Another Reason Bush Must Be Re-elected
In his new book, Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert (R-IL) writes that, during President Bush's second term, the Republicans will push for the elimination of the Internal Revenue Service. The book, "Speaker: Lessons From Forty Years of Coaching and Politics," discloses a plan by President Bush and the GOP Congress to replace the burdensome federal income tax with a national sales tax.
Great news, and another reason President Bush must get a second term. I've been a huge supporter of a national retail sales tax for a few years. An excellent place to learn more about the idea of this "Fair Tax" is at the website FairTax.org
In his Federalist Papers, Number 21, Alexander Hamilton writes that the fairest route for raising money for the government is based on consumption.
"There is no method of steering clear of this inconvenience, but by authorizing the national government to raise its own revenues in its own way. Imposts, excises, and, in general, all duties upon articles of consumption, may be compared to a fluid, which will, in time, find its level with the means of paying them. The amount to be contributed by each citizen will in a degree be at his own option, and can be regulated by an attention to his resources. The rich may be extravagant, the poor can be frugal; and private oppression may always be avoided by a judicious selection of objects proper for such impositions. If inequalities should arise in some States from duties on particular objects, these will, in all probability, be counterbalanced by proportional inequalities in other States, from the duties on other objects. In the course of time and things, an equilibrium, as far as it is attainable in so complicated a subject, will be established everywhere. Or, if inequalities should still exist, they would neither be so great in their degree, so uniform in their operation, nor so odious in their appearance, as those which would necessarily spring from quotas, upon any scale that can possibly be devised.
It is a signal advantage of taxes on articles of consumption, that they contain in their own nature a security against excess. They prescribe their own limit; which cannot be exceeded without defeating the end proposed, that is, an extension of the revenue. When applied to this object, the saying is as just as it is witty, that, 'in political arithmetic, two and two do not always make four.' If duties are too high, they lessen the consumption; the collection is eluded; and the product to the treasury is not so great as when they are confined within proper and moderate bounds.This forms a complete barrier against any material oppression of the citizens by taxes of this class, and is itself a natural limitation of the power of imposing them."
Hamilton says that a consumption-based system is most fair because we all have control over our purchases, and thus have control over how much, or how little, tax we pay. The wealthiest will make more purchases and will pay te most in taxes. The poorest, who purchase the least, will pay the least in taxes.
A consumption-based tax, such as a national retail sales tax, is applied to final purchases at the retail level regardless of the purchaser. The wealthiest pay the same sales tax on their items that the poor would pay on theirs. There are no loopholes for those who can hire the best accountants. You buy more, you pay more. You buy less, you pay less. Hence, a "fair tax".
Of course, it will take nothing short of a miracle to get this done. You can imagine what the hard-left libs will have to say about such a proposal. They will use lies and distortions of truth to argue against it.
Libs will say a national sales tax benefits the wealthy, because they no longer have to pay income tax. That argument doesn't wash for various reasons.
- First, they will pay the same tax percentage for all their purchases (homes, cars, yachts, groceries, etc.) that lower-income families pay.
- Secondly, it would do away with tax-shelters, loopholes and other means by which accountants have helped taxpayers avoid paying their "fair share".
- Third, a national retail sales tax would actually benefit the lowest income earners by exempting the basic necessities, and providing a monthly rebate for those estimated costs to each and every family determined by Health & Human Services to be living in poverty.
Rep. John Linder (R-GA) has been a vocal supporter of a national retail sales tax, along with Rep. Steve King (R-IA), and Herman Cain, Georgia businessman and past candidate for the U.S. Senate.
"I believe that we need to stop tinkering with the 54,800 pages of Internal Revenue Code and IRS regulations," said Congressman Linder. "We are only creating a temporary fix to the fundamental problem that our tax system is flawed and needs to be overhauled. It should be abolished and replaced with the FairTax, a simple national retail sales tax."
King campaigned on the proposal during his first run for Congress in 2002, and has said he believes the measure would pass if President Bush were to get behind it during his second term. He also believes that once taxpayers understand the ramifications of the change, they will embrace it.
"We need to stop taxing productivity. As Ronald Reagan said, whatever you tax you get less of. I believe we should give taxpayers a one-year moratorium on withholding tax and let them keep everything they earn while trying the Fair Tax. Do that and they will never go back to the old system."
The only way such a progressive, meaningful and beneficial change to our tax system can occur is by supporting President Bush now and in November. If you are unfamiliar with the idea, look into it. I guarantee it will open your eyes.
