Democrats Should Make Bush Pay For War-Funding« Thread Started on Feb 1, 2007, 2:43am » --------------------------------------------------------------------------------Democrats Should Make Bush Pay For War-Funding (16 comments ) READ MORE: Jonathan Tasini read at source> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jonathan- ... 09.htmlWhy not call the president's bluff on his escalation plan and continued funding for the war--using the very principle the Democrats declared would be a rock-solid commitment for all new spending? Pay as you go or, in Beltway lingo, "pay-go." Personally, I do not support the obsession with the deficit as a short-term emergency.BUT, if the party is going to promote such a principle when it comes to domestic spending, then it should apply to the war, too. Within the coming weeks, the president is expected to ask Congress for an "emergency supplemental" for at least an additional $100 billion to keep the bombs dropping and the bodies piling up in Iraq.There are a lot of ways to force a "pay-go" provision. My own favorite: when the appropriation reaches the Ways and Means Committee, Charlie Rangel, the chair of the committee (who has also pushed legislation to re-institute a military draft), could attach an amendment stating that every dollar has to be paid for by hiking the taxes of the top one percent of the country, effectively rolling back the Bush tax cuts for the very rich. As I've pointed out before, the top 1 percent--those who pull in at least $1.3 million a year--will pocket more than $347 billion in the next four years if Congress does not roll-back the tax cuts. According to data from Citizens for Tax Justice, if Congress just rolled back the tax cuts on that top 1 percent for just 2007 and 2008, it would reap $136 billion--probably enough to cover the costs of the emergency supplemental request.What would the president and Republicans say then? No, we won't ask the richest people in the country, who have carried virtually none of the sacrifice of the war and occupation, to pay up? Indeed, while working-class and poor American of all races have been dying and suffering grave wounds on the battlefield, the top one percent has been pocketing staggering amounts of money. Under such a condition for passing the supplemental, I'd wager the authorization for that money would be dead in the water.Understand, I support legislative initiatives pushed by the Progressive Caucus members of the House (and driven by grassroots efforts spearheaded by Progressive Democrats of America) to end funding for the war and allocate money only for safe, rapid withdrawal of the troops and reconstruction of Iraq. But, if the funding for the war cannot be stopped, the sacrifices should be born by everyone in the country.