Ugh! If there is one thing I hate more than defending Robert Scheer, it's having to take issue with something reported favorably by Instapundit. (Seriously, I love the guy, and this is the first time in over a year of reading his blog that I have even come close to disagreeing with him, on anything.)

But I feel compelled to do both, and here is why. Yesterday it came to the attention of the blogosphere that Scheer is a tax deadbeat who advocates imposing higher taxes. The objection, apparently, is that Scheer is a hypocrite for daring to advocate higher taxes for himself -- even though he is a late payer.

Shark Blog offers a link to, among other places, the Alameda County Recorder's Office -- where you can enter Scheer's name and discover all kinds of apparent dirt.

Well, I don't know how many of you would care to google me at the same location, but if you do, you'll find that my situation looks a lot worse than Scheer's. My name's not all that different from Scheer; its Scheie. That, and the fact that we both own property in Berkeley makes us alphabetical and geographical neighbors. And like Scheer, I was once a Commie; unlike Scheer I outgrew it when I was in my twenties. (While I am not perfect, I do try to avoid making up canards, as well as excessive sanctimony.)

Anyway, those of you who don't have better things to do than ferret out tax deadbeats, can go here (link courtesy of Shark Blog), and if you enter my name, you'll get something along the lines of the following:

Criteria: Name or Associated Name Begins with SCHEIE, ERIC Search Results - 61 matches

7 pages then follow...

Wow! I must be a pretty bad person to come up 61 times. But it would serve no purpose to devote an entire post to reciting all the regrettable financial details of my life. I don't want to write about it, and excepting few voyeurs, I doubt my readers really want to read about it. In previous posts, I have mentioned bankruptcy, suicidal intentions, business failure, deaths of partners ; I don't think I mentioned the IRS being after me for a decade for hundreds of thousands of dollars I did not owe (they ended up sending me a check!) but I don't want to devote this blog to endless whining about my personal, mostly-behind-me, problems. I have gradually gotten caught up... but there I go, whining about things as complicated as they are irrelevant.

Enough.

For the purpose of this argument, let us assume that I am the worst tax deadbeat in the state of California. What I want to know is: unless I am criticizing people for late payment of their taxes, how does mismanagement of my financial affairs make me a hypocrite? How does it render my opinions on property taxation suspect? I know they say that people who live in glass houses should not cast stones, and it probably wasn't the world's greatest idea to make political trouble just weeks before the Oklahoma City blast, while in the midst of financial ruin, but from where derives the notion that bad financial judgment indicates hypocrisy, or that business failure invalidates political opinions?

I assure you, despite sharing alphabetical proximity, Scheer and Scheie are nearly complete political opposites.

But if Scheer is a hypocrite for wanting to raise taxes, then why would I not also be a hypocrite for wanting to lower, or even eliminate them?

Suppose Scheer wanted to lower his tax burden, and had phrased the issue in terms like, "the poor working classes are being run out of their homes by skyrocketing property taxes." Would he get a pass? I don't think so. Scheer and I are damned if we do and damned if we don't.

Let's assume I get completely squared away with all governmental agencies and all creditors. (I am pretty close, but once again, the point here is not to defend myself.) Do I then regain the right to legitimately criticize or praise taxation? I don't see why I would -- and I guess there are a lot of people who would maintain that late payment of taxes, defaulting on legal obligations, and bankruptcy are sure signs of immorality, for which I ought to be damned for life, and perhaps roasted in Hell for eternity. So, no matter what happens, in some circles I may be permanently disqualified to speak about taxation.

Maybe that's why I have not become an anti-tax crusader. These days I advise everyone to just pay their taxes. I also advise them not to take drugs, and I even tout the virtues of sobriety. (I used to be a real mess in that regard too; perhaps I am in a conflict of interest on matters of substance abuse.) Is do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do always hypocrisy? Why shouldn't a heroin addict warn people not to do as he does? From where derives a general moral duty to set an example?

How about guns? Does my ownership of firearms and membership in the NRA render my pro Second Amendment views suspect? I have been told it does, because I am a sort of "lobbyist" advocating my own self interest. Must I resign from the NRA and give up my guns to be taken seriously?

Advocating what is in one's self interest can, of course, indicate a lack of objectivity, if not outright bias. So, if I demand lower taxes and I am then found to owe a lot of money to the government, my position can fairly be called into question as being selfish.

But in Scheer's case, his tax burden will go up if his view prevails -- and that is not selfish by any standard.

Anyway, this tax deadbeat felt obligated to speak up, even though it leaves a bitter taste in my mouth to defend the likes of Scheer. (And frankly, I am getting weary of baring my life, but as Lanny Davis used to say, if you have truth to tell, "tell it early, tell it all, and tell it yourself.")

One last point: as any California Realtor will tell you, the penalties and fees assessed against unpaid property taxes are nothing short of usurious (10% penalty plus an additional 1.5% per month), and the government always gets its money, because the property is not going anywhere. The tax lien, if it remains unpaid, will eventually trigger a tax sale, and all other creditors stand in line behind the government. Thus, counties stand to gain substantially more revenue from a deadbeat than from the punctual taxpayer. By paying his taxes late instead of taking out a loan to pay them, Scheer is needlessly enriching the government at his own expense.

If anything, that is consistent with his position.