Rate this post:
|Republican tax reform attacks federalism promotes democracy!
It is absolutely amazing that our Republican Party leaders and their political action groups, when it comes to factual information concerning tax reform and “conservatism”, are suspiciously silent with regard to an important provision of our Constitution which the Founding Fathers agreed upon to provide protection against mob rule vote [democracy] which now works to allow the spending of federal revenue without a proportional obligation in filling our national treasury and burdens our younger generation with a national debt exceeding $50 TRILLION!.
Republicans and conservative political action groups who support H.R. 25, a national retail sales tax, a flat income tax or a value added tax, and promote these ideas as being “conservative tax reform’’, ignore how each proposal cleverly undermines and violates one of our Founding Fathers’ most important agreed upon rules to be followed when a general tax is laid among the States to fill the national treasury.
Of course, conservative leaders who doubt our founding fathers intentionally agreed upon a specific rule to protect us from “democracy” when it comes to taxing and spending, need to study the debates during which time our Constitution was framed and ratified to understand the importance of their carefully thought out tax plan.
Those who do take the time and study the historical debates will discover a specific rule was in fact created to not only protect us from democracy when the states are called upon to contribute into the common treasury and wealth is used to measure the amount of tax to be paid, but, they will also learn the founding fathers wisely provided a specific provision to extinguish deficits when and if Congress should find it necessary to borrow to meet its expenses.
NOTE:Under the Articles of Confederation a general across-the- board tax to fill the national treasury was agreed upon. The amount to be contributed by each state was to be calculated from each state’s assessed land value, i.e., each state contributed in proportion to assessed wealth.
Article VIII. of the Articles of Confederation states:
“All charges of war, and all other expences that shall be incurred for the common defence or general welfare, and allowed by the united states in congress assembled, shall be defrayed out of a common treasury, which shall be supplied by the several states in proportion to the value of all land within each state, granted to or surveyed for any Person, as such land and the buildings and improvements thereon shall be estimated according to such mode as the united states in congress assembled, shall from time to time direct and appoint.”
The following quotes from Madison’s Notes on the Convention of 1787 tells us how and why the rule for contributing into the common treasury was changed. The documentation also exposes the true nature of today’s popular “conservative tax reform proposals”, each of which turn out to be clever variations of taxation calculated from wealth, property and financial success as found in each particular state, a political philosophy advocating ___ from each state according to its ability, to federal constituents according to their needs.
Mr. Govr. MORRIS … thought property ought to be taken into the estimate as well as the number of inhabitants. Life & liberty were generally said to be of more value, than property. An accurate view of the matter would nevertheless prove that property was the main object of Society. . . . These ideas might appear to some new, but they were nevertheless just. If property then was the main object of Govt. certainly it ought to be one measure of the influence due to those who were to be affected by the Governmt. … He thought the rule of representation ought to be so fixed as to secure to the Atlantic States a prevalence in the National Councils….”
Mr. RUTLIDGE. The gentleman last up had spoken some of his sentiments precisely. Property was certainly the principal object of Society. If numbers should be made the rule of representation, the Atlantic States will be subjected to the Western. He moved . . . "that the suffrages of the several States be regulated and proportioned according to the sums to be paid towards the general revenue by the inhabitants of each State respectively.”
Mr. PINKNEY“ The value of land had been found on full investigation to be an impracticable rule. The contributions of revenue including imports & exports, must be too changeable in their amount; too difficult to be adjusted; and too injurious to the non-commercial States. The number of inhabitants appeared to him the only just & practicable rule.
Mr. DAVY, was for committing the clause in order to get at the merits of the question arising on the Report. He seemed to think that wealth or property ought to be represented in the 2d. branch; and numbers in the 1st. branch.
Mr. Govr. MORRIS “…the Legislature shall possess authority to regulate the number of Representatives in any of the foregoing cases, upon the principles of their wealth and number of inhabitants."
Mr. BUTLER urged warmly the justice & necessity of regarding wealth in the apportionment of Representation.
Mr. KING had always expected that as the Southern States are the richest, they would not league themselves with the Northn. unless some respect were paid to their superior wealth. If the latter expect those preferential distinctions in Commerce & other advantages which they will derive from the connection they must not expect to receive them without allowing some advantages in return. Eleven out of 13 of the States had agreed to consider Slaves in the apportionment of taxation; and taxation and Representation ought to go together.
Genl. PINKNEY dwelt on the superior wealth of the Southern States, and insisted on its having its due weight in the Government.
