Has your elected official signed the Taxpayer Protection Pledge?


New IRS Form Proves Obama Lied About Individual Mandate Tax

Posted by John Kartch and Ryan Ellis on Friday, July 25th, 2014, 10:59 AM PERMALINK

On Thursday the IRS released a slew of draft 2014 tax forms. The new draft Form 1040 shows a new surtax line has been created for the payment of the individual mandate surtax – see line 61 of the 1040:

President Obama has repeatedly denied that the surtax is in fact actually a tax. The most prominent example was a heated exchange on ABC’s This Week in Sept. 2009, when George Stephanopoulos confronted Obama with a dictionary:

STEPHANOPOULOS: I -- I don't think I'm making it up. Merriam Webster's Dictionary: Tax -- "a charge, usually of money, imposed by authority on persons or property for public purposes."

OBAMA: George, the fact that you looked up Merriam's Dictionary, the definition of tax increase, indicates to me that you're stretching a little bit right now. Otherwise, you wouldn't have gone to the dictionary to check on the definition. I mean what...

STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, no, but...

OBAMA: ...what you're saying is...

STEPHANOPOULOS: I wanted to check for myself. But your critics say it is a tax increase.

OBAMA: My critics say everything is a tax increase. My critics say that I'm taking over every sector of the economy. You know that.

Look, we can have a legitimate debate about whether or not we're going to have an individual mandate or not, but...

STEPHANOPOULOS: But you reject that it's a tax increase?

OBAMA: I absolutely reject that notion. [Transcript]



It was always obvious that the penalty for not complying with Obamacare’s individual mandate was just another surtax:

  • The surtax is collected by, and enforced by, the IRS.
  • As shown by the newly released draft Form 1040, the surtax is paid as part of normal income tax filing by taxpayers.
  • The individual mandate surtax was written into tax law itself by the Obamacare statute.
  • Revenues derived from the individual mandate surtax have always been scored by the Congressional Budget Office as tax revenue.


Famously, Chief Justice John Roberts pointed out that the individual mandate surtax is in fact a tax. However, that does not compel conservatives to agree that Obamacare’s individual mandate is Constitutional. The same decision declared the individual mandate unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause. Conservatives can accept that this surtax is a tax increase without accepting the constitutionality of the individual mandate.

The Obamacare individual mandate non-compliance surtax is one of at least seven Obamacare taxes that violate the President’s “firm pledge” not to raise any tax on any American making less than $250,000 per year. Thorough documentation of Obama’s promise can be found here.

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments


The Supreme Court ruled that it's a tax.

And no - George was not checking the definition, he was showing you so that you could explain to America why the dictionary definition of a tax is different from your own.

It's a tax, it always has been and Obama has always been a liar.

Ron Perez

The definition of "crook" has Barrack Hussein Obama's photograph sitting right next to it.

Richard M. Nixon


I was against Obamacare Before Congress Didn't Read it...

1. I will have the most transparent administration.
2. I have Shovel ready jobs.
3. The IRS is not targeting anyone.
4. If four Americans get killed, it is not optimal.
5. There are going to be bumps in the road. (referring to Libya and Egypt protests/attacks).
6. ObamaCare will be good for America.
7. You can keep your family doctor.
8. Premiums will be lowered by $2500
9. You can keep your current healthcare plan
10. Just shop around, for that healthcare I claimed you wouldn't lose.
11. I am sorry you lost your healthcare, (you know the health care you have to shop around for, ya the same health care I said you could keep, yup, that's the one).
12. I did not say you could keep your health care. (Regardless that 29 recorded videos show I did)
13. ObamaCare will not be offered to illegal immigrants.
14. ObamaCare will not be used to fund abortions.
15. ObamaCare will cost less than 1 Trillion Dollars.
16. No one making under $250,000 will see their taxes raised one dime.
17. It is Bushes fault. (this can be inserted in between every statement).
18. It was about a movie.
19. I will fundamentally transform America.
20. If I had a son.
21. I am not a dictator.
22. I will put an end to the type of politics that “breeds division, conflict and cynicism".
23. You didn't build that.
24. I will restore trust in Government.
25. The Cambridge police acted stupidly.
26. I am not after your guns.
27. The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. The BHO of (2006).
28. I have been practicing...I bowled a 129. It's like -- it was like Special Olympics.
29. "If I don't have this done in three years, then this is going to be a one-term proposition.
30. I do think at a certain point you've made enough money.
31. I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody.
32. The Public Will Have 5 Days To Look At Every Bill That Lands On My Desk
33. It's not my red line it is the worlds red line.
34. Whistle blowers will be protected.
35. We got back Every Dime we Used to Rescue the Banks, with interest.
36. I am good at killing people.
37. I will close Gitmo. (but instead built them a $750,000 soccer field).
38. The point I was making was not that Grandmother harbors any racial animosity. She doesn't, but she is a typical white person
39. I am not spying on American citizens.
40. By, on, on, by, Friday uh afternoon things get a little uh, uh challenged uh, uh ( when left to think for himself without a Teleprompter).
41. I am a Christian.
42. John McCain has not talked about my Muslim faith.
43. It's not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy.
44. UPS and FedEx are doing just fine, right? It's the Post Office that's always having problems. (Attempting to make the case for government-run healthcare).
45. What’s good for illegal immigrants is also good for people who are losing their health insurance because of Obamacare.
And the biggest lie of all
I Barrack Hussain Obama pledge to preserve protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.
Obama voters, here's your sign...

