Posted on 06/22/2002 12:24:33 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
A leader of the "tax honesty movement," whose hunger strike last year convinced federal officials to agree to answer in public tough questions about the income tax's legality – though the government later reneged on the offer – now says he will no longer file income tax returns and has pledged to tour the country to convince other taxpayers to do likewise.
Bob Schulz, chairman of the We The People Foundation for Constitutional Education, said in a June 17 letter sent to President Bush, Internal Revenue Service Commissioner Charles Rossotti and congressional leaders that he believes "the federal income tax to be fraudulent in its origin and illegal in its operation." As such, he said, the agency "lacks the legal authority to force employers to withhold the income tax from the paychecks of its employees" and cannot force "most Americans, including me, to file a tax return and to pay the income tax."
"I love my country," insisted Schulz, 62, but based on six pages of information attached to the letter, he added: "I despise my government, which is promoting anarchy, rebellion, and lawlessness, which I oppose."
"I do not have to submit to any unconstitutional, illegal, unjust and uncivil law, in which case I choose to be civilly disobedient, defending my natural rights and obeying my Creator rather than my civil authorities," he wrote in a lengthy tome.
"The gloves are off," said Schulz. "Enough is enough. I will now do everything in my power to mobilize the people in defense of our rights."
According to a separate report, Schulz is also planning a national campaign to convince others not to withhold taxes or file returns.
"[Schulz] will hit the road late this week or early next and drive cross-country spreading the message with the help of some 600 like-minded 'coordinators' who have already enlisted in the cause," said an editorial in Schenectady, N.Y.'s Daily Gazette newspaper.
Schulz first gained national prominence last year after he began a hunger strike to protest what he says is the government's unlawful effort to levy and collect income taxes.
The tax activist and others contend that the 16th Amendment to the Constitution – which established the income tax in 1913 – was improperly ratified and, hence, is not legal. IRS and Justice Department officials have repeatedly disputed those claims.
Nevertheless, Schulz' hunger strike – which he began July 4, 2001, and ended 20 days later – initially garnered enough attention that Justice Department officials and one U.S. congressman agreed to meet with him to discuss his concerns.
U.S. Assistant Attorney General Dan Bryant and Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, R-Md., signed a written agreement that commited the government to send their top tax and legal experts to a two-day seminar planned by Schulz. The seminar was scheduled for late September but was sidelined after the Sept. 11 attacks.
The seminar, which ultimately took the form of informal hearings, were finally held Feb. 27-28 in Washington, but by then officials had backed away from earlier agreements to appear.
No government officials or lawmakers attended the meetings.
Though nothing has changed as a result of the hearings, Schulz, in an earlier interview with WorldNetDaily, was upbeat.
He said the two-day forum established a "record of truth and fact," and was "compelling."
"We think the people now are justified in demanding that Congress fix the problems" created by the income tax, he said.
The size and scope of the IRS has grown substantially since it was created after the government began collecting income taxes.
At present, the IRS is the federal government's largest agency. It collects some $1.8 trillion in taxes annually and employs 98,000 people. The agency's budget last year was about $8.2 billion.
More TP foolishness. Don't get me wrong. I am thoroughly convinced that the 16th Amendment was not properly ratified. But, I also accept that the Court is going to continue to refuse to address that issue, as it would violate the separation of powers, meaning that the only way that we will ever get rid of the not to be sufficiently damned IRS and Income Tax is through Congressional action, spurred by voters electing real conservatives. All that this TP garbage does is give the IRS and their dupes a way to paint real tax reformers with the broad brush of these kooks.
If you want real tax reform, you are going to have to do it the same way that we got into this mess - through Congressional action, hopefully ending up in the repeal of the 16th Amendment. Then, it won't matter whether or not the 16th Amendment was properly ratified or not.
But, real tax reform doesn't just mean taking the token move to a flat income tax. Remember, that's where this all started. We must rip the income tax out by it's roots and replace it with something all new, that does not require an agency like the not to be sufficiently damned IRS, looking into the private financial affairs of individuals and giving the government a huge threat to hold over the heads of citizens who don't obediently bend over for them on command.
It's time to forget this TP garbage and get down the business of real tax reform. At this time, the only alternative on the table that fits that requirement is the National Retail Sales Tax. If you really want substantive tax reform, then get behind the NRST and let your congresscritters know that if they don't get behind it too, we will elect someone who will (Republican, Libertarian, Independent or otherwise).
try www.taxableincome.net if you want to understand why "national retail sales tax" just ain't gonna see the light of day.
I hope you're not serious ! ? ! ? !
www.taxableincome.net??? Don't you know who those people are? They don't want limited taxes and limited government. They want no taxes and no government. A thorough examination of their site will show them to be the folks who want to bring the entire government down, by choking the government of ALL taxes of any kind.
They don't say that in so many words. But, take some time and read through some of the hogwash that they spout. In fact, they are very careful not to state their purpose or present an alternative anywhere on the site. In my research, I have carefully read through the entire site and such information doesn't exist. It has been my experience that those who complain about government, but offer no alternative, are usually anarchists, who want no government.
