Anti-Tax Group Makes 'Final Warning' to Federal Government

Washington (CNSNews.com) - A cross-country anti-tax rally culminated in the nation's capital Thursday, with several hundred protestors warning all branches of the federal government to "obey the Constitution, or else."

The conservatives and Libertarians attending the rally said their protest should serve as a wake-up call to lawmakers, but the Anti-Defamation League regards the protest as an "extremist" threat.

"The tax protest movement is a right-wing extremist movement," said Mark Pitcavage, director of fact finding for the ADL. "You're not talking about tax reformers here. You're talking about people who have incredible conspiracy theories about the government."

The ADL considers those who organized and attended the anti-tax rally to be such a serious threat, that the ADL included the group on its monthly calendar of "extremist events." Pitcavage said that the event's organizer - a group called "We The People Congress" - advocates an agenda that is "so far out of the mainstream" that the group has effectively disenfranchised itself from the rest of American society.

"These are people who do not think simply that taxes are too high or want tax reform," Pitcavage said. "They have convinced themselves they do not have to pay taxes and that there's a major government conspiracy designed to cover-up that fact."

Pitcavage also warned that the anti-tax movement is not confined to protest rallies.

"It's also a movement that has been linked strongly to violence; to attacks on IRS agents; to blowing up IRS offices, as well as many other crimes," he said. "There's a great deal of criminal activity associated with the movement."

A spokesman for We The People Congress dismissed the ADL's accusations as "an incredible propaganda campaign." Mike Bodine said the sole purpose of the anti-tax rally (called Freedom Drive 2002) is to restore the Constitution to what it was in 1776.

"Frankly, I don't understand how trying to uphold and defend the Constitution of this nation can be construed to be an extremist event by anybody," Bodine said. Unfortunately, we do question government," he added.

According to Bodine, his group has issued four "petitions for redress of grievances" to the federal government. Those petitions challenge the constitutional legitimacy and legality of the federal income tax; the Federal Reserve; the War Powers clause; and the USA Patriot Act.

The first petition states that there is no legal authority for the federal government to enforce the federal income tax on average Americans. He said research conducted by We The People Congress includes the sworn testimony of IRS agents and CPAs who support the group's claim.

The second petition accuses the federal government of auctioning off the U.S. Treasury to the highest bidding corporations, financiers and campaign contributors.

We The People Congress has also demanded that Congress and the president adhere to the Constitution's War Powers clause in the imminent war against Iraq. Bodine said the Constitution mandates that Congress must pass a formal declaration of war before the U.S. can commit troops to battle. A resolution, such as that recently passed by Congress, is not enough, the group insists.

"The reason that they don't make a formal declaration of war anymore, and that we haven't since World War II, is that it's very, very politically difficult to do," Bodine said. "But that's exactly why the Founding Fathers put it in there. It was supposed to be difficult to do."

Bodine said his group's final petition condemns Congress for passing the USA Patriot Act, which he said, contains language that clearly violates the Constitution. According to Bodine, the law makes it legal for law enforcement officials to disregard the "search and seizure" clause contained in the Fourth Amendment.

"We're trying to give the government a warning, kind of like a final warning," said Rick Stanley, a Denver businessman and member of the Libertarian Party, who recently tried to unseat Sen. Wayne Allard (R-Colo.).

Last March, Stanley released a comprehensive list of demands, including repeal of "all unconstitutional laws" at all levels of government. "In other words, they've been given the petition for redress of grievances many times, and the bottom line is we want them to obey the Constitution...or else," he said.

Asked what "or else" means, Stanley was evasive, but he hinted at armed rebellion, mentioning a "Million Gun March" he is planning for July 4, 2003.

"We're coming [to Washington] to make sure that they [the government] comply with the Constitution and with our petition demands.

"To me, it [the Million Gun March] will be the thing that dislodges the government that has overthrown America from its perch. And what's going to happen is 'We, the people' will be running the government from that day forward."

Stanley and Bob Schulz, the latter the chairman of We The People Congress, are urging anti-tax activists to stop paying their income taxes, which both men claim they already have done.

Stanley said his message to the federal government is clear: "We're cutting off your funding. We're cutting off your money supply."

