Near Miss Threatens Big Government
Barbarous Relic 
Screenwriting Sanctuary
|
Near Miss Threatens Big Government
Barbarous Relic
|
|
By George
Articles
Demagogue's Survival
Guide
|
By George F. Smith The income tax of 1913 played a major role in switching us from a constitutional republic to a pressure group free-for-all. By extorting wealth from productive citizens, it has allowed demagogues to substitute the rule of men for the rule of law. Most states soon followed the plundering example of the federal government and passed income taxes of their own. Massachusetts was one of those states, and its elected officials, like politicians everywhere, have loved playing the game of buying votes with other peoples money. On November 5th, Massachusetts voters came dangerously close to killing the politicians racket. An alarmingly high 881,738 voters 45.4% voted "Yes" on ballot question 1, which asked if they wanted to end the state income tax effective July, 2003. Prior to the election three independent polling organizations--the Boston Globe, Boston Herald, and WHDH-TV News/Suffolk University--projected the "Yes" vote in the 25% - 34% range, with a 5% error margin.[1] On election day, the "Yes" vote won in 30% of the precincts. Big media upchucked familiar lies, half-truths, and irrelevancies in the aftermath of the near miss. The strong support for ending the income tax, the Boston Globe asserted, "underscored a potent antitax sentiment in the state." The Globe claimed that opponents of the measure "mounted no organized campaign against it," since they expected it to be soundly defeated. Why did they believe this? "No elected officials would back the measure, viewing an abandonment of state income tax as disastrous to the economy and state government." [2] This is the part that is so unsettling to Massachusetts power brokers: slaves were demanding their freedom when they weren't supposed to know they were slaves. How did they find out? It took a third party candidate, Libertarian Carla Howell, to put the question on the ballot. But Howell herself gathered only 1% of the vote in her bid for governor. So why didn't the income tax question suffer a similar rejection? Selling statist ideas is one of the few things government schools do right. Weren't those 881,738 people who voted "Yes" paying attention in class? Where did they get the idea that the money they earn is their property? The income tax is not so much a tax as an allowance -- the state determines how much of the money you make it will let you keep. People are supposed to imbibe this without ever questioning it. If the schools can't be counted on to deliver gullible citizens, the oppressive state will crumble. The income tax is not just another program; it's the pillar of overbearing government. From the state's perspective, nothing, but nothing, must interfere with the seizing of taxpayer wealth. That's the reason Howell had no organized opposition; the big government candidates knew they supported legalized theft. How would that strengthen their political base? A 45.4% showing to oust the income tax was the equivalent of a heart attack. The omnipotent state took a hit. Shrewd politicos know the November 5th income tax vote represented early detection of a potentially fatal disease. If left unchallenged, the income tax movement will kill big government. Carla Howell's assault on the income tax proved one thing: people will stand up for themselves, just as Boston's forefathers stood up to Parliament and their tax schemes. The most significant result of Election 2002 is not the blank check the electorate handed the Republicans to goose-step over the Constitution. It was the fear that the shot Carla Howell fired might be heard 'round the world.'
References 1. Small Government News newsletter, November 7, 2002. 2. Voters' antitax sentiments seen altering agendas, by Corey Dade, Globe Staff, 11/7/2002, The Boston Globe, Next in State
Treachery
|
Other Interesting Sites
Ron Paul's Classics of Libertarian Thought Greenspan's 1966 "Gold and Economic Freedom"
|
|
|