There’s three certainties in life – death, taxes, and the death tax.
The death tax, or more kindly called, “the estate tax”, is a strange concept – someone decides to give something they’ve earned to someone or something they care for or about. Different governments, both state and federal, see the cessation of heartbeat as a revenue-raising opportunity since money is changing hands.
It’s a moral quandary – let’s force people in end of life situations into complex revenue schemes to avoid paying those taxes, or let’s tax them because they have “enough” and after all, whomever they’re giving it to didn’t earn it themselves, so let’s just level the playing field.
It’s a standard conservative position to not support estate taxes or the elimination of existing estate taxes because it’s an obvious financial problem.
Many on the right are fearful to take a stand on positions beyond the death tax because opposing a method of revenue collection is a “safe” position. “Safe” positions are ones that are easy to articulate and market and avoid stepping on as many toes as possible.
“Safe” positions get you “liked”.
A Georgetown cocktail party with a variety of DC critters will likely feature a “conservative” who will espouse a position that they’d like to eliminate the estate tax. Glances and nods will be exchanged – after all, how amusing! and the position will escape the conversation as quickly as it entered it, unscathed and politely.
After all, everyone in that room has a network of trusts set up precisely to avoid such taxes.
For decades, conservatives have enjoyed being the loyal opposition, who were comfortable with disagreement as long as they were liked.
And who doesn’t want to be liked? Nobody sets out to inspire resentment – it’s natural, absolutely biological, an act of preservation to gain favor among those closest to you.
The previous generation’s conservatives are remembered nostalgically by the following generation’s liberals.
“Trump is no Reagan!” they cry, ignoring the fact that many “well-liked” conservatives despised Reagan well into his presidency.
“We miss Bush!” these liberals holler, with the same voices they used to call him a war criminal a few years prior.
There are, however, some on the Right who come about generationally to break down walls, not espouse index card talking points on death taxes. There are some people on the Right who do not care about being liked.
Rush Limbaugh was one of those people.
It’s painful to type “was”, because Rush seemed like an ever-present voice on the Right, a lightning rod that amplified the voice of people who listened to him on their way to work with they people they elected to represent them.
Before Rush, the average person could expect to have their opinions read or given to them from the news, and they could talk back through letters to the Editor.
With Rush, the average person heard someone who thought like them, talked like them, understood them – and then that voice was reflected back towards the halls of power.
The more popular Rush became, the more hated he became – he was on the radio for hours per day asking questions, giving opinions, telling jokes – all with absolute zeal. In many obituaries he will be described as “controversial”, because that’s the term that’s used when you don’t look to an elite audience for response.
He had his ear to the ground because he actually listened to people who called in for hours and hours, every single week.
He took their opinions into account, pushed back if he needed to, and responded with real-time feedback. Decision makers, who functioned mostly in isolation, tuned into his show to hear what real people actually thought.
These were people who didn’t really care about estate taxes as a functional question, but saw them as a moral one – even if it doesn’t affect me, why should I have to pay the government when I die?
Why can’t I give my children or grandchildren my home, business, or farm?
Why should they have to pay a penalty?
Why is that fair?
This is the same moral view of fairness that can be applied to other controversial issues that conservatives avoid:
The people see illegal immigration as a moral problem: why is there a “first across the line” policy where someone can cross the border or overstay a visa and apply for government benefits while Americans are out of work?
Conservatives see it as a financial problem: cheap labor.
By espousing the safe financial position, not standing up for a moral position, conservatives outsource moral arguments to the Left – “it’s only fair! We’re being compassionate! Can’t you see these people are refugees?!”
Rush brooked no opposition, and suffered no fools.
He espoused opinions that he knew would inspire responses filled with hate. He came clean about his own moral shortcomings. He did this every single day, until his last broadcast, knowing that his death would be celebrated by the worst people.
In his 2020 State of the Union address, President Trump stated the following:
Almost every American family knows the pain when a loved one is diagnosed with a serious illness. Here tonight is a special man, someone beloved by millions of Americans who just received a Stage 4 advanced cancer diagnosis. This is not good news, but what is good news is that he is the greatest fighter and winner that you will ever meet. Rush Limbaugh: Thank you for your decades of tireless devotion to our country. Rush, in recognition of all that you have done for our Nation, the millions of people a day that you speak to and inspire, and all of the incredible work that you have done for charity, I am proud to announce tonight that you will be receiving our country’s highest civilian honor, the Presidential Medal of Freedom. I will now ask the First Lady of the United States to please stand and present you with the honor. Rush, Kathryn, congratulations!
If you’ve inspired hate, you’ve done something right.
Stand for something.
