Skip to comments.If a Government Can't Tax, Is It Really a Government?
Posted on 08/14/2012 8:02:03 PM PDT by Lorianne
A ground-breaking Colorado case tests a constitutional guarantee. ___ Could Congress invalidate your state's constitution and demand it be rewritten?
The answer -- disconcertingly enough for those who regard the states as "sovereign," as against the federal government -- is almost certainly yes. It won't happen, of course. But last month, a related question emerged that may have more practical importance: Could a federal court do the same thing?
The clause that raises this question is called the Guaranty, or "Republican Form of Government," Clause of Article IV, § 4. It provides that "[t]he United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government . . . ." The clause, usually obscure, is relevant now because of a preliminary district court decision on July 30 in Kerr v. Hickenlooper, a case in which members of Colorado's legislature have gone to court to argue that the state's own constitution is unconstitutional.
The target is Colorado's so-called "Taxpayer's Bill of Rights," enacted by initiative in 1992, which essentially bars both the state and local governments from raising any tax without a prior approval by popular vote. The plaintiffs' complaint in Kerr contends that "[a]n effective legislative branch must have the power to raise and appropriate funds." Removing this power entirely, the argument goes, in essence leaves the state without a functioning legislature. In turn, a state without a legislature cannot have a "republican form of government."
(Excerpt) Read more at theatlantic.com ...
ALL givernment is Mob Rule by mobsters.. all of them..
The matter is limiting the damage a givernment can do...
Thats WHY we have a Constitution(written down) the ONLY reason..
This is complicated by the fact in America we have three giverments.. federal, state and local givernment..
Each of them have different problems and need to be limited in different ways..
The next person you hear use the word givernment and does not specify or imply which givernment is blowing smoke up your ass.. or is a moron..
And since most americans are civic morons whom do not care about solving real problems anyway.. If YOU DO NOT educate them they will remain morons..
I do what I can...
Who, in their right minds, wants an effective legislature?
Life is much safer when the bastards are tied up in knots and spinning their wheels.
I'll have to take issue with that.
Mobsters have limits even they won't go past, and internal rules of conduct.
Legislatures? Not so much.
Very interesting. Thanks for posting.
It is clear that having the means of financing government is critical and that was why the Constitution was written in the first place.
Blah, blah, blah, this is a serious issue.
Governments should not have the power to tax. Period.
There are other business models than theft that could be explored. Unfortunately, using power to extract money from people seems to be the preferred mode.
I understand why the founders wrote the eligibility requirements so that Hamilton couldn't be elected president. And why Burr shot him.
[ Mobsters have limits even they won’t go past, and internal rules of conduct. ]
Really.. you don’t much about mobs.. which all operate much like muslims..
Islam is mob central.. Mob University...
Muslims DO NOT harm other muslims.. UNLESS....
They are the wrong muslims...
MoMo said.. “If a muslim changes his religion, “KILL HIM”...
Its that way in all mobs.. even democracy..
Which is by the way Mob Rule by mobsters..
NO democracy has ever yet been democratic.. nor can it be..
Democracy is a lie.. that most are brain washed with..
Democrats are “the Mob” that are FOR Mob Rule..
Trying to be Bi-partisan is completely delusional..
Many republicans are quite insane..
No democrat is ever Bi-partisan UNLESS he has already lost whatever it is..
Liiberals never beleive in a limited government unless it is a conservative government. Let the gov tax abortions and watch them go nuts.
[ Blah, blah, blah, this is a serious issue. ]
Whether the givernment can tax or not is a straw-man argument..
The only ones to disagree would be anarchists..
meaning the issue IS NOT A SERIOUS ISSUE..
On the otherhand whether there should even BE A FEDERAL givernment could be a valid issue..
States can solve their problems just like countries do..
With allies and enemies and all that..
States send $100 to Washington get $10 back and $90 is almost totally wasted.. There may be another way..
On that we agree. ;)
I still think there are valid ways of financing governments besides taxation.
You know as little about Hamilton and the constitution as you do about political science it appears.
The Constitution SPECIFICALLY allowed Hamilton to be president and he would have been one of the greatest there is no doubt.
