Bachmann Evades Reality, Brings Back Fictitious ‘Death Panels’, Favors Corporations Over Taxpayers

(This post originally published at

Republican Minnesota Congresswoman and 2012 presidential candidate Michele Bachmann is no stranger to lying or dodging questions in order to get her way – especially when “her way” means securing the votes of the less-informed.

A few months back, I wrote a post that highlighted some of the “Queen of Rage’s” best takes on  the Affordable Care Act – better known in her circles as “Obamacare”. Then soon-to-be Iowa Straw Poll victor argued many untrue themes – all of which are thoroughly debunked by anyone willing to read or listen to reason.

Most recently, at a town hall meeting in South Carolina, Bachmann equated “Obamacare” as being the end to Medicare and the means to an end for seniors; elderly Americans who would no doubt be sentenced to an end-of-life 15-person panel Board of Death Approval.

Meanwhile, on the economy, the Queen herself continues to vilify the extension of unemployment benefits yet glorifies the need for lowering the corporate tax rate. According to Bachmann, the unemployed must go without benefits, since  “I think it would be very difficult for us to do because we frankly don’t have the money. That’s the bottom line in the United States.

Yet, in the very same dialogue, she insists that “… what will lead to job creation is taking the United States down from about the top corporate tax rate in the world at 34 percent down to something that is far more competitive.

Even though American corporations are currently holding trillions of dollars in cash reserves and are reporting record-high profits, a potential President Bachmann would like to see the corporate tax rate drop from 34% to 9% – costing American taxpayers well over $2 trillion in lost revenues even after a two-term presidency for the Congresswoman. Apparently we “have the money” for that.

A far more modest proposal – dropping the corporate tax rate from 34% to 25% (Paul Ryan’s plan) – would still cost the country around $915 billion.

But all that extra money for corporations means more jobs for Americans, right? Actually, no – but don’t wait for Congresswoman Bachmann to get to that part. As is common with her party’s rhetoric, presenting all the facts is bad for campaign season.

What she so carefully leaves out is that – while a 34% tax rate seems a bit steep – it really does not represent the full picture. In fact, when accurately compared with other advanced economies, companies doing business in the U.S. already pay low taxes – yet our unemployment rate is still far too high.

While 34% is technically higher than most major economies, most American-based companies are paying much less  due to loopholes and deductions (think G.E.) – such that the effective tax rate for corporations is really closer to 13% (low by international standards) and has been for years. Yet, no jobs.

So we don’t have money to help citizens, but we do have money to help corporations in the hopes that the free market will provide for citizens – even though, as evident from 2000-2008 under lax tax rates and Republican-supported deregulation, it has and will not.

Where does that leave us – the working, citizen taxpayers just trying to make ends meet? Where does that leave the country? If the Federal government opts to slash revenues by cutting the corporate tax rate under the guise of job creation, what does that do to our deficit?

In recent months, there has been much political speculation and pandering over the mystical “debt ceiling” debate – raise it, leave it, break it, etc. Congresswoman Bachmann – a very vocal opponent of raising the ceiling (or, more accurately, opponent of whatever President Obama suggested) – told ABC’s Jake Tapper that, even though the ceiling was ultimately raised, her plan against it would have been a better decision.

When confronted with the minor detail of government being required to immediately slash 40% of spending literally overnight, Bachmann had no retort. Instead, she laid out programs she would NOT cut – including Social Security and military spending.

Well, immediately what we need to do is recognize that we will tell the markets that we will pay the interest on the debt, don’t worry about default,” said Bachmann. “Number two, we will pay our military, and anyone who’s currently on Social Security, you get paid.

Without significant spending cuts to Social Security and military, a 40% cut in government spending would then reduce education, Medicare/Medicaid, veterans’ benefits and IRS refund spending by nearly 90 percent. And even that still would not be enough to make up the difference.

But beyond that,” added Bachmann, “I would bring all members of Congress together – and this isn’t some project for ten years, fifteen years down the road – and we’re going to reform entitlements.

And bring on yet another national recession while we’re at it. Go Team Bachmann!

– Follow Joe Ascanio on Twitter @onewhiteduck as well as his personal feed @joeascanio