We have so many national political stories and crazy events we seldom have time for what is happening in our own state. Consider Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid or the late Senator Byrd. A standout in this group is the King of the Gay Pride Movement, Massachusetts’ own Barney Frank. When not running a male brothel from his own home, he found the time to author financial legislation that will create dozens of new commissions and bring unprecedented rules and regulations.
Now comes our own Attorney General Dustin McDaniel who is criticizing Lt. Governor Bill Halter for paying income taxes. It seems the ever contriving Halter, evidently suspecting that most of his fellow office holders are not paying income taxes on state furnished autos, wanted to show the world what a good citizen he is.
The federal income tax law is very clear in that any private use of a company or government owned auto is taxable income to the recipient. This is true even if the individual only uses that car to commute back and forth to his regular job. This only makes good sense because a taxpayer who uses his own auto cannot deduct the cost of commuting.
Halter’s actions raised a ruckus amongst other state office holders as it puts them in a very embarrassing situation. Even if they follow Halter’s lead and start reporting this as income, the logical question is why haven’t they done so previously? This is especially true as pertains to Attorney General McDaniel who is the highest ranking legal expert in the state.
So what is McDaniel’s excuse? It is the oldest and weakest explanation of those that should know better. He says he relied upon his accountant. Any taxpayer should know when he or she signs his tax return, he is taking full responsibility for accuracy of its contents. This is especially true for an attorney and for someone running for or in public office. I agree that an ordinary taxpayer who has a rather complicated return cannot be expected to understand all the Internal Revenue Code and Regulations thereof but that excuse does not wash for our state’s highest legal officer.
Ah, but Mr. Attorney General wasn’t satisfied with his ‘my accountant says” excuse. He went on to accuse Mr. Halter of violating the state constitution by acknowledging that the personal use of an auto is income. In an argument that only a lawyer could make, our Attorney General says this acknowledgement goes against constitutional law that provides elected officials cannot receive other state income beyond their salaries.
Evidently our Attorney General does not believe his own argument as he announced recently he would no longer drive a state vehicle. So whatever you think of the sly Mr. Halter, he is doing his part to reduce taxpayer expenses on the part of some of our state officials.
This quote from our Attorney General after making this decision is both self-serving and hilarious - “I make sure my office operates ethically and is accountable to the public, and must always lead by example.” He should have added a few words to this quote – especially when I get caught.
Adding fire to his holier than thou claim of his ethical purity is the revelation that his predecessor, our own Governor Beebe, reported his personal auto use as income when he was Attorney General. Might it have been prudent to determine this or suggest to his accountant to inquire about the matter?
I have listened to Mr. McDaniel address our Rotary Club in recent months. His remarks were similar to Arkansas’ Attorneys General in the past. Their emphasis is always on protecting the consumer against the big bad businessman. Doesn’t the businessman have the right to be protected against fraud, pilfering and outright theft? The easy answer to this is that businesses don’t vote but individual consumers do.
Although this column is not intended to be a beat up McDaniel piece, there is another more meaningful issue that concerns many Arkansas voters. Why did our Attorney General not join in with the other 20 states in bringing suit against the federal government on health care legislation?
Our own Governor Beebe expressed concern that the health care legislation would probably cost our state an additional 400 million in Medicare costs. Since that expression of concern, the CBO (Congressional Budget Office) has indicated future health care costs are vastly understated.
Wouldn’t you think our Attorney General should be looking out for Arkansas people especially when you are dealing with hundreds of millions of dollars? The obvious answer to this charade is that opposing this legislation – even though 65 percent of Arkansans do – would not look good on his Democrat resume. It appears our attorney general is having problems balancing ethics, the concerns of Arkansans and his own political future.
(Jerry Jackson of Heber Springs writes his “conservative viewpoint” column each Wednesday)
