Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Tax reform proposals to be secret for 50 years
CNNMoney.com ^ | July 25, 2013 | NEW YORK (CNNMoney)

Posted on 07/26/2013 7:40:02 AM PDT by TexasCajun

Tax reform is apparently so treacherous for senators these days that they require the utmost protection from the public -- half a century's worth.

The leaders of the Senate Finance Committee last month asked senators to submit written proposals detailing tax breaks they'd like to see preserved once the tax code is reformed and explain why. The point was to help inform committee leaders in their efforts to craft a tax reform bill.

The request apparently wasn't embraced, and the committee has now promised skittish senators that their proposals will be kept secret for 50 years.

A memo sent out on July 19 promised to mark all submissions "COMMITTEE CONFIDENTIAL. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION. DO NOT COPY.

These materials may not be released to the public from the National Archives or by the Finance Committee prior to December 31, 2064."

(Excerpt) Read more at money.cnn.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: cowards; irs; secret; secrettaxreform; senate; senatefinance; taxes; taxreform
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-64 next last
How cowardly is this? ...shameful.
1 posted on 07/26/2013 7:40:02 AM PDT by TexasCajun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun

Only one tax reform is true reform.....FAIRTAX.

http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=FAQs


2 posted on 07/26/2013 7:44:04 AM PDT by Hostage (Be Breitbart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun

“Every thing secret degenerates, even the administration of justice; nothing is safe that does not show how it can bear discussion and publicity.” Lord Acton


3 posted on 07/26/2013 7:45:06 AM PDT by SMARTY ("The test of every religious, political, or educational system is the man that it forms." H. Amiel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun

Shadow government defined. Secession. Now more than ever, it’s the right thing to do.


4 posted on 07/26/2013 7:45:43 AM PDT by PowderMonkey (WILL WORK FOR AMMO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hostage
No, no thank you.
Under the FairTax, all Americans consume what they see as their necessities of life free of tax. While permitting no exemptions, the FairTax (HR25/S122) provides a monthly universal prebate to ensure that each family unit can consume tax free at or beyond the poverty level, with the overall effect of making the FairTax progressive in application. There is no marriage penalty as the couple gets twice the amount that a single adult receives.

I'd be all for a flat-rate income tax with no exemptions, no credits, no rebates, and no withholdings.

5 posted on 07/26/2013 7:48:11 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

They should end employers withholding taxes from employee’s paychecks whist tax reform is being debated. Make EVERYONE write a quarterly check to the IRS. There would be a tax revolt!
I once asked a friend how much he made. He said, “Well, I take home,,,,,” He really didn’t pay attention to how much was being taken from him. Another had more withheld than required, cuz he liked the big rebate check!


6 posted on 07/26/2013 7:56:35 AM PDT by Dr. Bogus Pachysandra ( Ya can't pick up a turd by the clean end!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun

Probably because their plans include 401k confiscation.


7 posted on 07/26/2013 7:57:38 AM PDT by TurboZamboni (Marx smelled bad & lived with his parents most his life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun

Clearly we need an Amendment defining their rules for them.


8 posted on 07/26/2013 7:59:28 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun

Politicians don’t want their constituents to know what they are doing.....How about putting a certain percentage in cash of what you owe the Federal Government in a lock box....


9 posted on 07/26/2013 8:01:01 AM PDT by yoe ("They Come To America" order it now: http://www.theycometoamerica.com/buy-dvd/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Bogus Pachysandra
They should end employers withholding taxes from employee’s paychecks whist tax reform is being debated.

I highly agree. I think that withholdings are themselves quite immoral: either stealing from the employee, or forcing the employer to perpetrate fraud.

Make EVERYONE write a quarterly check to the IRS. There would be a tax revolt!

I'd be happy if it were yearly, or twice a year.
Yes, I realize that people would crap their pants over a yearly one... for the first few years; but that's only because they've been conditioned not to think about the future WRT finances.

