http://www.stegenga.net Mon, 06 Sep 2010 19:54:37 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.2 http://www.stegenga.net/content/view/48/#josc2 H.R. 25 is a socialist type of tax and violates a fundamental rule of our Constitution. I have provided irrefutable documentation in [URL=http://hannity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=49755]Republican Tax Reform Attacks Federalism, free market, and promotes democracy![/URL]that H.R. 25 violates the agreed upon rule by which the various states, under the Constitution, agreed to contribute in a general tax to fill the national treasury. Our founding fathers agreed, during the Convention of 1787 to change the rule for a general tax from a tax based upon wealth, to a general tax among the states which tied representation and taxation together! Each state agreed, by its ratification of our Constitution, to pay a general tax based upon its voting strength which would insure that those states paying the lions share of the tax burden to fund the Constitutionally authorized functions of the federal government, would likewise have a proportional voice, equal to their financial contribution, in how their money would be spent. H.R. 25 ignores this important rule. H.R. 25, just as income taxation [ a Marxist type of tax], which seeks to intentionally calculate the amount of tax to be paid from wealth, property and financial success ___ a political philosophy advocating [b][I]from each state according to its ability, rather than an equal per capita tax apportioned among the states as the founding fathers intended and the various states agreed by their ratification of our Constitution.[/b][/I] Why do you support a tax proposal which would, just as income taxation now does, undermine and subjugate our founding fathers rule for a general tax among the states? Seems to me if you are a sincere supporter of our Constitution and want a fair system of taxation, you would, at the very least, demand a provision to be attached to H.R. 25 requiring the rule of apportionment to be observed when laying the H.R. 25 tax among the states. And, without such a rule being applied to the tax, you would not support H.R. 25 as it violates this important rule of fairness. Regards, JWK [b][I]\"In construing the Constitution we are compelled to give it such interpretation as will secure the result intended to be accomplished by those who framed it and the people who adopted it...A construction which would give the phrase...a meaning differing from the sense in which it was understood and employed by the people when they adopted the Constitution, would be as unconstitutional as a departure from the plain and express language of the Constitution.\" [/b][/I]_____Senate Report No. 21, 42nd Cong. 2d Session 2 (1872), reprinted in Alfred Avins, The Reconstruction Amendments’ Debates 571 (1967) john w k Mon, 03 Jul 2006 23:32:58 +0100 http://www.stegenga.net/content/view/48/#josc3 Of course, you\'ll then agree that the CURRENT tax structure is even more a violation of the framers intent. My support of the fair tax does not disavow the fact that it is not what the framers of our great nation intended, but it is the largest transfer of power from the government to the governed in a very long time. The Fair Tax is not the cureall. The cureall is to get our government back to it\'s constitutional perogative. However, this is something best done in steps. The Fair Tax is one. One step away from the socialist economy our government is crafting... an economy and society of dependence, dependence on government to be \"mommy and daddy\" to everyone. That is a condition I abhore, and one that can be fixed, in steps, starting with the Fair Tax. Thanks again John W K for visiting! john Mon, 03 Jul 2006 23:40:31 +0100 http://www.stegenga.net/content/view/48/#josc6 I’m sure most of those who promote H.R. 25, the alleged fair tax, know the friends of big government and socialists in America worked very hard during the late 1800’s to have an “income tax” adopted because it would allow them, via the force of federal taxation, an unfettered access to tax the people’s wealth, property and financial success wherever it was found and within each particular state. But the Court struck this wealth based tax down on several occasions citing our Constitution’s fair share formula [Art. 1, Sec.2., Cl, 3] and even went on to elaborate upon its requirement, that, whenever such a tax [a tax upon wealth, property and financial success levied among the states] is laid by Congress, it must, at the very least, be apportioned among the states as declared in our Constitution! In the opinion of the SCOTUS in POLLOCK v. FARMERS\' LOAN & TRUST CO., 158 U.S. 601 (1895) the Court correctly points out: The founders anticipated that the expenditures of the states, their counties, cities, and towns, would chiefly be met by direct taxation on accumulated property, while they expected that those of the federal government would be for the most part met by indirect taxes. And in order that the power of direct taxation by the general government should not be exercised except on necessity, and, when the necessity arose, should be so exercised as to leave the states at liberty to discharge their respective obligations, and should not be so exercised unfairly and discriminatingly, as to particular states or otherwise, by a mere majority vote, possibly of those whose constituents were intentionally not subjected to any part of the burden, the qualified grant was made. Those who made it knew that the power to tax involved the power to destroy, and that, in the language of Chief Justice Marshall, \'the only security against the abuse of this power is found in the structure of the government itself. In imposing a tax, the legislature acts upon its constituents. This is, in general, a sufficient security against erroneous and oppressive taxation.\' 4 Wheat. 428. And they retained this security by providing that direct taxation and representation in [158 U.S. 601, 622] the lower house of congress should be adjusted on the same measure. Moreover, whatever the reasons for the constitutional provisions, there they are, and they appear to us to speak in plain language. As Congress now taxes financial wealth and success under “income taxation“, H.R. 25 attempts to expand the reach of the federal government in taxing wealth___ extending the federal governments’ reach to a tax upon property in order to close the circle of socialism in America___ the ability of the central government to tax profits, gains, salaries and other income, and under the proposed H.R. 25, also have direct access to the people’s property, john w k Mon, 17 Jul 2006 23:46:05 +0100