Mr. WILLIAMSON was for making it the duty of the Legislature to do what was right & not leaving it at liberty to do or not do it. He moved that Mr. Randolph's proposition be postpond. in order to consider the following "that in order to ascertain the alterations that may happen in the population & wealth of the several States, a census shall be taken of the free white inhabitants and 3/5 ths. of those of other descriptions on the 1st. year after this Government shall have been adopted and every year thereafter; and that the Representation be regulated accordingly."
Mr. RUTLIDGE contended for the admission of wealth in the estimate by which Representation should be regulated. …. He moved that "at the end of years after the 1st. meeting of the Legislature, and of every years thereafter, the Legislature shall proportion the Representation according to the principles of wealth & population"
Mr. SHERMAN thought the number of people alone the best rule for measuring wealth as well as representation; and that if the Legislature were to be governed by wealth, they would be obliged to estimate it by numbers. He was at first for leaving the matter wholly to the discretion of the Legislature; but he had been convinced by the observations of [Mr. Randolph & Mr. Mason,] that the periods & the rule, of revising the Representation ought to be fixt by the Constitution
Mr. MADISON, Future contributions it seemed to be understood on all hands would be principally levied on imports & exports. …He could not agree that any substantial objection lay agst. fixig numbers for the perpetual standard of Representation…It was said that Representation & taxation were to go together; that taxation and wealth ought to go together, that population & wealth were not measures of each other.
Mr. Govr. MORRIS moved to add to the clause empowering the Legislature to vary the Representation according to the principles of wealth & number of inhabts. A "proviso that taxation shall be in proportion to Representation."
General PINKNEY liked the idea. He thought it so just that it could not be objected to. But foresaw that if the revision of the census was left to the discretion of the Legislature, it would never be carried into execution. The rule must be fixed, and the execution of it enforced by the Constitution.
Mr. WILSON approved the principle, but could not see how it could be carried into execution; unless restrained to direct taxation.
Mr. Govr. MORRIS having so varied his Motion by inserting the word "direct." It passd. nem. con. as follows-"provided the always that direct taxation ought to be proportioned to representation."
The tax described in H.R. 25, a national retail sales tax, a flat income tax and a value added tax are each intended to subvert the rule the people of the various states have agreed to to contribute into the common treasury in a general tax among the states. Each proposal intentionally calculates a state’s share of the tax from the value of property within each particular state which then determines the amount of tax contributed into the common treasury by each particular state. And, under such proposals, the rule requiring the tax to be apportioned among the states based upon each states’ number of allotted representatives is ignored which subjugates the agreed upon rule that taxation and representation shall be fixed by the same standard!
Ignoring this rule allows the various State Delegates in Congress Assembled to vote to spend money without a fear of a proportional obligation in contributing the money spent___ one of the major defects of income taxation and democracy___ which our founding fathers corrected by the rule of apportioning such a tax based upon representation, the new rule intended to guarantee Representation with proportional obligation!
Each of the various popular tax reform proposals are another attack upon federalism, property ownership and gives in to the evil nature of “democracy”, two wolves and a sheep voting for what shall be for dinner.
Madison, in talking about democracy, in Federalist Paper No. 10 notes “the violence of faction” and also emphatically states: “ that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.”
Madison continues: "The inference to which we are brought is that the causes of faction cannot be removed, and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its effects."
In controlling the “means“, the founding fathers provided a specific rule by which the various states are to contribute into the federal treasury in a general tax…a rule preempting a socialist Congress from seeking out wealth, financial success, and then taxing it wherever found___ a fundamental and historical evil associated with “democracy’’, mob rule vote and group theft!
I apologize for the length of the post, but I though some factual information may be useful to some, especially those who see the need for real tax reform and support a free market system, which our Founder’s plan was intended to preserve and protect!
The only tax reform we need is for the people to demand their employees add the following words to our Constitution, bringing us back to our Founding Father’s original tax plan:
The Sixteenth Amendment is hereby repealed and Congress is henceforth forbidden to lay ``any`` tax or burden calculated from profits, gains, interest, salaries, wages, tips, inheritances or any other lawfully realized money
See how easy real tax reform is? It doesn’t take 135 pages of bullstuff and gobblygoo, [H.R.25] which would leave us on a sinking ship and entrench our nation with more socialism…it only takes 32 words for the people of America to re-establish a fair system of taxation, our Founder’s original plan, which would also gain control of a runaway Congress!
CLICK HERE to study the Founder’s Plan___ scroll down to:
American Constitutional Research Service Before the
Committee on Ways and Means
United States House of Representatives
For a documented summary of the rule by which the states have agreed to and did in fact fill the national treasury in a general across the board tax, CLICK HERE
[Permission is hereby given to reprint this article if credit to its author and the ACRS appears in such reprint. No copyright is claimed for quotes within the article which are public domain materials.]