They talk about "feel good" purpose like getting the truth out, but they offer no suggestion for alternatives to the income tax. In fact, in several places, they indirectly imply that the federal government should not have the power to tax Americans, at all.
www.taxableincome.net:
A government which can fabricate currency out of thin air (a.k.a. "monetary policy") doesn't need "taxation" to fund it.
They carefully weave valid legal arguments, interspersed with twisted logic (most often using "false choice" arguments), meant to make you believe that the government has virtually no power to tax.
www.taxableincome.net:
If the Sixteenth Amendment didn't authorize Congress to tax the income of all Americans, what would it take to amend the Constitution to allow it? In short, it could not be done without repealing most of the Constitution.
Get that! These folks want you to believe that even a properly ratified amendment to the Constitution, would not not grant Congress the Constitutional right to tax income. Duh? I may not like the income tax, but what they suggest is preposterous. They make the absurd statement that in order to grant Congress such a tax would require repealing a large part of the Constitution. Where do these people come from? In fact, an amendment, by definition, supersedes related parts of the Constitution.
But, let's go on. Here is a good example of how they use "false choice.":
www.taxableincome.net:
"Mark, of course, in saying this we are not here considering a tax... entirely beyond the scope of the taxing power of Congress, and where consequently no authority to impose a burden, either direct or indirect, exists. In other words, we are here dealing solely with the restriction imposed by the 16th Amendment on the right to resort to the source whence an income is derived in a case where there is power to tax..." [Stanton v. Baltic Mining Co., 240 U.S. 103 (1916)]
Their highlights are designed to promote the "false choice" that, since the Court mentioned that they were not considering certain legal issues, there must therefore be a flaw in those issues. In fact, the Court always includes such language in every ruling, to insure that the ruling covers only the question at hand and is not misconstrued to create unintended effects.
The closest that those folks come to suggesting any alternative is one statement that suggests that the only tax that the federal government should be able to levy is a duty on foreign trade - the one tax, incidentally, that history has proven will take a nation down faster than any other.:
www.taxableincome.net:
...the entire debate over a flat income tax, a national sales tax, or any similar "replacement" for the current tax Code, is entirely pointless, as the limits on Congress’ taxing power would limit all of these (and anything similar) to commerce under federal jurisdiction, i.e. international and foreign commerce.
The only informed people that I have ever heard make a suggestion that our government should exist only on duties from international commerce were those whose other arguments and actions placed them clearly among those who fervently want to bring the United States down - not just the United States government - the whole United States. We are talking about Communists, Marxists, Fascists and Anarchists.
In fact, the Constitution clearly does give Congress the power to lay and collect taxes uniformly throughout the United States.
The Constitution of the United States; Article 1; Section 8:
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;
Whether or not you believe that the 16th Amendment was properly ratified, the Constitution clearly does grant Congress the power to "lay and collect taxes", as long as those taxes are uniform among the states. Furthermore, there are numerous Court rulings that prove that any arguments against the government's right to collect taxes within the United States will forevermore be considered frivolous.
On the other hand, the National Retail Sales Tax is, by definition, an excise tax that is uniformly imposed throughout the states and thus allowed in Section 8. I can think of other more favorable and more clearly constitutional ways for the federal government to fund itself. But none of them exist as a bill in front of Congress today. The NRST would certainly lead to a much more limited federal government, since the voters would see how much tax they pay every time the cash register rings. But, the operative word in referring to government is "limited", not non-existent.
The plain fact is that we need a tax system that will both fund the necessary functions of government, without the severe negative effects of a tax on income or reliance on foreign duties and at the same time, place strict limits on the government's power. A NRST would provide both functions quite well. In fact, several different studies have shown that a NRST would reverse the current ominous level of capital flight. And, since the voters would feel it every time they go to the cash register, taxpayer outrage would have the effect of lowering the tax level, thus limiting the federal government. But, the greatest benefit is that it directly takes power from the federal government, since they can no longer hold the IRS over the heads of individuals who don't obediently bend over for them.
If the Courts have allowed the income tax to continue for this long, even after the many constitutional challenges that it has faced, the NRST will have no problems in passing constitutional muster for at least another 89 years..
Personally, I believe that the best and most Constitutional method of taxation would be a tax upon the states, that would let the citizens of each state decide how they want to have tax collected, based upon their own local political viewpoints. This would effectively reverse federalism and put the states back in the driver's seat. But, as I pointed out above, there is no such bill before Congress and little chance that any congresscritters will advance such a bill. However, since the NRST will solve the major problems with the current system, pass Constitutional muster and is currently before Congress, I find it to be an eminently acceptable alternative.