ATR and COGC Urge Senators to Vote YES on Senator Mike Lee's Amendment to H.R. 5021

Posted by Emma Raymond; Mattie Duppler on Friday, July 25th, 2014, 10:34 AM PERMALINK

Senator Mike Lee has proposed an amendment to H.R.5021, The Highway and Transportation Funding Act of 2014, that is expected to come to a vote next week. Americans for Tax Reform and the Cost of Government Center urge the Senate to support this amendment:

Senator Lee’s amendment, the Transportation Empowerment Act, provides a long term solution to the struggling Highway Trust Fund by returning the fiscal responsibility and authority for transportation spending back to the state level. The amendment involves reducing the federal gas tax and allowing states to keep the revenue that would normally be funneled into the federal Highway Trust Fund to use on projects that these individual state governments deem necessary.

The current system allows taxpayer dollars to be wasted as funds that run through Washington are ultimately diverted to the pet projects and special interests of politicians. The extra layer of bureaucracy that comes from putting Washington in control siphons off resources that should be used for infrastructure. By giving more authority back to the states, the money can be better spent on pertinent transportation needs.

Senator Lee’s amendment would empower states to be stewards of their own highway dollars and allow them to prioritize and authorize projects that will most benefit their citizens. We urge all members of the United States Senate to vote YES on the Lee Amendment to the Highway and Transportation Funding Act of 2014.

To read the full alert, click HERE

Photo Credit: 
Mark Hamilton

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments


Utah group files federal election complaint against Senator Lee

Part of it stems from indicted businessman Jeremy Johnson telling
investigators he laundered $50,000 in campaign contributions — at the
request of former Attorney General John Swallow, who later resigned amid a scandal — to Lee’s successful 2010 campaign.

The other part comes from Lee’s "short sale" of his home in Alpine at a
voluntary loss of $400,000 to mortgage-holder J.P. Morgan Chase, and
then renting another home from the same campaign donor, a J.P. Morgan
Chase executive, who had bought his house.


Lee also wants to repeal Bacon Davis wages.

Utah group files federal election complaint against Senator Lee


ATR on PBS: Unchecked Spending Draining Highway Trust Fund

Posted by Cassandra Carroll on Thursday, July 24th, 2014, 12:55 PM PERMALINK

The Federal Highway Trust Fund, which provides the funds used to build and maintain many highways and bridges in the US, is projected to run dry in August, causing politicians in Washington to rush to find a way to keep the fund afloat before leaving for their August recess.

While some lawmakers have suggested plowing new and higher taxes into the trust fund to make it whole, ATR's Mattie Duppler sat down with PBS Newshour to discuss why more revenue can't keep the fund from going bankrupt. She highlighted the importance of not just spending money on infrastructure, but spending it wisely.  And she’s right: For example, according to Chris Edwards of the Cato Institute, inflation and improved fuel efficiency aren’t the culprits that have reduced the HTF to nearly nothing. To see what really ran the fund dry, you need only look at federal highway and transit spending in the last approximately four decades. Highway spending has doubled in the last twenty years, and an increasing number of non-highway projects – such as mass transit, bike paths and landscaping efforts – have been getting a bigger part of the pie.  You can read more of ATR's thoughts on this looming catastrophe here. 


