Posted on 03/07/2008 6:25:39 AM PST by ShadowAce
A river is a beautiful thing. However, a river outside its banks is called a flood and turns from being a beautiful amenity to being a destructive force. This role change describes what may be happening to our judicial branch of government. There are many very fine judges, but all too often we hear about bad decisions in which the judge applied his personal philosophy to arrive at a decision far beyond simply interpreting the law.
We are seeing a nationwide trend of judges starting to tax and spend without legislative authority. It is bad enough to see a poor interpretation of a law, but to see judges actually making legislative decisions is way outside their bounds. Observing the tussles between the three branches is like playing the game, “Rock, Paper, Scissors.” What makes the game interesting is that any one of the three can win. Right now, the judicial branch is winning more than the Constitution allows.
With dramatic rises in property taxes, many Missourians are left feeling confused and overtaxed. Alleviating this situation is a priority for us in Jefferson City this session. But another tax problem deserves attention as well.
From the federal government to local taxing entities, Missouri taxpayers are accountable to more than enough taxing authorities. One we should not stand for is judges who try to impose higher taxes.
Even so, we have seen several examples of appointed judges who have forced local communities and state governments to enact certain laws or levy tax increases. Judge-imposed taxes became an issue here in Missouri during the Kansas City school desegregation case, Missouri v. Jenkins. A federal judge ordered the state and local governments to increase spending for the school. The judge also forced the local government to raise taxes. Many Republicans and Democrats alike fought this decision. The case went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, where judges upheld a federal court’s ability to force state and local governments to raise taxes.
In Arizona, the state could be held in contempt of court if legislators don’t find funds to improve instruction of English to non-native speakers, many of whom are the children of illegal immigrants. I will save the conversation about educating illegal immigrants for another day. Today, I want to use this case as an example of a judge who has taken appropriating money into his own hands. The judge directed millions in penalties to go immediately to Arizona classrooms. The state of Arizona is facing a billion dollar budget shortfall, and the last thing it needs is judges dictating how the legislature should allocate money.
These are just a few examples of judges who exceed their constitutionally designed powers to make law and levy taxes from the bench. While state legislators can’t control what federal judges do, we can ensure Missouri judges don’t have the power to tax.
We are proposing a constitutional amendment that would end judge-imposed tax increases. Voters would have the opportunity to decide the future of this legislation. Specifically, the proposed amendment prohibits the Missouri Supreme Court or any other court of the state from ordering the state, county or city to increase taxes. The amendment also prohibits any Missouri court from controlling how the state, county or city spends, allocates, or budgets except as expressly authorized by legislation or approved by Missouri voters.
Around the country and in Missouri, judges are necessary and important to the governmental process, and many do great work. However, we legislators, not judges, are elected to represent our constituents’ interests and values.
My goal is to allow you and other voters to have a say in the operation of government – whether it is by voting, calling your representatives or taking action through petitions, grassroots campaigns and public forums.
Judges do not have the same role in our system as do legislators, and citizens do not have the same opportunity to challenge their decisions. When was the last time you called a judge to tell him what you thought? When was the last time a judge sent you a survey to ask what direction you wanted him to rule? It is difficult to even find a phone number for a judge.
In addition, judges can’t see the full picture of the state budget because they do not have the knowledge and experience with the process and its conflicting demands that your elected representatives do.
Missouri’s taxpayers literally pay the price when judges impose court-ordered tax increases. We must step in and reiterate the separation of powers between the branches of our government and clearly define who has the power to levy taxes.
If all goes well this session, we will put a resolution on the November ballot for you to vote on that will stop judges from being able to order tax increases on innocent taxpayers.
Here are the proposed changes to our state constitution:
2. No court shall levy or impose or order the levy or imposition of new or increased taxes, licenses, or fees of any description whatsoever.Your thoughts are important to me, so please let me know what you think about this proposal. You can send me your opinion by clicking here: Cynthia Davis.3. No court shall order the general assembly or any elected or appointed officer of the state or any political subdivision or governmental agency or authority to appropriate or expend public funds except as expressly approved by legislation or the vote of the people. This subsection shall not be construed to prevent the courts of this state from declaring the rights and obligations of parties under duly enacted legislation appropriating public funds or authorizing the expenditure thereof; nor shall this subsection be construed to prohibit the courts from entering and enforcing judgments concerning lawful contracts or bonded indebtedness of the state or any political subdivision, agency, or authority thereof.
4. Nothing herein shall be construed to limit the authority of the courts to enforce the provisions of article X, sections 16 through 24 of this constitution, nor to enjoin the levy or collection of illegal taxes, licenses, or fees or the expenditure of public funds not authorized by law or contrary to law, nor to order reductions in tax rates in accordance with law.
MO Ping!!
I happen to know Mrs. Davis personally, and I know she is conservative and a Christian who is truly looking out for her constituents. Please help her with this by contacting your local MO rep and urging his/her support for this effort!
I pray that you are successful my friend. We are slowly sliding into fascist socialism regardless of the will of the people.
I think you’re correct, but with reps like Mrs. Davis, we can slow that considerably.
Low volume ping list
FReepmail me to be on, or off, this list.
I tend to agree that judges should rule on the law and not make the law.
However, there is a difference between the "law" and "justice". Let's keep this in mind also.
As for court ordered TAX increases, that's BS.
Thanks for a great article. I agree wholeheartedly.
bookmark..
thanks for the ping Joe.
Any ruling that covers tax increases with “fairness” or justice” needs to be overturned as activist, and outside their scope of authority.
It used to be easy to contain the judiciary. They were bound by the law, so you’d just pass a law to reverse what they did. Now, however, they no longer consider themselves bound by the law. Now, they are the law, and if we don’t like it, then TOUGH!
(Article 1, section 7- All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other Bills... (Article 1, Section 8, ss1 & 2- The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; To borrow money on the credit of the United States
Also, Article 3 limits judicial power.
If they are ignoring this, what is to keep them from just ignoring another amendment?
That is for the US Judicial system. This article is about the state judiciary. The US Constitution (I believe) doesn’t cover what Mrs. Davis is preventing with this measure.
I would much more appreciate the ability to “Fire” an activist judge. There has got to be a way, and take away their pensions.
What is needed is defiance of these acts of pretended legislation by the officials whose powers they usurp.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.