Someone Explain This To Me

We have a series of failed wars that are going to cost $2.4 trillion dollars in the future. We have a growing health care crisis with no end in sight unless the government gets involved in at least a partial way to effect a solution. We have a continuation of natural disasters that could be managed if heartless governments would managed to spend one nickel on fire prevention. Not to mention that we have an ongoing catastrophe in the nation's housing markets that are going to shrink revenue practically everywhere.

In this environment, Charlie Rangel and the Democrats have proposed a revenue-neutral tax plan?

I appreciate some of the elements to it, like eliminating the AMT (which was close to hitting the middle class) and reducing the corporate tax rate in exchange for closing up some loopholes, but let's face facts. We're in need of some major revenue, and notably, polling has shown that people are willing to pay higher taxes in exchange for increased services.

This plan is going nowhere as long as George Bush is President, but it provides a blueprint for future efforts under a potential Democratic Administration. People have to wake up and understand that taxes are the price you pay for a free society, and that in a time of looming recession, America is worth paying for. That's fiscally responsible. Spending can be cut back in some places, but ultimately, to get the change we really need, it's going to take more revenue. Democrats have to be able to make the sale so we can get back to some sanity in government.