I once asked a friend how much he made. He said, “Well, I take home,,,,,” He really didn’t pay attention to how much was being taken from him. Another had more withheld than required, cuz he liked the big rebate check!

Interest-free loan to the government: they must really love that sucker.

10 posted on 07/26/2013 8:02:14 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun

Where is Snowden when you need him?...............


11 posted on 07/26/2013 8:04:41 AM PDT by Red Badger (Want to be surprised? Google your own name......Want to have fun? Google your friend's names........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun

Difficult to believe this is not satire, perhaps there is really no such thing as political satire these days.


12 posted on 07/26/2013 8:05:17 AM PDT by PoloSec ( Believe the Gospel: how that Christ died for our sins, was buried and rose again)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PowderMonkey

I agree. It’s getting bad now...

CA....


13 posted on 07/26/2013 8:06:38 AM PDT by Chances Are (Seems I've found that silly grin again....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun

Just about every senator has been bought by special interests which want favorable treatment from the government. That happens when government gets so big it can grant favors and benefits to selected groups or businesses over the rest of those in the economy or we little guys without a hook into government.

All these interests tell their tame senator what tax breaks, special treatment from regulators, what inside deals on government contracts, what laws or benefits they need to keep the members of the interest group happy (and contributing) or what insider trading tips they need to stay rich, etc.

The only real reform is to shrink government and make it illegal to call a bribe a campaign contribution. A simple tax plan will only happen when the senators and House members can’t reward the ones pulling their strings.


14 posted on 07/26/2013 8:07:24 AM PDT by RicocheT (Where neither their property nor their honor is touched, most men live content, Niccolo Machiavelli)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog
Clearly we need an Amendment defining their rules for them.

Something like this?

Tax Reform Amendment

Section I
No tax, federal or state, shall ever be withheld from the wages of a worker of any citizen of either.

Section II
No property shall be seized for failure to pay taxes until after conviction in a jury trial; the right of the jury to nullify (and thereby forgive) this debt shall never be questioned or denied.

Section III
The second amendment is hereby recognized as restricting the power of taxation, both federal and state, therefore no tax (or fine) shall be laid upon munitions or the sale thereof.

Section IV
The seventh amendment is also hereby recognized, and nothing in this amendment shall restrict the right of a citizen to seek civil redress.

Section V
No income tax levied by the federal government, the several States, or any subdivision of either shall ever exceed 10%.

Section VI
No income tax levied by the federal government, the several States, or any subdivision of either shall ever apply varying rates to those in its jurisdiction.

Section VII
No retroactive or ex post facto tax (or fee) shall ever be valid.

Section VIII
The congress may not delegate the creation of any tax or fine in any way.

Section IX
No federal employee, representative, senator, judge, justice or agent shall ever be exempt from any tax or fee by virtue of their position.

Section X
Any federal employee, representative, senator, judge, justice or agent applying, attempting to apply, or otherwise causing the application of an ex post facto or retroactive law shall, upon conviction, be evicted from office and all retirement benefits forfeit.

15 posted on 07/26/2013 8:07:51 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: John Semmens

Source material (( ping ))


16 posted on 07/26/2013 8:09:48 AM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

Excellent.


17 posted on 07/26/2013 8:11:12 AM PDT by BipolarBob (Democrats will give you the shirt off somebody elses back for a vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

“I’d be happy if it were yearly, or twice a year.”

I still think quarterly would force action on tax reform more quickly. People would freak! They’d demand reform, and they demand the govt. cut spending radically.


18 posted on 07/26/2013 8:13:20 AM PDT by Dr. Bogus Pachysandra ( Ya can't pick up a turd by the clean end!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun; Revolting cat!
TRANSPARENCY

"I'M SHOCKED!"

19 posted on 07/26/2013 8:19:19 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (America 2013 - STUCK ON STUPID)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Snowden wasn’t upset with the tax system. He was angered that Obama wasn’t following up on all of his promises to the far left fast enough.


