johnwk
06-28-2011, 04:58 PM
SEE Levin talks to Orrin Hatch about new balanced-budget amendment (http://www.therightscoop.com/levin-talks-to-orrin-hatch-about-new-balanced-budget-amendment/)
Mark Levin, although I love him and wish I had his gift of gab, did not explain to his listening audience the proposed balanced budget amendment (H.J.RES.1 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.J.RES.1.RH:...)) is a fraud being perpetrated upon the American People by the Washington Establishment. And it’s a fraud because it does not provide a fixed rule to extinguish a deficit when Congress borrows to meet expenses during the course of a fiscal year.
Reasonable people would agree emergencies may arise and Congress may have no choice but to borrow to meet expenses. And a specific vote in Congress ought to determine if a legitimate emergency has developed and if Congress ought to be allowed to borrow. And this is what the proposed balanced budget amendment sort of does, but does so in a half heartedly way under SECTION 6 which uses open ended flimflam phraseology.
However, what we are really talking about, when we talk about a “balanced budget amendment” is, once Congress borrows and spends more than is brought in from its normal taxing powers to finance an emergency, what is the fixed rule by which to extinguish the debt created by borrowing for that emergency, and would thus satisfy the goal of an annually balanced federal budget?
The fact is, our founding fathers intended an apportioned tax among the states to be used under such circumstances, e.g., see: Ratification of the Constitution by the State of New Hampshire; June 21, 1788 (http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/ratnh.asp)
Fourthly That Congress do not lay direct Taxes but when the money arising from Impost, Excise and their other resources are insufficient for the Publick Exigencies; nor then, untill Congress shall have first made a Requisition upon the States, to Assess, Levy, & pay their respective proportions, of such requisitions agreeably to the Census fixed in the said Constitution in such way & manner as the Legislature of the State shall think best and in such Case if any State shall neglect, then Congress may Assess & Levy such States proportion together with the Interest thereon at the rate of six per Cent per Annum from the Time of payment prescribed in such requisition-
And were these intentions for an emergency apportioned tax among the States ever put into practice which would confirm the founders really meant what they said? See e.g., an Act laying a direct tax for $3 million (http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=003/llsl003.db&recNum=94) in which each State’s Congressional Delegation returned home with a bill in hand for their State’s apportioned share to extinguish a deficit.
Also see Section 7 of direct tax of 1813 (http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=003/llsl003.db&recNum=112) allowing states to pay their respective quotas and be entitled to certain deductions in meeting their payment on time.
Our founding fathers intended use of the “apportioned tax among the States” sets a fixed rule by which to balance the budget when an emergency arises, and, it does so in a manner that makes every State’s Congressional Delegation immediately accountable when they must bring home the bill to their State to pay for the “emergency” they borrowed money for. Of course, our founding fathers also left Congress with the authority under the emergency apportioned tax to set the time period in which the States must pay their share of the burden in extinguishing the debt created by Congress. But the bottom line is, it also provides a fixed rule to balance the budget in a no-nonsense way.
Whether 2/3 or 3/5 vote in setting the time period seems immaterial so long as the States are legally bound to extinguish the debt created by Congress, thereby meeting the criterion for an annually balanced federal budget, a desired end which is not accomplished under the fake balanced budget amendment Mark Levin has been conned into supporting.
My opposition to H. J. RES. 1 is, the proposed balanced budget amendment does not declare how to balance the budget when Congress borrows to meet its expenses which causes and annual deficit. Mark Levin needs to explain why it is called a balanced budget amendment if it does not provide a fixed rule to balance the budget?
Here is the Fair Share Balanced Budget Amendment, which is based upon our founding fathers expressed intentions!
Proposing a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
“SECTION 1. The Sixteenth Amendment is hereby repealed and Congress is henceforth forbidden to lay ``any`` tax or burden calculated from profits, gains, interest, salaries, wages, tips, inheritances or any other lawfully realized money
NOTE: these words would return us to our founding father’s ORIGINAL TAX PLAN (http://townshipnews.org/?p=1360) as they intended it to operate! And, they would remove the existing chains of taxation which now oppresses America‘s free enterprise system and robs the bread which working people have earned when selling their labor!
"SECTION 2. Congress ought not raise money by borrowing, but when the money arising from imposts duties and excise taxes are insufficient to meet the public exigencies, and Congress has raised money by borrowing during the course of a fiscal year, Congress shall then lay a direct tax at the beginning of the next fiscal year for an amount sufficient to extinguish the preceding fiscal year's deficit, and apply the revenue so raised to extinguishing said deficit."
NOTE: Congress is to raise its primary revenue from imposts and duties, [taxes at our water’s edge], and may also lay miscellaneous internal excise taxes on specifically chosen articles of consumption. But if Congress borrows and spends more than is brought in from imposts, duties and miscellaneous excise taxes during the course of a fiscal year, then, and only then, is the apportioned tax to be laid.