Photo Credit: 

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments

ATR Supports Bill Ending Marriage Penalty in Child Tax Credit

Posted by Ryan Ellis on Wednesday, July 23rd, 2014, 2:20 PM PERMALINK

The U.S. House of Representatives this week will consider H.R. 4935, the "Child Tax Credit Improvement Act," sponsored by Congressman Lynn Jenkins (R-Kan.)  This bill is a common sense update of the income tax's child tax credit provision, and we urge all Members to vote for it.

Under the tax code, filers with dependent children living with them receive a credit against tax of $1000 for each dependent child under the age of 17.  This credit begins to phase out when adjusted gross income (AGI) exceeds $75,000 ($110,000 in the case of a married filing jointly couple).

There are two issues with the child tax credit which H.R. 4935 addresses:

The credit amount was never indexed to inflation.  The child tax credit was first passed in 1997, and expanded in 2001 and 2003.  Since that time, it has been set at $1000 and never indexed to inflation.  H.R. 4935 corrects that beginning in 2015.

The phaseout limit was never indexed to inflation, and contains a marriage penalty.  The phaseout limits ($110,000 for married couples, $75,000 for most others) were also never indexed to inflation.  In addition, there is a marriage penalty in that the phaseout range for married couples begins at less than double the level for other taxpayers.  The current credit phaseout range creates an incentive for parents to cohabitate rather than get married, even though the tax code should be neutral on such decisions.

H.R. 4935 corrects both problems.  The married phaseout level is set to double the "other" phaseout level ($150,000 vs. $75,000).  In addition, these phaseout rates are indexed for inflation starting in 2015.


Top Comments


Yes Grover this will help out all those illegal aliens and trillions of new immigrants you favor. They have tons of children... wait they don't pay much in the way of taxes due to their poverty...and they need entitlements! Fairfax County, a hugely rich bloated area due to the federal government has a ton of Grover's new immigrants on free lunch... So Grover let's sign that NO TAX Pledge... uh what are we going to do about the immigrants burgeoning in our communities?

Kurt Zellers and Dean Simpson Sign the Taxpayer Protection Pledge

Posted by Paul Blair on Wednesday, July 23rd, 2014, 12:30 PM PERMALINK

Former speaker of the Minnesota House Kurt Zellers has signed the Taxpayer Protection Pledge in his bid for the Republican nomination as Governor of Minnesota. His running mate, former state Representative Dean Simpson, has also signed the Pledge. The Pledge, sponsored by Americans for Tax Reform, commits signers to oppose any and all efforts to increase taxes.

Americans for Tax Reform offers the Pledge to all candidates for state and federal office. Fourteen governors and over 1,000 state legislators have signed the Pledge. The Zellers/Simpson ticket is the first to sign the Pledge in their bid to secure the Republican nomination and defeat incumbent Governor Mark Dayton.

The Zellers campaign just released an ad highlighting his record of fighting against higher taxes and his personal written commitment to continue to do it as governor. 


“I want to congratulate Kurt Zellers and Dean Simpson for taking the Taxpayer Protection Pledge. Minnesotans deserve better than tax-and-spend policies that fall hard on the backs of hardworking families and small businesses. They want real solutions that create jobs, cut government spending, and incentivize more economic growth,” said Grover Norquist, president of ATR.

“By signing the Pledge, Zellers and Simpson have demonstrated that they understand the problems of hard-working taxpayers in Minnesota.”

“Democrat Mark Dayton raised taxes by more than $2 billion just one year ago. Two years before that he shut the government down over his demand that the legislature raise taxes.  With Speaker Zellers presiding over the House during that time, he stopped Dayton from getting his way.”

"I challenge all candidates and their running mates in the Minnesota gubernatorial race to make the same commitment to taxpayers by signing the Taxpayer Protection Pledge today,” Norquist continued. 

To view a PDF copy of the press release, click here. 

Photo Credit: 
Glen Stubbe, Star Tribune

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments

Reason.tv and Remy Mock the IRS with a Love Song

Posted by Adam Radman on Wednesday, July 23rd, 2014, 9:30 AM PERMALINK

A few weeks back, I highlighted how Rep. Paul Ryan ripped into IRS commissioner John Koskinen over the IRS scandal involving Lois Lerner and the targeting of free-market groups. The issue at the time came down to the failure of the IRS to produce emails related to the investigation and the inability of the commissioner to explain why the IRS couldn’t retrieve the missing data. The Daily Caller even reported that the failure to produce emails related to the investigation may have violated federal law.

