Laws are not best created out of spite. In fact, such laws are unconstitutional. According to the Constitution, "No bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall

Laws are not best created out of spite. In fact, such laws are unconstitutional. According to the Constitution, "No bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed." The bill of attainder here is attacking Saverin, as Schumer and Hatch have been doing to gain support for their bill, and passing a law making what Saverin did illegal. That they want to charge him 30% capital gains tax is questionable tax policy at best (especially when countries like Singapore with no capital gains tax are luring away money), but that they also want to bar him from visiting the United States for the rest of his life is oppressive. Hatch's and Schumer's arguments reek of class warfare and exploit patriotism. It's all summarized in the quoted statement, "bothers me when somebody renounces his citizenship in the greatest country on Earth just to save money." It's more than just to save money, Mr. Hatch. The American colonies fought a revolutionary war over taxes, so it's much more than just "to save money." The only person making any sense in the entire article is Charles Grassley. Saverin's decision should have been a signal to Congress that an overhaul of the tax code is needed, to make taxes more transparent and for real economic recovery. Instead, Schumer and Hatch have taken the opportunity to exploit class warfare and patriotism to grow an already unsustainable government even larger and more oppressive. Instead of looking at other countries legitimately competing with us (like Singapore) and learning from them, Schumer and Hatch are intent on making things worse in the US, and that's a damn shame.