One thing is for sure. The NRST is a d@m^ sight better than the anarchy spouted at taxableincome.net.
as an aside, the fed govt's lack of scrutiny or control of corporations like global crossing, enron, worldcom, etc., may be the undoing of our entire economy! the SEC is a BIG JOKE and NOT WORTHY of INVESTIGATING ANYTHING, including itself! the lack of meaningful investigatory actions by the SEC (what are they really doing with our tax dollars???) could be held responsible, in part, imo, for the lack of confidence in investors and the BIG collapse in the stock market-- there is a whole lot of trouble in this country because of the love of greed, power and money, and the rich and powerful protecting themselves. martha stewart, anyone?
the average American doesn't know that much of what the fed govt engages in is built on phony lies and NOT the constitution. PRE or POST 9/11, THE FEDS CAN'T EVEN FIGURE OUT HOW TO PROTECT OUR BORDERS with the MILITARY LIKE OUR CONSTITUTION SAYS THEY ARE TO DO -- it must not be politically correct for the BORDER POLITICIANS !!
how 'bout the IRS CAN"T EVEN INVESTIGATE JESSE JACKSON'S NOT-FOR-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS or INVESTIGATE the RED CROSS --that's one of the IRS' main purposes and controls, ain't it??!! or is it just out there to put fear in the small guy???
that some patriots like Schulz (www.givemeliberty.org) or Rose or Schiff want our school children and citizens to study hard the U.S. Constitution and their own state constitutions to understand how to make this country better. this study would also show what wool is being pulled over citizen's eyes -- what the feds do "illegally" on so-called "income taxes". watch bill o'reilly regularly. watch hannity & colmes regularly. see if you think the feds are doing a great job with the tax dollars they collect now. see if there is any govt waste out there. how's your state govt doing with your tax dollars? talk to your neighbors and see if they feel more secure about terrorism now. ask them if they know what the feds are doing SPECIFICALLY to secure our borders. many are waking up to the fact that much of what the fed govt does is based on phony lies, deceit and political correctness -- and damn the Constitution if necessary.
if you think national retail sales tax is going to happen (it will not -- mark these words) or, if it were "legal" (it is not -- please use your misplaced constitutional quotes and ask your questions directly to Larken Rose on his www.taxableincome.net site and make sure you take his 10 question test for all citizens -- tax professionals, accountants and tax lawyers included. what i suggest for you is getting excited about SERIOUS campaign finance reform instead of national retail sales tax banter -- there isn't one congressman in 2002 proposing it or even talking about this illegal concept. hold local citizen meetings, like we have done, and demand true campaign finance reform of your representatives!!
when the truth about what goes on with our tax dollars is out there in big enough numbers, then maybe true reform can start to happen. pols will listen to "numbers" of citizens. otherwise, they ain't gonna do anything for the small guy -- unless it's getting their picture in the paper smiling and holding a flag at the local parade. as the old poli sci prof said years ago, "politicians are 98% symbolic and 2% substance." he may have understated this a bit!! many pols run scared of citizen's groups who shine flashlights on their activities. true campaign finance reform is a BIG START to what is wrong in washington. mccain-feingold is only a SMALL START to what's really needed.
i have not heard Bob Schulz (www.givemeliberty.org)or Larken Rose (www.taxableincome.net) at all talk about "no taxes and no government". you will have to find the quotes from these individuals to back up your argument that this is true. if you are calling these brave men who are willing to stand up and seriously question our govt something other that patriots, then we differ more than night and day.
i have not heard Bob Schulz (www.givemeliberty.org)or Larken Rose (www.taxableincome.net) at all talk about "no taxes and no government". you will have to find the quotes from these individuals to back up your argument that this is true.
As I pointed out in my previous post, Rose does not say that he is anti all taxes in so many words. But, he certainly does intimate that in several places. This is just one example:
www.taxableincome.net:
A government which can fabricate currency out of thin air (a.k.a. "monetary policy") doesn't need "taxation" to fund it.
That theme is repeated in various degrees throughout the site. But, where he really loses credibility, is in his intimation that even a properly ratified amendment to the Constitution would not not grant Congress the Constitutional right to tax income.
I never said that Schultz was against all taxes, although he too, never makes clear exactly what his purpose is, other than to make money off of promoting his schemes.
As I said, I am thoroughly convinced, for several reasons, that the income tax, in its current form, is not valid under our laws. However, I am also convinced that we will never be allowed the chance to prove that in Court. Once the Court refused to hear certain arguments and rejected the rest, that avenue was closed. But, as long as we still have the right to elect our lawmakers (for at least another year... optimistically), we can get rid of the income tax in Congress, and not have to worry about a future Court overturning the previous ruling.
But, what that entails is electing lawmakers who are dedicated to replacing the income tax with something more visible (to keep taxes low) and less oppressive (eliminating the IRS). Since there are currently only two replacements proposed in Congress and the flat income tax does not get rid of the IRS, I support the only replacement that fulfills both requirements - the NRST.
As I said before, it isn't my favorite solution. But, it will solve most of the problems with the current system. In fact, should it become law, the voters would almost certainly start demanding lower taxes right away. That's because they perceive the sales tax as taking their money, while the income tax is taken out of their checks before they ever see it, so they don't yet consider it as their money.
I know that it will be extremely difficult to get the NRST or any substantive tax reform through Congress. But, in comparison, the Court has made it very clear that it will be a total waste of time to try and get them to overturn the income tax. In all honesty, I'm not all that certain that it isn't already too late, but I still have some hope.
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.