Now, the IRS is singing a different tune. IRS Deputy Associate Chief Counsel Thomas Kane, who oversees document production for the agency, says he’s unsure whether all the backups related to Lerner were recycled and destroyed. However, IT experts for the IRS recently declared under oath that Lerner’s hard drive had been recycled by an outside contractor.

So which is it? Can the IRS produce these missing emails or not? Sometimes the absurdity of it all requires you to step back and just laugh. For that reason, I suggest you check out Remy’s new song: What are the Chances? (An IRS Love Song)

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments

For State Policy Makers, the Simple (Anti) Tax Solution for Faster Growth

Posted by Dan Mitchell on Tuesday, July 22nd, 2014, 2:03 PM PERMALINK

When people in other nations ask me for evidence in favor of low taxes, I often will ask them to compare the economic performance of a high-tax nation like France with the performance of a nation such as Switzerland with less onerous taxes.

If I’m asked by Americans, I generally suggest that they compare different states. For instance, I show them evidence that California has a much more punitive tax system than Texas. And when you look at all the available state rankings, it’s clear that there’s a big difference.

And I then ask folks to compare economic performance. There’s lots of evidence that Texas is growing much faster and creating far more jobs than California.

Heck, it’s almost as if California politicians want to drive successful people out of the Golden State (fortunately, the state’s politicians didn’t read Walter Williams’ satirical column about putting a barbed-wire fence at the border). And when upper-income taxpayers leave the state, that means taxable income and tax revenue also escape.

Though it’s worth pointing out that the case for low taxes isn’t based solely on comparisons of Texas and California. We know, for instance, that states with no income taxes generally outperform other states.

Moreover, we don’t need to rely on casual empiricism. Here are some of the results from a new study published by the Mercatus Center.

…this study uses the average tax rate as a practical approximation of the overall state tax burden. …The coefficient of average tax rate is negative and statistically significant in both models, suggesting that a higher tax burden as a share of income reduces state economic growth. …Elasticity of −2.6, for example, implies that a 1 percent increase in the tax rate decreases economic growth by 2.6 percent, not percentage points. …While the aforementioned income growth results are insightful, the impact of taxation on the level of income is also important. …income tax progressivity has a significant negative relationship with real GSP per capita. …An alternative way to measure economic activity is to look at the number of private firms that operate in each state. …The main conclusion from the two regression models is that only personal income tax progressivity seems to have a significant negative effect on the growth in the number of firms. … By voting with their feet, people send a clear signal about where they prefer to live and work. …an empirical analysis of migration may show, indirectly, how taxes affect the flow of economic activity across states. …state net immigration rate is negatively related to the personal income tax rate … The net immigration rate also seems to have a significantly negative correlation with the average tax rate and income tax progressivity.

These findings should not be a surprise.

It’s common sense that economic activity – and taxpayers – will flow to states that don’t punish people for creating wealth.

Let’s now circle back to the Texas-vs-California comparisons. Take a look at this remarkable chart put together by Mark Perry of the American Enterprise Institute.

As you can see, total employment in Texas has jumped almost 10 percent since 2008. In California, by contrast, total employment has increased by less than 2/10ths of 1 percent.

So you can see why this Lisa Benson cartoon is so appropriate.

Speaking of humor, this Chuck Asay cartoon speculates on how future archaeologists will view California. And this joke about Texas, California, and a coyote is among my most-viewed blog posts.

All jokes aside, none of this should be interpreted to suggest that Texas is perfect. There’s too much government in the Lone Star state. It’s only a success story when compared to California.

And even though California does worse than Texas in my Moocher Index, it’s worth pointing out that Californians are the least likely of all Americans to sign up for food stamps.

Editor's Note: This article was originally posted on Individual Liberty and was republished here with permission.

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments


Hey Grover... how is the massive illegal immigration surge that you support coming along... just fine... just fine... many more new welfare recipients to provide cheap labor for your corporate clients, right you slime bag?

Please spare me the drivel about taxes when you support an invasion of illegals that need and like welfare....

EPA Moves to Scuttle Alaskan Pebble Mine

Posted by Cassandra Carroll on Monday, July 21st, 2014, 2:43 PM PERMALINK

Underneath picturesque Bristol Bay in Southwestern Alaska sit vast deposits of an estimated $300 billion worth of molybdenum, copper and gold. The waters of Bristol Bay hold the largest sockeye salmon fishery in the entire world, as well as huge populations of silver, chum, and king salmon. It is obvious that Bristol Bay is home to unbelievably valuable natural resources which could be used to create prosperity for Alaska as well as the rest of the country. Certainly, the area is delicate; a large number of local jobs rely on fisheries, and many of the residents rely on wild resources such as salmon, caribou and moose to survive. All this being said, you’d think the federal government and EPA would be interested in fostering cooperation between itself, industry, and the residents of Bristol Bay and the surrounding areas to take advantage of all this opportunity while protecting the local people and ecosystem, right? Well, not necessarily.