20 posted on 07/26/2013 8:20:42 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (America 2013 - STUCK ON STUPID)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: PowderMonkey
Secession. Now more than ever, it’s the right thing to do.

I second that.

As for locking up tax proposal for 50 years: what could the vermin possibly have to hide?

21 posted on 07/26/2013 8:39:48 AM PDT by Standing Wolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

I like this idea. The Republicans are short on vision. The RNC should have a list of amendments for the ready to be voted on at such a time as when we have the needed majorities. It may seem like pie in the sky but without this vision, they just hurry to the next election with the only goal of beating the Democrats.


22 posted on 07/26/2013 8:43:16 AM PDT by VRW Conspirator (The Lefties can drink Kool-Aid; I will drink Tea.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark
Section IX
No federal employee, representative, senator, judge, justice or agent shall ever be exempt from any tax or fee by virtue of their position.

And be subject to the same taxing and enforcing authority as everyone else. The Scoundrels in Washington have gotten away with all kinds of things yet claim that they have the same laws as the rest of us. BUT, these "same laws" that they have are enforced by the likes of the Capitol Police. Wink, wink. Whereas you and I have these laws enforced by the likes of the FBI, IRS, etc.

23 posted on 07/26/2013 8:48:25 AM PDT by VRW Conspirator (The Lefties can drink Kool-Aid; I will drink Tea.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

Sorry to have to tell you but you are grossly misinformed.

First, the Flat Tax is an Income Tax and requires the 16th Amendment to be constitutional.

Second, THE FLAT TAX NEVER STAYS FLAT. Don’t think for a second that our United States has never had a a Flat Tax. There have been several, starting from 1861.

Thirdly, the FairTax is not designed to be a progressive tax. Why is it then described as progressive?

The answer is because a rebate of taxes of $196 per month, the same amount for every qualified individual American, and mind you, that Rebate is a tax cut, will leave those at the poverty line untaxed and those above the poverty line will be taxed.

EVERYONE lives tax free at the poverty line and below. For those that spend above the poverty rate, they are taxed by the National Retail Sales Tax (NRST).

Because incomes vary and because spending varies according to income, the Rebate as a percentage of all NRST taxes paid will vary.

It just happens to turn out to be a graph that looks progressive; it is NOT progressive by design.

There is no income tax under the FairTax and there can never be. The Income tax code is abolished and the 16th is repealed.

There is more than ten times the support in Congress and at the grassroots for the FairTax than there is for the Flat Tax. That’s because most people start out thinking the Flat Tax is a good idea, a needed simplification, but when they get informed from history and from law, and they start to fully understand the FairTax, THEN they go with the FairTax because hands down it wins in every category.


24 posted on 07/26/2013 9:28:01 AM PDT by Hostage (Be Breitbart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark
May I?

No property shall be seized for failure to pay taxes until after conviction in a jury trial; the right of the jury to nullify (and thereby forgive) this debt shall never be questioned or denied be explicitly stated by the judge before the opening and after the closing arguments.

25 posted on 07/26/2013 9:36:58 AM PDT by ExGeeEye (It's been over 90 days; time to start on 2014. Carpe GOP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: VRW Conspirator
I like this idea. The Republicans are short on vision. The RNC should have a list of amendments for the ready to be voted on at such a time as when we have the needed majorities. It may seem like pie in the sky but without this vision, they just hurry to the next election with the only goal of beating the Democrats.

I have a whole list. One for repealing the 17th, one for stabilizing out monetary policy and reigning in spending that I'm particularly pleased with:

Fiscal Responsibility Amendment
Section I
The power of Congress to regulate the value of the dollar is hereby repealed.

Section II
The value of the Dollar shall be one fifteen-hundredth avoirdupois ounce of gold of which impurities do not exceed one part per thousand.

