Now that the momentum behind it has dissipated, Republican Congressman Paul Ryan explains his flip-flop on the House Rage Tax:
Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan, the top Republican on the budget committee, said Thursday he would have voted against the 90 percent tax increase if he had known that legal scholars would deem it unconstitutional.
"Now, that I know — which I didn't at the time — that this is unconstitutional, I wouldn't have voted the same way," Ryan said during a taping of C-SPAN's "Newsmakers" on Thursday — the show is set to air on Sunday. POLITICO was one of the participants in the Ryan interview.
Now it's unconstitutional? Hmm. Laurence Tribe said it was constitutional; then Tribe said it wasn't. Jack Balkin says it was. Richard Epstein says it was. For those scoring at home, that is either 3-1 in favor or 2-1 in favor - a clear majority! FWIW, unnoticed Constitutional scholar Tom Maguire's preliminary assessment was that the Rage Tax was probably OK, based on this 1998 Heritage paper.
Some speculated that Tribe was throwing a lifeline to his buddy Barack, providing political cover for an Obama cut-and-run. I guess gutless Republican weasels can grab the same rope.
DID I SAY "GUTLESS"? Let me try for something stronger while we contemplate this:
Vote now, study later. But this takes the cake pie-in-face:
How dare those Dastardly Democrats create a situation where Ryan's vote actually counts!