NC)  (202) 225-3032
    Moore (KS)  (202) 225-2865
    Moran (VA) (202) 225-4376
    Murtha (PA) (202)-225-2065
    Pomeroy (ND) (202) 225-2611
    Price (NC) (202)-225-1784
    Sanchez, Loretta (CA) 202-225-6676
    Scott (VA) (202) 225-8351
    Snyder (AK) (202)-225-2506
    Spratt (SC) (202)-225-5501
    Tanner (TN) (202) 225-4714
    Thompson (CA) (202) 225-3311
    Waters (CA)  (202)-225-2201  Maxine Waters? I can't believe it!
    Watt (NC) (202) 225-1510

    " admirable evasion of whoremaster man, to lay his goatish disposition to the charge of a star!"

    King Lear

    by Norwell on Sun Jul 03, 2005 at 05:03:22 PM PDT

  •  corporate party (none)
    This has happened over and over where we have corporate party members masquerading as Democrats.

    Dean's proof of small contributions over the Internet to raise the huge sums of money needed to run any political campaign is helping some to rid oursevles of this constant voting for multinational corporate interests instead of the interests of the nation-state.

    I think though we're not going to rid of it until some major campaign and lobbying reforms are done.

    In 2004, there were multiple candidates who lost dramatically simply because they did not have large corporate donors and were outspent...many who wanted to stop awarding government contracts to offshore corporations that also were offshore outsourcing jobs.  (Accenture is the largest example).

    One to me that is quite simple that would help enormously is to demand that Media give free TV advertising spots to political candidates in all sorts of time slots as a public service as well as in return for being awarded free use of the airwaves.

    In a Discovery Times documentary on the 2004 Democratic primary and it was the largest expense of a campaign to run TV ads.

    by Robert Oak on Sun Jul 03, 2005 at 05:20:03 PM PDT

  •  I suppose each (none)
    had their own reasons for voting the way they did, but one piece of legislation does not necessarily show a generalized problem with all democrats or all democrats in congress.

    Power always thinks... that it is doing God's service when it is violating all his laws....John Adams

    by nupstateny on Sun Jul 03, 2005 at 05:23:28 PM PDT

    •  uhhhh (none)
      Why don't you look at the rest of the legislation passed in Congress over the past 30 years and get back to us.

      What are you talking about?

      " admirable evasion of whoremaster man, to lay his goatish disposition to the charge of a star!"

      King Lear

      by Norwell on Sun Jul 03, 2005 at 05:32:56 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  OK, 28 Dems screwed up, (none)
    and I don't like it either.

    But almost 200 Republicans voted to protect corporate tax cheats.

    This should help a lot of Dem challengers next year.

    How about a list of GOP Reps who got less than 55 percent last time who voted against American taxpayers on this?

    The Republicans want to cut YOUR Social Security benefits.

    by devtob on Sun Jul 03, 2005 at 05:54:28 PM PDT

  •  Moran, VA? (none)
    I would really like to know why my liberal Democrat Rep Jim Moran voted no on this bill.

    Maybe he thinks tax dodges are a good thing, being that he probably has more lobbyists living in his district than any other person in Congress.

    I will be calling his office Tuesday to find out why, and, if no one beats me to it, reporting back to all of you on his answer.

  •  Ok, the sunlight showed you something (none)
    it's called a price tag.

    I've been a democrat since 1958, a union carpenter since 1960. For years I've been complaining about the very low return on the PAC money we've invested. Also, the free volunteer hours doing all kinds of things for the democratic party.

    It's got to and it will change.

    One vote doesn't mean the Congressman is bad but there should be some type of accounting, there should be reasons given.

    I admit to being hardline. It's my Irish/American style. But letting these guys off the hook time after time isn't too productive.

    We have to let our Congressmen know that there is going to be change for the betterment of America with or without them.

    Personally I have no problem voting against a democrat that STEALS from us. I think that truth and honesty should always prevail.

    Senator Reid needs to talk to each brother that voted with corporate America and let them know it isn't going to happen anymore.

    I just did some research a month ago on off shore abuses, I'll try to find the link and post it back here. The numbers are enormous.

