Replies

It would mean the Dems would have to have a 2/3rds majority in both houses. Cain has said he wouldn’t sign the bill unless this provision was included. So you can remain ignorant and by default support the current system and its IRS bureaucracy or you can get on board a change that would REDUCE the size of the Federal Government. Cain’s ultimate goal is the elimination of the IRS and all production taxes to be replaced by the Fair Tax (tax on consumption). If you knew your history you would know that before the Income Tax, the US funded itself on consumption taxes and tarrifs. The IRS and its Income tax is Marxist/Progressive, a heavily graduated tax on Production is at the heart of Marxism/Progressivism. I don’t see how anyone who considers themselves a Conservative could be in favor of keeping the current system.

Visit www.fairtax.org

It would mean the Dems would have to have a 2/3rds majority in both houses.

No it doesn't. If Congress passes a law or sets a procedural rule that says a 2/3 majority is needed for a tax increase, raising taxes is now a two-step process: Congress votes to change the law or rule to a simple majority, and then Congress votes to increase the tax with a simple majority. Neither one requires a 2/3 majority. Only a constitutional amendment requiring a 2/3 majority would do that.

It would mean the Dems would have to have a 2/3rds majority in both houses. Cain has said he wouldn’t sign the bill unless this provision was included.

Such a provision would never make it past the Supreme Court. The Constitution specifies super majorities for veto overrides and amendments only. All other legislation requires only a simple majority.