Section III
To guard against Congress using its authority over weights and measures to bypass Section I, the ounce in Section II is approximately 28.3495 grams (SI).

Section IV
The Secretary of the Treasury shall annually report the gold physically in its possession; this report shall be publicly available.

Section V
The power of the Congress to assume debt is hereby restricted: the congress shall assume no debt that shall cause the total obligations of the United States to exceed one hundred ten percent of the amount last reported by the Secretary of the Treasury.

Section VI
Any government agent, officer, judge, justice, employee, representative, or congressman causing gold to be confiscated from a private citizen shall be tried for theft and upon convection shall:
     a. be removed from office (and fired, if an employee),
     b. forfeit all pension and retirement benefits,
     c. pay all legal costs, and
     d. restore to the bereaved twice the amount in controversy

Section VII
The federal government shall assume no obligation lacking funding, neither shall it lay such obligation on any of the several States, any subdivision thereof, or any place under the jurisdiction of the United States. All unfunded liabilities heretofore assumed by the United States are void.

Section VIII
The federal government shall make all payments to its employees or the several states in physical gold. Misappropriation, malfeasance and/or misfeasance of these funds shall be considered confiscation.

26 posted on 07/26/2013 9:55:02 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: VRW Conspirator
Section IX
No federal employee, representative, senator, judge, justice or agent shall ever be exempt from any tax or fee by virtue of their position.
And be subject to the same taxing and enforcing authority as everyone else. The Scoundrels in Washington have gotten away with all kinds of things yet claim that they have the same laws as the rest of us. BUT, these "same laws" that they have are enforced by the likes of the Capitol Police. Wink, wink. Whereas you and I have these laws enforced by the likes of the FBI, IRS, etc.

Already covered in Section VI.

27 posted on 07/26/2013 9:56:30 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Hostage
Sorry to have to tell you but you are grossly misinformed.

Howso? The quoted portion I gave was from your provided link.

First, the Flat Tax is an Income Tax and requires the 16th Amendment to be constitutional.

There are more holes regarding the 14th amendment than the 16th's ratification IIUC.

Second, THE FLAT TAX NEVER STAYS FLAT. Don’t think for a second that our United States has never had a a Flat Tax. There have been several, starting from 1861.

See my post 15: that amendment would guarantee it.

Thirdly, the FairTax is not designed to be a progressive tax. Why is it then described as progressive?

By the very link you gave it says that it is progressive. So, I have no answer for you.

28 posted on 07/26/2013 9:59:39 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ExGeeEye

Oh, nice. I would make it another clause rather than replace the prohibition against questioning/denying the right of nullification, however.


29 posted on 07/26/2013 10:01:21 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: PowderMonkey

It will work as well now as it did last time. No retreat, no surrender.


30 posted on 07/26/2013 10:34:30 AM PDT by Durus (You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

I like that. I’d be willing to accept the entire thing without amendment.


31 posted on 07/26/2013 11:01:12 AM PDT by zeugma (Be a truechimer, not a falseticker!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: VRW Conspirator
Section IX
No federal employee, representative, senator, judge, justice or agent shall ever be exempt from any tax or fee by virtue of their position.

And be subject to the same taxing and enforcing authority as everyone else. The Scoundrels in Washington have gotten away with all kinds of things yet claim that they have the same laws as the rest of us. BUT, these "same laws" that they have are enforced by the likes of the Capitol Police. Wink, wink. Whereas you and I have these laws enforced by the likes of the FBI, IRS, etc.

In addition, did you know that the IRS will prepare taxes for any congresscritter free of charge? I would imagine they are somewhat more lenient with the criminal class than they are us average citizens.

32 posted on 07/26/2013 11:04:00 AM PDT by zeugma (Be a truechimer, not a falseticker!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

OneWingedShark,

The fact that you have found freerepublic.com and have chosen to participate is evidence that you are a cut above the low-information voter, but you are not much more that a small cut above. I don’t mean that in a harmful way, we all have to start somewhere. But there are some very serious people on this website with a lot of experience and insight into politics and political philosophy and you, I and many
others here would do well to observe and learn from them.