"SECTION 3. When Congress is required to lay a direct tax in accordance with Section 1 of this Article, the Secretary of the United States Treasury shall, in a timely manner, calculate each State's apportioned share of the total sum being raised by dividing its total population size by the total population of the united states and multiplying that figure by the total being raised by Congress, and then provide the various State Congressional Delegations with a Bill notifying their State’s Executive and Legislature of its share of the total tax being collected and a final date by which said tax shall be paid into the United States Treasury."
NOTE: our founder’s fair share formula to extinguish a deficit would be:
States’ population
---------------------------- X SUM TO BE RAISED = STATE’S SHARE
Total U.S. Population
This formula, as intended by our founding fathers, is to insure that those states who contribute the lion’s share of the tax are guaranteed a representation in Congress proportionately equal to their contribution, i.e., representation with proportional obligation!
"SECTION 4. Each State shall be free to assume and pay its quota of the direct tax into the United States Treasury by a final date set by Congress, but if any State shall refuse or neglect to pay its quota, then Congress shall send forth its officers to assess and levy such State's proportion against the real property within the State with interest thereon at the rate of ((?)) per cent per annum, and against the individual owners of the taxable property. Provision shall be made for a 15% discount for those States paying their share by ((?))of the fiscal year in which the tax is laid, and a 10% discount for States paying by the final date set by Congress, such discount being to defray the States' cost of collection."
NOTE: This section respects the Tenth Amendment and allows each state to raise its share in its own chosen way in a time period set by Congress, but also allows the federal government to enter a state and collect the tax if a state is delinquent in meeting its obligation.
"SECTION 5. This Amendment to the Constitution, when ratified by the required number of States, shall take effect no later than (?) years after the required number of States have approved it.
In closing, I do know that the “good-cop bad-cop” con game does not work if there is no “good cop” in the game! I’m just wondering why not one of our “good cops” (Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Schnitt, Mark Levin, Dennis Prager, Bill O'rielly, Mike Gallagher, Lee Rodgers, Neal Boortz. Tammy Bruce, Monica Crowley, Herman Cain …. etc..) have pointed out the fact that the so called balanced budget amendment has no provision to actually balance the budget when Congress borrows to meet its expenses, and yet, the proposed legislation is called a “balanced budget amendment”. Something stinks like a fish and it’s not our founding fathers original instruction manual, nor their Fair Share Balanced Budget method.
JWK
“Honest money and honest taxation, the Key to America’s future Prosperity“ ___ from “Prosperity Restored by the State Rate Tax Plan”, no longer in print.
Mark Levin, although I love him and wish I had his gift of gab, did not explain to his listening audience the proposed balanced budget amendment (H.J.RES.1 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.J.RES.1.RH:...)) is a fraud being perpetrated upon the American People by the Washington Establishment. And it’s a fraud because it does not provide a fixed rule to extinguish a deficit when Congress borrows to meet expenses during the course of a fiscal year.
Reasonable people would agree emergencies may arise and Congress may have no choice but to borrow to meet expenses. And a specific vote in Congress ought to determine if a legitimate emergency has developed and if Congress ought to be allowed to borrow. And this is what the proposed balanced budget amendment sort of does, but does so in a half heartedly way under SECTION 6 which uses open ended flimflam phraseology.
However, what we are really talking about, when we talk about a “balanced budget amendment” is, once Congress borrows and spends more than is brought in from its normal taxing powers to finance an emergency, what is the fixed rule by which to extinguish the debt created by borrowing for that emergency, and would thus satisfy the goal of an annually balanced federal budget?
The fact is, our founding fathers intended an apportioned tax among the states to be used under such circumstances, e.g., see: Ratification of the Constitution by the State of New Hampshire; June 21, 1788 (http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/ratnh.asp)
Fourthly That Congress do not lay direct Taxes but when the money arising from Impost, Excise and their other resources are insufficient for the Publick Exigencies; nor then, untill Congress shall have first made a Requisition upon the States, to Assess, Levy, & pay their respective proportions, of such requisitions agreeably to the Census fixed in the said Constitution in such way & manner as the Legislature of the State shall think best and in such Case if any State shall neglect, then Congress may Assess & Levy such States proportion together with the Interest thereon at the rate of six per Cent per Annum from the Time of payment prescribed in such requisition-
And were these intentions for an emergency apportioned tax among the States ever put into practice which would confirm the founders really meant what they said? See e.g., an Act laying a direct tax for $3 million (http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=003/llsl003.db&recNum=94) in which each State’s Congressional Delegation returned home with a bill in hand for their State’s apportioned share to extinguish a deficit.
Also see Section 7 of direct tax of 1813 (http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=003/llsl003.db&recNum=112) allowing states to pay their respective quotas and be entitled to certain deductions in meeting their payment on time.