Hamilton arrived in the colonies at the end of 1772. Hence, he was eligible to be president as Article II, Section 1, paragraph 6 says. “No person except a Natural Born Citizen, OR a citizen of the United States at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; (this qualifies Hamilton as it did other Founders; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States. (Hamilton was here for fourteen years.) The Natural Born requirement did not affect the eligiblity of the Founding generation.
When the ignorant criticize one of our greatest Revolutionary heroes, Alexander Hamilton, they are criticizing George Washington who loved the man and supported even after the Jeffersonian scum tried to destroy him. He was the greatest political writer of his generation.
Burr was a typical Democrat crook aligned with the model of corruption - NYC’s Tammaney Hall, the vote stealing sink of thievery. He shot Hamilton because Hamilton had wrecked his political career stopping him from becoming president in 1800 and governor of NY in 1804.
It is particularly gratifying to watch as Jefferson viciously turned on the man who had put him in the White House and proceeded to tyrannically destroy him. Read about the Trial of Aaron Burr if you want to see the real Jefferson.
Hamilton’s death (voluntary from all evidence) also destroyed the secession movement growing in NE which Burr would have brought NY state into had he become governor splitting the union.
Our fore fathers went to war over taxation on stamps, documents, tea - imagine what they would think about the government taking up to 39% of ones income?
The other way was tried and shown to be a disaster. States outside of a Union would have been the puppets and playthings of the great empires in the world at the time of the Founding. The unwillingness of states to provide the funds necessary to fight the War would have defeated the US but for the loans from France and the Netherlands which Hamilton’s genius found a way under the Constitution to repay. But it took the collapse of the government of the Confederation to convince the nation that a new Foundation was necessary.
Return to the concept of Federalism - no direct election of Senators specifically. Allow states to define their electorates.
The Senate was established to be like the House of Lords and Senators were appointed by state legislatures to look out for the interests of the states as states. It was also intended to be primarily concerned with long term National interests hence the longest terms, 6 yrs, of any of our elected officials.
The principle problems with our government stem from too much democracy.
Any belief that state governments could do better is only possible when the actual history of those governments is ignored or not known. It is not known to the mass of Americans.
There is some debate about the eligiblity clause as relates to Hamilton, because of his origin on Nevis.
I do not hold Hamilton in high regard, having read much about him. Maria Reynolds and paying blackmail jumps to mind.
Pulling the funds outta you @$$ won’t do.
It is impossible to fund the modern military without an income tax, in fact. If you want a military that is.
Very superficial argument. Only an Obama judge would allow it to go forwrd.
Colorado’s legislature can tax and appropriate per it’s constitution.
Limits on the rulers are as republican as are those on the mob.
A federal government certainly doesn't need a 17th amendment. Or a 16th.
Why always with the pointing guns at people and demanding cash?
Everybody falls back on taxes because Hammurabi and his strong-men ilk thousands of years ago started it, and nothing else has been tried.
I presume you mean 1781 when Hamilton resigned from Washington’s staff after four continuous years of serving him (longer than any other aide). Washington apologized to Hamilton for the rude behavior which provoked the break. He also stayed on until a replacement could be brought up to speed.
As Washington’s chief aide, Hamilton was essentially his alter ego and wrote most of his correspondence. He did all this although he wanted a line command more than anything and it had been his excellence in commanding the militia regiment he had used his college funds to equip which brought him to Washington’s attention.
One of our greatest patriots, Hamilton threw away a chance to amass a great fortune since even though the greatest lawyer in the nation he spent the majority of his earning power years in low-paying government service. But the Union was his greatest concern not money.
As I showed you there was nothing stopping Hamilton from becoming president constitutionally. And, NO, there is no question or controversy about this. Just read the clause.
Maria was his downfall, no doubt, and the whole affair was orchestrated by the Jeffersonians. Burr was her divorce lawyer and set her on to Hamilton. But he was also the greatest political philosopher the New World ever produced.
He was the fulcrum around which politics turned, at the center of almost every significant event for almost 25 yrs. Jefferson called him “a colossus” and a “host within himself” because of his success at thwarting the Class Warfare the Democrats used to oppose Washington and Adams. Their methods were exactly like that of today’s Democrats: outright lies and dirty tricks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.