> “How exactly can a Congressional law (HR 25) repeal a Constitutional Amendment?”
HR 25 cannot repeal a Constitutional Amendment. It can only make itself go away ‘sunset itself’ if the 16th is not repealed.
Repeal is done by separate legislation now before Congress, H.J.RES.104:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c113:H.J.+Res.+104:
As soon as HR 25 is passed and signed into law by President Cruz, then a large portion of resources get shifted over to pushing the above legislation for repealing the 16th.
The thing to understand here is that the guys and gals on the committees who deal with the nuts and bolts of taxation, and the tax lobbyists, members and staffers of the CBO and the JCT; they all know each other, lunch with each other, their kids have play dates with each other.
Except the progressives will eat at one end of the lunch room away from conservatives and their kids are not allowed to play with kids from conservative families, usually.
Now progressives know that if Ted Cruz gets in, then HR 25 is front and center. They know this and they know it now.
They know they have lost the debate. But now they try to use scare tactics, name calling, smears and lies, anything to taint HR 25 supporters and sponsors; samething they do with the ‘Tea Party’ name.
But here’s the thing, they have to have an alternative to HR 25. And that alternative is the Flat Tax with no deductions. For progressives the Flat Tax preserves their cherished 16th Amendment and in fact it needs it to be legal. The Flat Tax gives them a clean slate to start their whole tax favor sales business over again.
I have seen them. As soon as HR 25 passes or HR 1040 for the Flat Tax passes, they will be getting to work the next day on raising the whole beast back up. To them it will be like remodeling a home.
So don’t be surprised if you see a lot of trolls here on FR quacking “Flat Tax”.
You can almost hear them now:
“Flat Tax”, “Flat Tax”, “Flat Tax”, “Flat Tax”, “Flat Tax”, “Flat Tax”, “Flat Tax”, “Flat Tax”
“Simple”, “Simple”, “No Deductions”, “No Deductions”, “No Deductions”, “Simple”, “Simple”, “Flat Tax”, “Flat Tax”, “Flat Tax” ...........
And when asked about the consumption tax? They will quack:
“Liars!”, “Lunatics!”, “23% vs. 30%!”, “BAH!” “Scammers!”, “Con Artists!”, “BAH!”, “Liars!”
And ask them again about the alternative?
“Flat Tax”, “Flat Tax”, “Flat Tax”, “Flat Tax”, “Flat Tax”, “Simple”, “Simple”, “No Deductions”, “No Deductions”, “Flat Tax”, “Flat Tax” ...........
That’s where they’re at.
I get so tired of the ranting lunatics who pop up around here, not reasonably discussing their side of the argument and seeking the best answer, but defending their pet idea at all costs. That’s what political parties end up becoming - not what’s best for America, but what’s best for the continuance of the political party.
As far as I know, you haven’t answered the Supremacy Clause and Amendment Clause problem about repealing the 16th Amendment (your link was basically a blank page). There’s only one way for the Constitution and its Amendments to be further amended and that’s found in Article V (must be a Constitutional Amendment, NOT an act of Congress).
Without the 16A gone, I am against a new layer of taxation. With 16A gone (looks like the best shot is state court(s) finding it was never legally ratified) your argument is a strong one IMO.
Getting rid of the 16A is the big deal IMO. If not, I move for a flat tax. Milton Friedman, who I highly respect, didn’t have too much of a problem with a low, flat tax. Again, adjudicate the 16A as invalid or constitutionally remove the 16A, and I’m all ears with HR 25.