Our founding fathers intended use of the “apportioned tax among the States” sets a fixed rule by which to balance the budget when an emergency arises, and, it does so in a manner that makes every State’s Congressional Delegation immediately accountable when they must bring home the bill to their State to pay for the “emergency” they borrowed money for. Of course, our founding fathers also left Congress with the authority under the emergency apportioned tax to set the time period in which the States must pay their share of the burden in extinguishing the debt created by Congress. But the bottom line is, it also provides a fixed rule to balance the budget in a no-nonsense way.
Whether 2/3 or 3/5 vote in setting the time period seems immaterial so long as the States are legally bound to extinguish the debt created by Congress, thereby meeting the criterion for an annually balanced federal budget, a desired end which is not accomplished under the fake balanced budget amendment Mark Levin has been conned into supporting.
My opposition to H. J. RES. 1 is, the proposed balanced budget amendment does not declare how to balance the budget when Congress borrows to meet its expenses which causes and annual deficit. Mark Levin needs to explain why it is called a balanced budget amendment if it does not provide a fixed rule to balance the budget?
Here is the Fair Share Balanced Budget Amendment, which is based upon our founding fathers expressed intentions!
Proposing a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
“SECTION 1. The Sixteenth Amendment is hereby repealed and Congress is henceforth forbidden to lay ``any`` tax or burden calculated from profits, gains, interest, salaries, wages, tips, inheritances or any other lawfully realized money
NOTE: these words would return us to our founding father’s ORIGINAL TAX PLAN (http://townshipnews.org/?p=1360) as they intended it to operate! And, they would remove the existing chains of taxation which now oppresses America‘s free enterprise system and robs the bread which working people have earned when selling their labor!
"SECTION 2. Congress ought not raise money by borrowing, but when the money arising from imposts duties and excise taxes are insufficient to meet the public exigencies, and Congress has raised money by borrowing during the course of a fiscal year, Congress shall then lay a direct tax at the beginning of the next fiscal year for an amount sufficient to extinguish the preceding fiscal year's deficit, and apply the revenue so raised to extinguishing said deficit."
NOTE: Congress is to raise its primary revenue from imposts and duties, [taxes at our water’s edge], and may also lay miscellaneous internal excise taxes on specifically chosen articles of consumption. But if Congress borrows and spends more than is brought in from imposts, duties and miscellaneous excise taxes during the course of a fiscal year, then, and only then, is the apportioned tax to be laid.
"SECTION 3. When Congress is required to lay a direct tax in accordance with Section 1 of this Article, the Secretary of the United States Treasury shall, in a timely manner, calculate each State's apportioned share of the total sum being raised by dividing its total population size by the total population of the united states and multiplying that figure by the total being raised by Congress, and then provide the various State Congressional Delegations with a Bill notifying their State’s Executive and Legislature of its share of the total tax being collected and a final date by which said tax shall be paid into the United States Treasury."
NOTE: our founder’s fair share formula to extinguish a deficit would be:
States’ population
---------------------------- X SUM TO BE RAISED = STATE’S SHARE
Total U.S. Population
This formula, as intended by our founding fathers, is to insure that those states who contribute the lion’s share of the tax are guaranteed a representation in Congress proportionately equal to their contribution, i.e., representation with proportional obligation!
"SECTION 4. Each State shall be free to assume and pay its quota of the direct tax into the United States Treasury by a final date set by Congress, but if any State shall refuse or neglect to pay its quota, then Congress shall send forth its officers to assess and levy such State's proportion against the real property within the State with interest thereon at the rate of ((?)) per cent per annum, and against the individual owners of the taxable property. Provision shall be made for a 15% discount for those States paying their share by ((?))of the fiscal year in which the tax is laid, and a 10% discount for States paying by the final date set by Congress, such discount being to defray the States' cost of collection."
NOTE: This section respects the Tenth Amendment and allows each state to raise its share in its own chosen way in a time period set by Congress, but also allows the federal government to enter a state and collect the tax if a state is delinquent in meeting its obligation.
"SECTION 5. This Amendment to the Constitution, when ratified by the required number of States, shall take effect no later than (?) years after the required number of States have approved it.
In closing, I do know that the “good-cop bad-cop” con game does not work if there is no “good cop” in the game! I’m just wondering why not one of our “good cops” (Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Schnitt, Mark Levin, Dennis Prager, Bill O'rielly, Mike Gallagher, Lee Rodgers, Neal Boortz. Tammy Bruce, Monica Crowley, Herman Cain …. etc..) have pointed out the fact that the so called balanced budget amendment has no provision to actually balance the budget when Congress borrows to meet its expenses, and yet, the proposed legislation is called a “balanced budget amendment”. Something stinks like a fish and it’s not our founding fathers original instruction manual, nor their Fair Share Balanced Budget method.
JWK
“Honest money and honest taxation, the Key to America’s future Prosperity“ ___ from “Prosperity Restored by the State Rate Tax Plan”, no longer in print.