Privileged former Rep. Beto O’Rourke, said that as president, he would put into effect a “modest” tax to be paid by citizens for each new war the nation enters as part of his plan to get the United States out of “endless” overseas conflicts.
His “war tax” would be “progressive” – which is basically just a fancy way of saying that wealthy Americans would be expected to foot a higher percentage of the bill. Taxpayers who make more than $200,000 would have to pay an additional $1,000 in taxes for each war according to his website.
He claims that the destination of the money would be into a series of Veterans Health Care Trust Funds (VHCTF). Supposedly new funds would be created at the start of every war that the U.S. enters, and would act to cover medical services, disability compensation, and other programs for veterans. Families with members or veterans of the Armed Forces would not have to pay the tax. It was unclear how much the tax would cost Americans in lower income brackets.
“Every new VHCTF would be paired with enactment of new war tax,” O’Rourke said. “This new tax would serve as a reminder of the incredible sacrifice made by those who serve and their families.”
His plan included a long list of empty promises designed to beef up care for veterans and end the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan which he detailed in a series of tweets.
On Twitter O’Rourke also argued the new “war tax” would make it harder for politicians to enter into new conflicts. “I will not only end our wars, but I’ll make it harder politically for Washington to start new ones. We’ll implement a progressive tax to be triggered if a new war is started, exclusively to fund the care of future veterans — never war itself,” he said.
“If politicians want to send our kids, our parents, our neighbors into combat, they should have to explain why every single one of us should bear the costs of war’s consequences,” he said in another tweet.
As part of his plan, he called for an end to the Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) which Congress passed after 9/11 to grant the executive more leeway in fighting terrorism.
“As president, I will ensure that before this country enters another war, we have exhausted every single peaceful alternative,” O’Rourke said, who apparently lacks the decision making necessary for a leader to act swiftly to protect citizens at all costs.
His plan came as fellow 2020 candidate and Sen. Bernie Sanders, emphasized the need to stay out of “endless war.” In an op-ed from Monday, Sanders showed that he was worried over whether Trump would get the United States into war with Iran.
“I am very concerned that, whether intentionally or unintentionally, the Trump administration’s moves against Iran, and Iran’s moves in response, could put us in direct conflict,” he said.
House Democrats have already taken up O’Rourke’s proposal to remove the AUMF, voting on Wednesday to repeal that law. Democrats do not seem to care that this was significantly weaken our ability to defend ourselves and respond quickly if we were to be attacked.
Democrats in the Senate have also pushed legislation that would aim to minimize Trump’s ability to engage in a conflict with Iran. As questionable a push as any, considering Trump has proven himself to be rather level-headed when it comes to sensitive foreign situations and their actual results.