[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 25 (Wednesday, March 8, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1285-S1286]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
THE INCOME TAX ANNIVERSARY
Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, 87 years ago today, the Federal Government
began collecting income tax. I rise not to celebrate the anniversary,
but to condemn the occasion. What began as a simple flat tax on the
revenue of a few has turned into a Pandora's box that devastates many.
And so I take this opportunity today to strongly urge Congress to begin
repealing the process of the constitutional amendment granting the
Federal Government the power to tax, abolish the income tax, and
replace it with a tax that is fairer, simpler, and friendlier to the
taxpayers.
The reasons for abolishing the Federal income tax are compelling. To
begin with, the income tax has clearly violated the fundamental
principles upon which this great Nation was founded.
Mr. President, our country was born out of a tax revolt--a tax revolt
built upon freedom and liberty. To preserve liberty, our Founding
Fathers crafted an article in the Constitution unequivocally rejecting
all direct income taxes that were not apportioned to each state by its
population.
During the following 100 years, this provision brought enormous
economic opportunities and prosperity for America. Although Congress
attempted to enact income taxes in the late 19th century, the Supreme
Court repeatedly declared the income tax unconstitutional. As a result,
between 1870 and 1913, before the income tax was levied, the U.S.
economy expanded by over 435 percent in real terms. This was an average
growth rate of more than 10 percent per year, without inflation.
Congress has passed many ill-advised laws, but nothing has been more
disastrous than the passing of the 16th amendment in 1909, which
allowed the Federal Government to begin levying and collecting income
tax as of March 8, 1913.
This shift in policy represented the efforts of those liberal
elements who believes and promoted the ideology that society has a
claim on one's capital and labor. They suggested that the
redistribution of private income would increase equality among people.
Their strategy was simple: they claimed this income tax was to ``soak
the rich'' and was not supposed to provide a mechanism for Washington
to reach into most Americans' pockets--the argument we still hear again
and again on the Senate floor.
Initially, less than 1 percent of all Americans paid income tax. Only
5 percent of Americans paid any income tax as late as 1939. But today,
nearly every American is subject to the income tax. The Federal tax
burden is at an historic high. A median-income family can expect to
give up nearly 40 percent of its income in Federal, State, and local
taxes--more than it spends on food, clothing, transportation, and
housing combined.
More Americans are working harder and are earning more today. But a
large share of the higher incomes of hard-working Americans aren't
being spent on family priorities, but are instead being siphoned off by
Washington.
They are working harder, but they are taking home less money because
the Government is taking a bigger bite out of their paychecks. Then
there is ``bracket creep.'' I think everybody knows what that is. It
means a large share of revenues goes to taxes as inflation pushes you
into another income level, or another tax bracket, so Washington can
get a bigger bite out of your paycheck.
Mr. President, is this what our Founding Fathers fought for? Even the
sponsor of the 16th amendment, Congressman Sereno E. Payne of New York,
later realized his mistake and denounced direct taxation as ``a tax
upon the income of honest men and an exemption, to a greater or lesser
extent, of the income of rascals.''
T. Coleman Andrews, a former commissioner of the Internal Revenue
Service said:
[[Page S1286]]
Congress [in implementing the 16th Amendment] went beyond
merely enacting an income tax law and repealed Article IV of
the Bill of Rights, by empowering the tax collector to do the
very things from which that article says we were to be
secure. It opened up our homes, our papers and our effects to
the prying eyes of government agents and set the stage for
searches of our books and vaults and for inquiries into our
private affairs whenever the tax men might decide, even
though there might not be any justification beyond mere
cynical suspicion.
To my colleagues who would brush off that statement as an
exaggeration, I remind them of the horror stories we heard from many of
our constituents 2 years ago, when the Senate Finance Committee held
hearings into abuses carried out by the IRS. Those poor taxpayers whose
lives were shattered thanks to the unwarranted excesses of an overeager
tax collector were not exaggerating.
The income tax must be abolished because it has become so complicated
and inefficient. The Federal Tax Code today stretches on for more than
7 million words, and is made up of 4 huge volumes, another 20 volumes
of regulations, and thousands of pages of instructions. Not even tax
accountants or lawyers fully understand it. What chance does the
average taxpayer have of getting it right?
The government publishes 480 separate tax forms and mails out 8
billion pages of forms and instruction each year. The IRS employs over
10,000 agents to collect taxes, more agents than the FBI and the CIA
combined.
The income tax must be abolished because it keeps enlarging the
government. In Washington, taxing and spending always go hand in hand.
As the income tax rate goes up, government spending explodes. Between
1913 and 1999, inflation-adjusted federal government spending increased
by more than 16,000 percent.
The income tax must be abolished because even in an era of budget
surplus, it allows the government to continue overcharging Americans as
we see today with our surpluses. According to the Congressional Budget
Office, working Americans' tax overpayments will be as high as $1.9
trillion in the next 10 years. After the biggest tax increase in
history, President Clinton has repeatedly denied working Americans a
tax refund and refuses to return tax overpayments to the American
people. His last budget again increases taxes instead of cutting them.
In a time of surplus, this President is out with a proposal to again
increase your taxes.
How is this possible? We would all agree that if a customer is
overcharged for a service he receives, the right thing for the merchant
to do is to return the extra money--not keep it because the merchant
has other things he'd like to spend it on. The same principle holds
true for tax overpayments. I strongly believe we should return tax
overpayments to their rightful owners--the taxpayers--rather than spend
them on new government programs. Not only does this money belong to
them, but the American people will spend it far more intelligently than
Washington politicians ever could.
Mr. President, on this somber income tax anniversary, I argue that we
have no choice but to repeal the income tax and abolish the IRS. I urge
my colleagues to join me in a pledge that we will dedicate ourselves to
replacing the Tax Code with a better system early next Congress, as we
continue to do everything we can to reduce the existing tax burden on
the overtaxed American people.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California.
____________________