The Pebble Mine is a project proposed by the Pebble Partnership that would make use of the currently unutilized deposits of gold, copper and molybdenum in Bristol Bay. Before the project can start, however, Pebble Partnership will have to spend a lot of time and money acquiring permits, which is where the EPA comes into the story. Normally, when a mining project is proposed, the company who plans to do the mining applies to the Army Corps of Engineers for a permit that certifies the project complies with section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Assuming the Corps of Engineers grants the permit, the EPA then has the authority to veto it if they deem the project to be too great a risk to the environment, or, more recently, too great a risk to the EPA’s increasingly partisan politics.

And it looks like Pebble Mine’s permit might be well upon its way to being denied before it’s even applied for. The EPA has already begun to propose drastic restrictions on how the land can be used. Technically this is not a preemptive strike, but it certainly looks like one in effect. The restrictions are based on a precarious report that made a number of false assumptions about the Pebble Mine. The House Oversight Committee even has reason to believe that Philip North, a former EPA employee, had already been making plans with colleagues in 2009 to deny Pebble Partnership a permit before they even applied for it, and even before the research on the mine’s potential impacts had begun. This is currently being investigated, but Philip North has not been reached for comment, citing a number of excuses, such as a one-year boat trip around the world with his children. When subpoenaed for North’s emails, the regional EPA office conveniently claimed that they’d been lost in a hard drive crash. Sound familiar? (http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/210564-epa-says-hard-drive-crashed-emails-lost )

Speaking about the potential mining project, EPA Region 10 Administrator Dennis McLerran said, “The science is clear that mining the Pebble deposit would cause irreversible damage to one of the world’s last intact salmon ecosystems.” That doesn’t sound like someone who wants to have an objective discussion. It also presumes that there’s nothing the Pebble Partnership can do to sway the agency, even though they are yet to submit their permit application.   

Pebble Mine has potential to be a great benefit to local Alaskan communities, particularly the native population. Maybe the mine would work in harmony with the locals and wildlife, and improve the lives of thousands of Americans. Maybe the mine really would be too great a risk to the environment, and should be abandoned. Either way, we all knew when our parents said things like “You can’t because I said so, and that’s the end of this conversation!”, it was often because they knew their arguments wouldn’t stand up to even a child’s scrutiny. So when the EPA essentially does the same thing to a mining company, it leaves us all to wonder. Why are they so afraid of a little discussion?

Photo Credit: 
Silverback Photo

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments

Aussies Throw Carbon Tax on the Barbie, U.S. Should Do the Same

Posted by Brendan Walsh on Monday, July 21st, 2014, 2:07 PM PERMALINK

Thursday, July 17th Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbot and his conservative government followed through on one of its promises to the people during the previous election to repeal the country’s Carbon Tax that was constricting the economy. While the left and environmental groups will undoubtedly clamor about the recent Senate vote (39-32) to repeal the carbon tax, there is little doubt that the Australian government did the right thing.

Australia’s carbon tax cost the country billions of dollars each year, draining the Australian economy of approximately $8.5 billion annually all while forcing ordinary families to pay more than an average of $500 more for power each year. With the repeal of the often maligned carbon tax, Australia has repositioned itself as a safe place for investment in crucial industries such as mining. Furthermore, by eliminating the carbon tax, Australian businesses and families will have an unnecessary burden lifted off their shoulders, paving the way for more jobs and future economic growth.

The United States can and should take note of Australia’s decision to repeal the carbon tax if it wants to protect itself from skyrocketing energy prices. While the Left and environmental groups in the U.S. continue to push for Cap and Trade and various forms of carbon taxation, they fail to apply basic economics in their rational. Simply put, by taxing carbon indiscriminately it increases the cost of business for that company, therefore reducing profits and threatening jobs. However, the negative externalities do not end there. The increase cost of business due to carbon taxes are sent along the supply chain, leading to the prices of inputs and commodities to increase. These increased costs are eventually passed on to taxpayers like you not only when you go to fill up your tank, but when you go to buy that carton of milk from your local grocery store as well.

