Problem is I think demographics have outshifted us. True Conservatism has none of the young vote, and more and more of the older vote is shifting away from our message as well. Maybe we need to abandon any thoughts of social conservatism, as this is a very polarizing issue, and stick to our guns with fiscal conservatism which more people seem able to bend on.
Your “concern” is noted, newbie.
When's the last time you heard a conservative discuss tax policy beyond "we need to lower taxes to boost the economy?" The left talks about the philosophy of why we should have progressive system with high rates (fairness, etc...) Until we start defending the why--the philosophy--of our positions we won't pick up support with the young.
I created a sample second party--the ALT2P--around the idea of returning our tax system to its original goal. Here's the opening statement from the website. This is the kind of specificity I'm talking about.
This was one of the most debated lines during the 1787 constitutional convention and subsequent ratification process, because it gave the federal government the authority to impose a domestic tax (a tax upon its own citizens). Something the federal government had been prohibited from doing under the Articles of Confederation.
Those supporting ratification of the new constitution were known as federalist, and included men such as James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay. The anti-federalist (who opposed ratification) included figures such as: George Mason, Richard Henry Lee, and Patrick Henry. Both groups wrote numerous essays in support of their position, which included their interpretation of the federal domestic taxing authority, it’s proper use, and it’s limits under the proposed Constitution.
When you sum up the federalist writings, they gave one (and only one) reason to support a federal domestic taxing authority: it was needed to raise the revenue required for the operation of the federal government.
The anti-federalist feared a federal domestic taxing authority would be used for more than merely raising revenue.
1) Large landowners (the “mega corporations” of the day) would use their influence to reduce their tax burden, while “imprudent and designing men” would mold the tax code for their own benefit.
2) A federal tax system would be used to “reign in free men” with burdensome penalties and an army of federal tax collectors, placing citizens in fear their own government.
3)The federal tax code would disrupt free trade; it would result in intrusive licensing, regulation, and federal oversight of businesses simply to ensure they comply with the tax code—extending the federal government’s authority beyond its proper bounds.
4) A federal tax code would be used to influence and control every part of private life; citizens would be unable to make purchases, go through their daily activities, or make plans for the future without concern for the tax code.
The anti-federalist argued that none of these were legitimate uses of the federal tax code. The federalist agreed. They never argued that any of these were legitimate uses of the tax code. Instead, they argued that the anti-federalist fears were baseless; that these abuses of the federal tax system would never come to pass under an open, representative government; and citizens had nothing to fear from a federal taxing authority.
And, for the next 80 years, the federalist seemed to be right. The federal domestic taxing authority was used sparingly. During Thomas Jefferson’s administration, the few domestic taxes that had been implemented were repealed. They were reinstated to raise revenue to pay the debt from the War of 1812 ( and then quickly repealed once that debt was paid). In fact, from 1818 to 1861 the United States had no domestic federal taxes at all—none. The federal taxing authority was placed in the Constitution as a necessary evil. Necessary to raise the revenue required to operate the government, but if that revenue could be raised elsewhere (from tariffs, import duties, land sales, etc…) then it was a “necessary evil” that Americans of all political persuasions preferred to leave on the shelf.
Today, the federal tax code is over 90,000 pages long; it is full of loopholes and tax breaks for the politically connected; and it has become the federal government’s primary tool for social and economic engineering. This is not what the founders of our country intended—not the federalist; not the anti-federalist; and not by the states that ratified the Constitution. It’s time we return (and limit) our federal domestic tax system to its original, intended purpose: to raise revenue for the operation of the government.
The American Legitimate Tax Second Party is being founded to do just that—return the federal tax code to its original purpose. No more social engineering via the tax code; no more economic engineering via the tax code; no more using the tax coded to grant political favors; no more manipulation of the tax code by “imprudent and designing men”; no more illegitimate usage of the tax code—period.
The goal of The American Legitimate Tax Second Party: re-establish that the only legitimate purpose for a federal domestic tax is to raise revenue for the operation of the government, and restore the federal tax system to its legitimate purpose.
republican party line huh? sorry. i will never, never agree to fund abortion mills (like planned parenthood) with tax payer money. that is non-negotiable. let the blood be on the hands of those who will willingly pay for it. if someone wants an abortion and does it with private money, well that is a disaster and i am as sorry for them as i can be, but that is the law of the land (roe v. wade), and i must accept that. it is liberals who require that consciensious individual behavior be enforced against some standard of social behavior. true conservatives want freedom for the individual to follow his or her conscious.