But Stanley does not believe the vast majority of Americans will join his income tax rebellion against the federal government. He expressed the need for something "bigger" -- that "something" being the "million gun" event.

"On that day, we'll be coming armed," Stanley warned. "And then we're going to have rallies at every state capital in all 50 states [happening] at the same time," he said.

Asked by CNSNews.com how he intends to deal with District of Columbia gun laws (the D.C. code says, "Carrying a handgun in the District is prohibited"), Stanley showed no concern.

"What about D.C.'s gun laws?" Stanley asked. "They're null and void. Anything that violates the U.S. Constitution -- and the Supreme Court has said it probably a thousand times -- it's null and void, as if it never existed," he said.

According to Stanley's website, the million gun march will be held only if at least one million people sign a petition guaranteeing their presence at the march.

A spokesman for We The People Congress dismissed the ADL's accusations as "an incredible propaganda campaign." Mike Bodine said the sole purpose of the anti-tax rally (called Freedom Drive 2002) is to restore the Constitution to what it was in 1776.

We were under the Articles of Confederation and the Continental Congress in 1776. The Constitution was not even drafted until 1787.

It was written to correct the problems associated with the Articles of Confederation, primary of which was its inability to provide for the payment of the Nation's Debts do to the inability to collect taxes of any kind.

James Madison, Elliots Debates Vol 3 p128:

Mr. Chairman, in considering this great subject, I trust we shall find that part which gives the general government the power of laying and collecting taxes indispensable, and essential to the existence of any efficient or well-organized system of government: if we consult reason, and be ruled by its dictates, we shall find its justification there: if we review the experience we have had or contemplate the history of nations, here we find ample reasons to prove its expediency. There is little reason to depend for necessary supplies on a body which is fully possed of the power of witholding them. If a government depends on other governments for its revenues -- if it must depend on the voluntary contributions of its members -- its [*129] existence must be precarious."

"If the general government is to depend on the voluntary contribution of the states for its support, dismemberment of the United States may be the consequence."

"Frankly, I don't understand how trying to uphold and defend the Constitution of this nation can be construed to be an extremist event by anybody,"

It would seem their aim is as poor as their scholarship, the remedy written into the constitution was to levy and collect taxes from the citizen, with concurrent jurisdiction:

Hamilton, Federalist #34:

To form a more precise judgment of the true merits of this question, it will be well to advert to the proportion between the objects that will require a federal provision in respect to revenue, and those which will require a State provision. We shall discover that the former are altogether unlimited, and that the latter are circumscribed within very moderate bounds. In pursuing this inquiry, we must bear in mind that we are not to confine our view to the present period, but to look forward to remote futurity. Constitutions of civil government are not to be framed upon a calculation of existing exigencies, but upon a combination of these with the probable exigencies of ages, according to the natural and tried course of human affairs. Nothing, therefore, can be more fallacious than to infer the extent of any power, proper to be lodged in the national government, from an estimate of its immediate necessities. There ought to be a CAPACITY to provide for future contingencies as they may happen; and as these are illimitable in their nature, it is impossible safely to limit that capacity.

``A CONCURRENT JURISDICTION in the article of taxation was the only admissible substitute for an entire subordination, in respect to this branch of power, of State authority to that of the Union.'' Any separation of the objects of revenue that could have been fallen upon, would have amounted to a sacrifice of the great INTERESTS of the Union to the POWER of the individual States. The convention thought the concurrent jurisdiction preferable to that subordination; and it is evident that it has at least the merit of reconciling an indefinite constitutional power of taxation in the Federal government with an adequate and independent power in the States to provide for their own necessities.

Madison Federalist #39:

"The difference between a federal and national government, as it relates to the OPERATION OF THE GOVERNMENT, is supposed to consist in this, that in the former the powers operate on the political bodies composing the Confederacy, in their political capacities; in the latter, on the individual citizens composing the nation, in their individual capacities. On trying the Constitution by this criterion, it falls under the NATIONAL, not the FEDERAL character;"

Madison Federalist #45:

"The change relating to taxation may be regarded as the most important; and yet the present [Continental] Congress have as complete authority to REQUIRE of the States indefinite supplies of money for the common defense and general welfare, as the future Congress will have to require them of individual citizens;

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.