  •  Here's a worthy read (none)
    Here is two links, the first gets to the home page and the second gets you to all kinds of good reading and links.

    Take notice, the corporate off shore tax schemes amounted to trillions (more then our national debt total) of dollars last year alone.

    The politicians regardless their party affiliation that helps these crooks need to be voted out of office. That may sound hardline but you and your kids are paying through the nose because of this shit.

    If a democrat or a republican stoled your kids education, ice cream cone, whatever, would you care what party he represented?

    Now then: ask yourself this easy question. What percentage of the general revenue raised through taxes last year did the corporations pay?

    10%   Ten louzy percent.

    Now then: ask yourself how much your income taxes represented.

    43% individual income taxes
    39% social security taxes
    10% corporate income taxes
    4% excise taxes
    4% misc. taxes

    Read the above very carefully. If you are not outraged let me ask you a question. Why?

    Now go back up and read what NoAlternative posted in this diary. The 28 democrats betrayed your trust. They didn't run on those issues. They lied. They are profound foul liars.

    If you want to vote for a liar that is stealing from you and your family, go ahead. I don't play those games.

    The major federal excise taxes are levied on transportation fuels, alcohol, tobacco, telephones and domestic air transport.

    Misc. taxes consist of taxes on estate, gift, customs and miscellaneous taxes.

    When all else is said and done, ask the 28 democrats if they helped spend the surplus funds from 150 trust accounts that they were entrusted to protect.

    One of those trust accounts is owed 1.7 trillion dollars. They have spent every penny of it. It's known as social security trust fund.

    Folks, this is some serious shit.

    Congress owes 3.3 trillion dollars to the 150 trust accounts. They spent every penny. Our money.

    And now they spent their souls to protect corporate America.

  •  Dino? (none)
    I don't know what a Dino is but I do know what a foul profound liar is and I'd call any of them that to their face.

    I just re-read this diary, we blow windy about everything but the truth. These 28 dems should at the very least give an explanation to the folks back home that they represent.

    There can only be two explanations, they didn't know or they did. Both harmed us.

    Incompetent or crooked, which one?

    Folks, you need to understand THIS:

    the 1.7 trillion dollars owed to social security is TAX money you and your employer paid into the US Treasury. The Treasury put it into the general revenue fund. The Treasury put special issue bonds into the social security fund to acknowledge the fact that our money is owed to us.

    President Bush told America that these were worthless IOUs.

    YOU HAVE TO THINK FOR YOURSELF. He finally told you the TRUTH and everyone got pissed off because they didn't know it was the truth.

    Think about that. We are ignorant and get pissed off because the truth was uttered from one of the biggest liars in the country.

    The special issue bonds pay any interest earned in additional special issue bonds. They are NON- MARKETABLE. They are an accounting entry.

    Can these IOUs be cashed in? Yes!!!!!!!

    But for God's sake, think about this.

    The IOUs can be cashed in IF (notice caps) we supply the cash.

    General revenue pays all governmental debt.

    Remember where general revenue comes from?

    43% individual income taxes
    39% social security taxes
    10% corporate income taxes
    4% excise taxes
    4% misc. taxes

    There is no difference between the government and us. We are the government. Why do we "think" that the government has to cash the bonds? Like it's some strange separate entity that has money.

    We pay the debts of America. Our TAXES pay the debts of America.

    If the US Treasury borrows money from China, Japan, bankers, etc., we have to pay it back. Our TAXES pay it back.

    If the government has money printed, it is borrowed from the Federal Reserve Bank which is neither federal or reserve. It's a PRIVATE BANK.

    Our TAXES have to pay it back and our TAXES pay any interest owed.

    Hello?  Now tell me I won't call Maxine or any of the other politicians whether democrat or republican that they are foul liars. They are.

    They are thieves.

    We were pissed off at Bush because he told the truth. Man, that is lame. He tells us lies and we keep our mouths shut.

    If you can't understand this, please, get some help. Print it out and ask someone to explain it to you. Read about our government, our money, our political system, etc.

    We americans are in real bad shape. We are going to lose everything that was given us because we didn't pay attention.  That's sad.

Click here for the mobile view of the site