Article Key Words

Flies in your Eyes is a dynamic source of uncommon commentary and common sense, designed to open your eyes and stimulate your thinking.

grid detail

Saturday, December 19, 2009

Flies in the Ointment

Arches in Hassan II Mosque Casablanca, Morocco - photo by JoAnn Sturman

Scott Sturman
fliesinyoureyes.com

When the Founding Fathers established our Constitutional republic, careful attention was paid to devising a form of government which could change – but not too fast. The constructionists rightfully were wary of the emotional component of governance where brash, unreasoned politicians pursue agendas detrimental to the long term viability of the country. The system of checks and balances was adapted to prevent these large philosophical variances. Equally as crucial to the founders was the balance of power between the federal and state governments. The Tenth Amendment speaks to this concern: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

This delicate interplay between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the federal government and the relationship between the national and state governments no longer exists. For all their genius how could the framers of the Constitution not foreseen the grave threat that in two hundred years threatens the republic? The Constitution was ratified at a time when the nation was predominately rural and strong Judeo-Christian values permeated the culture. Quite simply, it was a polity based on self reliance with a profound distrust of powerful government whose personal interactions were based on ethical precepts. It was a time when individual rights were paramount, and inherent social mores made it unnecessary for government to legislate morality. As society became more urban and moral ambivalence acceptable, the populace looked to the federal government to address problems which historically would have been solved locally. Three issues unanticipated by Madison and his collaborators transformed the country into the very situation they painstakingly meant to avoid:

Federal income tax
Career Congressional politicians
Congressional committee chairmen

From a constitutional perspective a direct tax is either a capitation or head tax or a tax on real or personal property. Indirect taxes are classified as excise or event taxes such as gift, estate, or income taxes. Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution mandates direct taxes levied by the national government to be apportioned among the states based on individual populations

In 1913 the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution became law. It stated: “The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.” It became irrelevant whether an income tax is direct or indirect. The purpose of the amendment was to exempt all income taxes from the requirement of apportionment and the consideration of the source where the income was derived.

Money equates with power, and the income tax shifts control from the states and municipalities to the federal government. The Sixteenth Amendment insured the preeminence of the national government by providing a tool to levy limitless taxes. It established the right to transfer wealth from individuals at the discretion of Congress and determine social conduct by establishing tax exemptions and spending tax revenue on programs deemed worthwhile by Congress. In essence the federal income tax in its present form authorizes the government to decide who to tax, how much to tax, where to spend tax revenues, and the type of economic activity to be rewarded and penalized.

The second determinate which undermines the precarious balance of power is the pernicious influence of detached career politicians whose personal success out weighs the welfare of the electorate. Barring death, retirement, or some horrendous scandal, the power of the incumbency virtually insures life long tenure. To insure reelection the senator or representative must divert as much money from the federal treasury to the home state. Squandering tax revenue to the detriment of the country is incidental to “bringing home the bacon.” So entrenched and smug are most careerists that is it comical to see them squirm when they are forced to make judicious decisions. Every so often controversial, highly publicized legislation captures public interest. Like moles exposed to the light, politicians are forced to make choices which place their career in jeopardy. The case of health care reform is one such example. Senator Mary Landrieu's antics come to mind when she realized defying the wishes of the voters of Louisiana could well cost her job in the next election. It is fascinating to contrast the conduct of senators who were elected in the last election cycle as opposed to those who stand for reelection in 2010. The latter group actually has to pay attention to the voters while the former know they can act with impunity since when they run for reelection in 2014 their constituents will have forgotten their actions in 2009.

Committee chairmen in both houses of Congress are extraordinarily powerful. Since the committees craft specific legislation to deal with complex problems which effect all of us for long periods of time, one would expect the chairperson to possess unique skills, yet the only qualification to lead is seniority. Length on the job trumps intelligence, experience in the field, and integrity. The most prestigious committee chairmanships are award as a prize to long serving party stalwarts. Consider the recent financial crisis which caused the banking industry to fail and cost the country billions of dollars, millions of jobs, and a large percentage of our savings. During the debacle who was in charge of the Senate Banking Committee? The same person remains in charge - Christopher Dodd, the son of a wealthy former United States Senator, an English literature major, and an attorney of modest credentials. As far as the voters of Connecticut are concerned his resume is good enough to send him to the Senate for the last twenty-nine years, but as a result the country has paid a terrible price.

Next: RX for Success

No comments:

Post a Comment

grid detail