You seem to be hung up on the word ‘progressive’. Do you know that this word has a different meaning when applied to tax code as it does when applied to a political group?

Let me make it simple for you. Do you know the FairTax can leave ANY American individual untaxed no matter how rich or wealthy? I will repeat:

ANY AMERICAN INDIVIDUAL CAN PAY ZERO NET FEDERAL TAX UNDER THE FAIRTAX.

Don’t believe it? Take Warren Buffet for example. He’s worth say about $50 Billion at least in what is known publicly.

Warren can move into a studio apartment, buy food and bathroom goods at the local Coop, take the bus or ride a bicycle, and pay his utilities all for the grand total of about $1100 per month. Yes, Warren can do that. And in so doing Warren will be left tax-free even if he earns and pays himself a billion dollars from his businesses.

You see EVERYONE can choose to be tax-free under the FairTax because the FairTax is based on RETAIL SPENDING. We have the choice under the FairTax as to how much we want to pay in federal taxes.

Now normally, people will spend enough to be satisfied to know that they, their families, their friends and community are having a good and abundant life. That’s human nature. So most people are going to be paying the NRST above the level of spending for the essentials of living (the poverty line).

And because the Rebate is fixed and the same for every American individual, people can choose by their spending choices whether to be untaxed or maximally taxed or somewhere in between.

THE FAIRTAX IS NOT AND CAN NEVER BE A PROGRESSIVE TOOL TO BE USED BY ‘PROGRESSIVE’ POLITICAL GROUPS.

THE FAIRTAX IS ‘PROGRESSIVE’ IN ITS NATURE BUT NEVER POLITICALLY BECAUSE PEOPLE CHOOSE TO SPEND WHAT THEY DESIRE AND HAVE CAPACITY TO SPEND.


33 posted on 07/26/2013 11:45:48 AM PDT by Hostage (Be Breitbart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Hostage
One of the reasons I'm against the fair-tax is precisely because it's more complex than need be (e.g. prebate). A simple flat-rate would be far better, especially as laid-out in my tax-reform amendment:
Tax Reform Amendment

Section I
No tax, federal or state, shall ever be withheld from the wages of a worker of any citizen of either.

Section II
No property shall be seized for failure to pay taxes until after conviction in a jury trial; the right of the jury to nullify (and thereby forgive) this debt shall never be questioned or denied. This section shall be explicitly stated by the judge before the opening arguments and after the closing arguments.

Section III
The second amendment is hereby recognized as restricting the power of taxation, both federal and state, therefore no tax (or fine) shall be laid upon munitions or the sale thereof.

Section IV
The seventh amendment is also hereby recognized, and nothing in this amendment shall restrict the right of a citizen to seek civil redress.

Section V
No income tax levied by the federal government, the several States, or any subdivision of either shall ever exceed 10%.

Section VI
No income tax levied by the federal government, the several States, or any subdivision of either shall ever apply varying rates to those in its jurisdiction.

Section VII
No retroactive or ex post facto tax (or fee) shall ever be valid.

Section VIII
The congress may not delegate the creation of any tax or fine in any way.

Section IX
No federal employee, representative, senator, judge, justice or agent shall ever be exempt from any tax or fee by virtue of their position.

Section X
Any federal employee, representative, senator, judge, justice or agent applying, attempting to apply, or otherwise causing the application of an ex post facto or retroactive law shall, upon conviction, be evicted from office and all retirement benefits forfeit.