On June 2nd 2014, the EPA officially released its new draft rule to force power plants to cut carbon emissions by 30% (from levels of 2005) by the year 2030. This ideologically driven mandate will have dire consequences on the U.S. economy. The administration’s climate agenda is poised to devastate the US economy. As Amy Harder of the Wall Street Journal notes, coal produces more carbon dioxide than oil and natural gas but it is by far the most abundant and cheap source of energy in the U.S. Coal, which provides 40% of electricity in the United States and the new regulations threaten to not only raise the cost of electricity but also threaten jobs in the industry.

The Chamber of Commerce analyzed a similar rule as the EPA’s and found that such regulations would cost the U.S. economy an average of $51 billion annually. From 2014 to 2030 that is an estimated $816 billion drain from the U.S. economy. Additionally, the report notes that the carbon regulation’s would cost the US 2,224 jobs annually through 2030, which means in total it would cost the US approximately 3,584,000 jobs. Furthermore the Chamber notes that energy costs for US taxpayers would increase by $289 billion, and reduce the amount of disposable income for families by approximately $596 billion. Simply put, given the failing economic recovery, the U.S cannot afford losing an additional $816 billion from the country’s GDP, nor does it make sense to prevent millions of Americans from finding jobs, or increase energy costs for households which hurt the least wealthy most of all.

Australia has shown the US a way to escape the grasps of over burdensome regulations pushed by the ideologically driven left that constrict economic growth and prosperity and now the U.S. must follow if it wishes to remain among the most competitive countries in the world.  


More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments

Contrasting Records a Feature of the North Carolina Senate Race

Posted by Patrick Gleason, Jorge Marin on Monday, July 21st, 2014, 10:00 AM PERMALINK

Most state legislatures have wrapped up their 2014 sessions and the November elections will be here sooner that many realize. North Carolina is one of the top political battlegrounds this fall, with embattled Senator Kay Hagan (D) fighting for her political life against her Republican opponent, North Carolina House Speaker Thom Tillis. Politico reported last week faces one of the toughest reelection races for any Senate Democrat this year, a true toss-up fight against North Carolina House Speaker Thom Tillis.”

Hagan has made clear that her campaign strategy is to score political points by painting Tillis as a conservative zealot whose record in the legislature is extreme. However, a look at the facts about Tillis’s top achievements as Speaker’s shows his record to be anything but extreme, and very much in line with pro-growth policies. Here are the highlights of what has been accomplished in the North Carolina legislature under the leadership of Thom Tillis:

  • Historic, rate reducing tax reform: last year Speaker Tillis helped bring the income tax rate down from a top rate of 7.75 percent to a flat rate of 5.75 percent, reducing taxes for all income levels. This pro-growth tax package relieved North Carolina of the dubious distinction of having the highest income tax in the Southeast and will provide North Carolinians with $6.475 billion in tax relief over the next 6 years. Tillis also cut the state corporate tax, one of the most economically damaging forms of taxation, from 6.9 percent to 5 percent. If revenue targets are met, the rate will go down to 3 percent by 2017.
  • Full repeal of death tax
  • Balanced the budget every year he has been Speaker
  • Since becoming Speaker in 2011, unemployment in North Carolina has gone from well above the national average to below it, from  9.7 percent to 6.4 percent.
  • North Carolina’s GDP grew by an average of 4.73 percent since Tillis became Speaker, while the nation as a whole grew by only 2.17 percent during the same period.
  • Last August, North Carolina enacted much-needed regulatory reform, which removed many of the state’s antiquated and burdensome regulations on businesses.
  • Tillis helped to shepherd through an expansion of the state’s school voucher program which has helped over 2,100 children escape failing schools and get a better education.


With a list of accomplishments like this, it’s going to be hard for Hagan to paint Tillis’s record as extreme, but it seems she is going to try. However, it’s not surprising that Hagan wants to focus on Tillis and not her own top legislative achievement, which is her vote for Obamacare and the 20 federal tax increases it imposed on North Carolinians.

A rally for Tillis supporters was held in Raleigh this past weekend (link). With state budget negotiations coming to a conclusion, North Carolina Republicans are now able to turn their attention to addressing the misinformation being spread by the Hagan campaign. Not all North Carolinians can keep their doctor under Obamacare, contrary to what President Obama and Sen. Hagan claimed. The good news is that they can elect a new senator this November.

Photo Credit: Mark Peterson

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments