To test that notion, Salon launched the  Patriotic Billionaire Challenge. We put the question to every member of the “Forbes 400″ list, all of them with a net worth of at least $1 billion: “Are you, like Warren Buffett, willing to pay higher taxes?”

The results are in. Of 400 billionaires, only eight (including Buffett) say they are willing to pay more.  Three others indicated opposition; one said maybe.

But most declined to comment at all. Oprah Winfrey, who endorsed Obama in 2008, did not respond. Nor did liberal media mogul Ted Turner. Prominent Democratic Party donors from Hollywood such as Steven Spielberg, David Geffen and Barry Diller did not express a view. Philanthropists Bill Gates and Michael Bloomberg — whom we queried repeatedly — refused to comment on Buffett’s argument, even as it became a central part of Washington’s political conversation.

On Sept. 19, President Obama rolled out his jobs plan, calling for individuals making more than $250,000 to pay higher taxes for the sake of paying down the deficit and funding the president’s jobs plan. As the president has pitched the plan to the country, he has repeatedly invoked the name of the Omaha Oracle as a selling point — dubbing his proposal as “The Buffett Rule.” Senate Democrats proposed an alternative solution: A 5 percent surtax on any income a person earns beyond $1 million a year — including capital gains. The president threw his support behind the measure.

Most of those who did respond to Salon’s question seemed to have strong opinions. Liberal philanthropist, George Soros (Net worth: $22B), expressed approval.

Warren Buffett is living up to his reputation as an astute investor. The rich hurt their own long term interests by their opposition to paying more taxes.

James Simsons, chairman of Renaissance Technologies ($10.6B), and Herbert Simon, co-founder of the Simon Property Group ($1.6B), both responded with a simple “Yes.”

John Arnold,  manager of the Centaurus Advisors hedge fund ($3.5B), had one condition: “I support incrementally raising tax rates on the wealthiest if part of a comprehensive package to address the federal deficit. ”

Leon Cooperman, manager of the Omega Advisors hedge fund  ($1.8B), offered his own plan, saying he supports “a 10-percent income tax surcharge for three years on those earning more than $500,000 per year.” He said that he believes in the progressive income tax and and that he’s “very fond of Warren.” But  also expressed wariness about President Obama’s plan, saying he “wants to give away money to the public.”

Others supported Buffet’s sentiment with some qualifications. Todd Wagner, co-owner and CEO of 2929 Entertainment ($1.2B), said, “I’m a lucky guy. I have no issue paying more.” But he added that the revenue raised would only amount to “maybe 8 to 12 percent of what’s needed, based on what everyone thinks we need to get the debt under control.”

 Where’s the rest come from? Military cuts? Raising the age on social security or medicare? I don’t have that answer. But I know that that’s the difficult part of it.

The problem is nobody trusts how the government spends it. We all feel a little concerned that it’s just dropping into a black hole. The wealthiest absolutely should pay more, but I also want to feel that it’s going to something that matters.

Wagner’s business partner, Mark Cuban, owner of the Dallas Mavericks basketball team and chairman of HDNet ($2.3B), said, “I have absolutely no problem paying more taxes. None.” But he went on:

What I have a problem with is how the money is spent.  If the incremental money could be directed to defined and deserved recipients.  I would be thrilled to write the check.

The problem I have is not on the revenue side, its on the expenditure side. Too much money is wasted on bureaucracy, adminis-trivia,  pensions and over-expansive federal employment.

So I’m a resounding yes on more taxes, but an attachment to the funding to be directly spent on approved programs. If a program doesn’t deliver 95 percent  or better to its intended recipients, it should be put on hold until it does.

Stanley Hubbard, founder, Hubbard Broadcasting ($1.9B), said maybe: “There is more to it than a simple yes or no.  It depends upon a lot of things.”

John Catsimatidis, CEO of the Gristedes supermarket chain ($2B), offered a different version of “shared sacrifice.”

All Americans should feel the pain equally; not be prejudiced only against a certain group. If that is allowed, it opens doors to other prejudices to other groups.

Bernie Marcus, co-founder of Home Depot (Net worth: $1.8B), didn’t say “no,” but expressed worry that Buffett and Obama are “penalizing success.”

I have no problem paying my fair share of taxes. What I do have a problem with is the idea that by raising taxes on a select few, we can get our economy growing again and close our national debt. That is false. Getting people back to work with good-paying, sustainable jobs is the only thing that will get our nation out of this recession because it will bring in more tax dollars. That’s what our government should be focused on rather than penalizing success.

He later clarified his position, saying:

I’m not against anybody paying additional taxes as long as there is a comprehensive tax program which involves spending cuts. We have to cut spending, which is the biggest evil we have in this government.

And Charles Koch, the CEO of Koch Industries and funder of conservative causes ($25B), categorically rejected the idea.

Much of what the government spends money on does more harm than good; this is particularly true over the past several years with the massive uncontrolled increase in government spending. I believe my business and non-profit investments are much more beneficial to societal well-being than sending more money to Washington.

What about all the others who ducked the question entirely? Peruse the Forbes list, and if you run into any of them, be sure to ask them yourself. We’ll be curious to learn what they say.

This article made possible by Salon Core members.

Though the essay is titled “An Olive Branch to Obama: I Will Share the Pain,” Schwarzman actually skirts the issue of his own tax burden. He does argue for “shared sacrifice,” but also says eliminating the deficit cannot be achieved by “just raising taxes on the wealthiest two per cent.” (It’s worth noting that these two points, taken together, bear some resemblance to the cries of critics who believe the bottom 50 percent of income earners don’t pay their fair share of taxes.) And, as far as prescribing actual policy, the only solution the Blackstone CEO suggests is a flat rate — which happens to have the flavor of a regressive tax plan.

Schwarzman has long been a vocal critic of President Obama. At one point he even compared the administration’s plan to increase taxes on private-equity firms, such as Blackstone, with Hitler’s invasion of Poland in 1939. The president’s Original Sin was a 2008 campaign promise with regards to “carried interest” — the share of profits a private-equity-fund manager, such as Schwarzman, receives in compensation for his work. Obama proposed taxing those earnings as personal income, rather than capital gains, a move that would shift the applied tax rate upward by 20 percentage points. The plan, of which Schwarzman was critical, bears striking similarities to action proposed by Buffett in his Times column.

While multiple messages for the Blackstone chief went unanswered — and as such, we don’t have a formal answer on the issue of the Challenge — the body of evidence seems to suggest that Schwarzman would not buy in to Buffett’s proposal. Even while the executive invokes “shared sacrifice,” he still seems to endorse every option on the table except raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans. So, until we hear something straight from the horse’s mouth, we’ll file Mr. Schwarzman as a tentative, but likely, “No.”

Enter, Mark Cuban.

The entrepreneur is a latter-day media magnate, with holdings including 2929 Entertainment (which owns Landmark Theatres, Magnolia Pictures and HDNet). He also moonlights as owner of the Dallas Mavericks, reigning NBA champs. Overall, Mr. Cuban is worth an estimated $2.5 billion, according to Forbes.

We reached out to Cuban on Thursday, and received a response yesterday afternoon. And, while his answer isn’t exactly an unqualified yes, he doesn’t seem to be of a hard-line position on the matter of taxes.

I have absolutely no problem paying more taxes. None.

What I have a problem with is how the money is spent.  If the incremental money could be directed to defined and deserved recipients.  I would be thrilled to write the check.

The problem I have is not on the revenue side, its on the expenditure side. Too much money is wasted on bureaucracy, adminis-trivia,  pensions and over expansive federal employment. 

So I’m a resounding yes on more taxes, but an attachment to the funding to be directly spent on approved programs. If a program doesn’t deliver 95pct or better to its intended recipients, it should be put on hold until it does.

“I know well many of the mega-rich and, by and large, they are very decent people. [...] Most wouldn’t mind being told to pay more in taxes as well, particularly when so many of their fellow citizens are truly suffering.”

Salon decided to put that idea to the test. We’ve contacted the other 19 wealthiest Americans — based on the Forbes 400 list — to ask if they would support paying higher federal income taxes. We quickly heard back from six, though only financier, philanthropist and Fox News target George Soros would say that, yes, he’d pay more (see his full statement below). We’ll update this post (and alert readers through Twitter and Facebook) when we have new responses. And we hope others who have the opportunity will ask them, as well.

We’ve also had five people duck out with “no comments,” but we’re still hopeful they’ll change their minds.

UPDATE (8/19/11): Charles Koch, chairman and CEO of Koch Industries, has issued a resounding, if expected, “No” on the issue of a tax increase: ”Much of what the government spends money on does more harm than good; this is particularly true over the past several years with the massive uncontrolled increase in government spending.” (See his full response below.)

Credit where credit’s due, Koch is just the second billionaire to answer our challenge. A half-dozen others have balked on the issue, dispensing opaque “no comments,” while other notables — such as New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, and Google’s Larry Page and Sergey Brin — so far remain mum. We’ll keep updating the page as we hear back from more of the subjects.

- – - – - – - – - -

• 1. Bill Gates

  
  Founder of Microsoft and co-chair of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. (2011 net worth: $54 billion)
  

  No comment

• 3. Larry Ellison

  
  Co-founder and CEO of Oracle Corp. (2011 net worth: $27 billion)
  

  No comment

• 4. Christy Walton (and family)

  Inheritor of WalMart fortune through her late husband, John T. Walton, and the world’s richest woman. (2011 net worth: $24 billion) (Walton’s brothers and sister in law — Jim, Alice and S. Robson, chairman of WalMart — are Nos. 7 through 9 on the Forbes 400 list, and each worth $20 billion-plus.)

• 5. (tie) Charles Koch and David Koch

  
  Co-owners of Koch Industries and bankrollers of many a conservative cause. (2011 net worth: $21.5B, each)
  

• NO VOTE “Much of what the government spends money on does more harm than good; this is particularly true over the past several years with the massive uncontrolled increase in government spending. I believe my business and non-profit investments are much more beneficial to societal well-being than sending more money to Washington.” — Charles Koch 

• 10. Michael Bloomberg

  Mayor of New York; founder and primary owner of Bloomberg LP. (2011 net worth: $18B)

• 11. (tie) Larry Page and Sergey Brin

  Co-founders of Google. Page is also the search giant’s CEO. (2011 net worth: $15B, each)

• 13. Sheldon Adelson

  
  Chairman and CEO of Las Vegas Sands Corp. (2011 net worth: $14.7B)
  

• No comment

• 14. George Soros

  
  Chairman of the Soros Management hedge fund and financier of liberal causes. (2011 net worth: $14.2B)
  

  YES VOTE “Warren Buffett is living up to his reputation as an astute investor,” he said. “The rich hurt their own long term interests by their opposition to paying more taxes.”

• 15. Michael Dell

  Founder and CEO of computer giant Dell, Inc. (2011 net worth: $14B)

• 16. Steve Ballmer

  
  CEO of Microsoft. (2011 net worth: $13.1B)
  

  No comment

• 17. Paul Allen

  Co-founder of Microsoft, chairman of Vulcan, Inc. (2011 net worth: $12.7B)

• 18. Jeff Bezos

  Founder, president, chairman and CEO of Amazon. (2011 net worth: $12.6B)

• 19. Anne Cox Chambers

  
  Heiress, primary owner and a director of Cox Enterprises. (2011 net worth: $12.5B)
  

  No comment

• 20. John Paulson

  
  Founder and president of the Pauls & Co. hedge fund. (2011 net worth: $12.4B)
  

  No comment