34 posted on 07/26/2013 12:31:33 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark
I see what Section VI says. But, my point is that laws for Congress and the laws for the rest of us are the same, indeed. But, it is who enforces the laws that are different. For instance, I could perpetrate insider trading and get the SEC, IRS, FBI down my street and up my alley. A given Congressman could perpetrate the identical crime and only be investigated by Barney Fife of the Capitol Police or a committee of other Scoundrels Congressmen, who looks around for a second and declares no crime committed after dragging out the investigation for a year.
35 posted on 07/26/2013 1:20:10 PM PDT by VRW Conspirator (The Lefties can drink Kool-Aid; I will drink Tea.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun

Flat Tax. As few exemptions as humanly possible.


36 posted on 07/26/2013 1:22:27 PM PDT by GeronL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

Another thing I would add to a flat tax is a limit. Income derived from COMBINED taxes, Federal, State, Local shall not exceed a certain percent. It seems to me that that Section V seems to authorize any governments up to 10%. Perhaps, I am reading it wrong, but that looks like 10% for Federal, 10% for State, 10% for County, 10% for City.

And, another thing I would add is the borrowing amount (money printing) shall not exceed X amount. Because you know that by now, if the FedGov cannot get enough tax money, they just print it, borrow it whatever. Then get the popcorn.


37 posted on 07/26/2013 1:29:13 PM PDT by VRW Conspirator (The Lefties can drink Kool-Aid; I will drink Tea.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: VRW Conspirator

I could live with that, I guess. I’d still be wanting to lower it below 10% though


38 posted on 07/26/2013 1:30:10 PM PDT by GeronL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: VRW Conspirator
I see what Section VI says. But, my point is that laws for Congress and the laws for the rest of us are the same, indeed. But, it is who enforces the laws that are different. For instance, I could perpetrate insider trading and get the SEC, IRS, FBI down my street and up my alley. A given Congressman could perpetrate the identical crime and only be investigated by Barney Fife of the Capitol Police or a committee of other Scoundrels Congressmen, who looks around for a second and declares no crime committed after dragging out the investigation for a year.

I get what you're saying; but a tax-reform amendment is not the place to put that correction.

39 posted on 07/26/2013 1:36:10 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: VRW Conspirator
Another thing I would add to a flat tax is a limit. Income derived from COMBINED taxes, Federal, State, Local shall not exceed a certain percent. It seems to me that that Section V seems to authorize any governments up to 10%. Perhaps, I am reading it wrong, but that looks like 10% for Federal, 10% for State, 10% for County, 10% for City.

Indeed; this is so. I had considered having the combined limit but then we get into jurisdictional clashes: if there's a 10% combined limit then what is the result when the FedGov, New York state, New York County, and New York City happen to set their rate at 5%?

It seems to me that the best way to avoid that would be to have each put as a 10% limit and let the State/County/city drive out the people they will with onerous taxation. It would be California x 1,000, especially when they get the individual bills from their respective governments.

Yes, I agree, it's not the ideal solution: but it does support the idea that if you don't like the policies of your city/state you can move.

And, another thing I would add is the borrowing amount (money printing) shall not exceed X amount. Because you know that by now, if the FedGov cannot get enough tax money, they just print it, borrow it whatever. Then get the popcorn.

Nope - Not in a tax-reform amendment; that calls for a separate Financial Responsibility amendment:

Fiscal Responsibility Amendment
Section I
The power of Congress to regulate the value of the dollar is hereby repealed.

Section II
The value of the Dollar shall be one fifteen-hundredth avoirdupois ounce of gold of which impurities do not exceed one part per thousand.

Section III
To guard against Congress using its authority over weights and measures to bypass Section I, the ounce in Section II is approximately 28.3495 grams (SI).

Section IV
The Secretary of the Treasury shall annually report the gold physically in its possession; this report shall be publicly available.

Section V
The power of the Congress to assume debt is hereby restricted: the congress shall assume no debt that shall cause the total obligations of the United States to exceed one hundred ten percent of the amount last reported by the Secretary of the Treasury.

