Huh.

Johnson paid nearly the exact same effective tax rate as Feingold — less than 14% — while earning nearly 10 times as much income as his political foe from 2005 to 2008. Johnson was able to lower his rate primarily with his heavy charitable giving.

I realize that Bice is trying to portray this as a negative for Johnson because he paid less taxes while earning (yes, earning) more money than Feingold, but note how he did it… He gave a ton of money to charity. Nothing has changed. Johnson still gives his personal time and money to charitable causes. Are we supposed to consider that a bad thing now?