Section VI
Any government agent, officer, judge, justice, employee, representative, or congressman causing gold to be confiscated from a private citizen shall be tried for theft and upon convection shall:
     a. be removed from office (and fired, if an employee),
     b. forfeit all pension and retirement benefits,
     c. pay all legal costs, and
     d. restore to the bereaved twice the amount in controversy

Section VII
The federal government shall assume no obligation lacking funding, neither shall it lay such obligation on any of the several States, any subdivision thereof, or any place under the jurisdiction of the United States. All unfunded liabilities heretofore assumed by the United States are void.

Section VIII
The federal government shall make all payments to its employees or the several states in physical gold. Misappropriation, malfeasance and/or misfeasance of these funds shall be considered confiscation.

40 posted on 07/26/2013 1:48:10 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun

Why is it that our representatives like to create laws and policy in secret?

Our country was founded on an open dialog and public debate. (Federalists Vs Anti-Federalists and others)


41 posted on 07/26/2013 2:04:53 PM PDT by Triple (Socialism denies people the right to the fruits of their labor, and is as abhorrent as slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise
Snowden ... was angered that Obama wasn’t following up on all of his promises to the far left fast enough.

Got a link to support that stupid statement, or do you just want to be widely regarded as a lying retard?

42 posted on 07/26/2013 2:12:54 PM PDT by meadsjn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: meadsjn

FUmeadjn

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/06/17/Snowden-Rips-Obama-For-Not-Closing-Gitmo

“Obama’s campaign promises and election gave me faith that he would lead us toward fixing the problems he outlined in his quest for votes. Many Americans felt similarly. Unfortunately, shortly after assuming power, he closed the door on investigating systemic violations of law, deepened and expanded several abusive programs, and refused to spend the political capital to end the kind of human rights violations like we see in Guantanamo, where men still sit without charge.”

He’s a bedwetting Obamavoter.


43 posted on 07/26/2013 2:16:29 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (America 2013 - STUCK ON STUPID)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: meadsjn

meadsjnretard much?


44 posted on 07/26/2013 2:17:09 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (America 2013 - STUCK ON STUPID)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise
shortly after assuming power, he closed the door on investigating systemic violations of law, deepened and expanded several abusive programs,

Thanks for proving my point.

Nothing in that statement by Snowden mentions moving the country to the left.

45 posted on 07/26/2013 2:18:45 PM PDT by meadsjn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: meadsjn

The other half of that statement (that he took the job as did Manning TO LEAK):

http://www.theverge.com/2013/6/24/4460028/edward-snowden-booz-allen-nsa-contractor-job

Edward Snowden says he took Booz Allen job to collect, leak NSA info

In an interview with the South China Morning Post, Snowden said that he took a job with Booz Allen specifically to gather information on the NSA’s spying efforts. His role as a source of leaks, sharing details of international surveillance efforts to the press, was something he says he envisioned for himself before taking the job.


46 posted on 07/26/2013 2:19:11 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (America 2013 - STUCK ON STUPID)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise
None of that even pretends to hint that Snowden was left-wing.

Statist surveillance of law-abiding citizens is the stuff of left-wing communists -- commies like Obama, GWB, Cheney, the Clintons, GHWB, etc.

47 posted on 07/26/2013 2:24:12 PM PDT by meadsjn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

When you have more than 75 members of Congress sponsoring your amendment along with endorsements from Fed Board Governors and State Governors along with millions of grassroots supporters, let me know.


48 posted on 07/26/2013 2:45:13 PM PDT by Hostage (Be Breitbart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: meadsjn

Snowden has been sucking commie cock since the day he ran.

Go on an tell me more about how marvey Ron Paul is.


49 posted on 07/26/2013 2:45:49 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (America 2013 - STUCK ON STUPID)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise
You have posted nothing to support your contention that Snowden is left-wing. Nothing has been published to support it.

I do not, and have never, supported Ron Paul.

You're batting zero.

50 posted on 07/26/2013 2:48:37 PM PDT by meadsjn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-64 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson