XXVIII Amendment to the United States Constitution

• All laws, programs, rules and regulations enacted by the Federal Government of the United States shall apply to all federal elected officials, all federal appointed officials and all federal employees and contractors equally and without exception. Yes, it's retroactive.
• Members of Congress and the U.S. Senate, appointed federal officials, and federal employees and contractors shall not have the use of any federal government supplied, contracted or run gymnasium, cafeteria, postal service, hair or beauty salon or any other personal convenience service or facility. They shall mingle with the common folk for all of these services.
• No member of Congress or the U.S. Senate, appointed federal official or federal employee or contractor may use any private or private federal government conveyance or transportation. They shall drive their own private automobiles and ride public or commercial buses, subways, trains, boats, ferries or air transportation. They shall not be given any special parking or special treatment or advancement in line for ticket purchase, check-in, baggage check-in or security checks. They created the T.S.A., let them enjoy it. Reimbursement for purchase of transportation for official federal government business shall be granted if approved by the appropriate supervisor and subject to public open records review and if within budget constraints.
• The Interstate Commerce Clause shall mean only that the Federal Government may intervene in a regulatory capacity to prevent a State from imposing unreasonable, prohibitive tariffs, taxes, fees or surcharges on real tangible goods crossing its border(s) to insure free and fair trade between the States. It does not give the Federal Government freedom to regulate any business in any fashion.
• There are no penumbras or emanations from the original text of the Constitution and its approved Amendments. (R.I.P. William F. Buckley, Jr.).

Thinking Can Be Taxing

I just concluded a discussion (debate) with a friend regarding the question of the federal income tax. He was whooped but refused to admit it. The question was on the fairness/constitutionality of the ‘progressive’ federal income tax where the more income one makes the higher percentage tax is paid on it. My point is that the 16th Amendment authorizing the federal income tax does not speak to tax brackets or percentages. Given that, the next place to look for instruction is the 14th Amendment which guarantees that all citizens will be treated equally under the law. Anyone with passing knowledge of logical deduction would conclude that within those constraints all citizens taxed on their income would be taxed at the same percentage rate. Right? But, he replied if you make more you should pay more! Eureka, he just discovered the mother-lode. Egad, how many times have I heard that tired bromide? From each according to his ability, to each according to his need…ooops, wrong country wrong constitution. I desperately tried to explain the scenario that 10% of a million dollars is substantially more than 10% of fifty-thousand dollars. Not enough, he snapped. Says who, says I? Well, the Congress. So is 20% of a million enough, compared with 10% of fifty-thousand I ask? Maybe. Again I remind him of the 14th Amendment and the equal protection concept. He is not moved to enlightenment. So rather than obey the actual letter of the Constitution we should let the Congress arbitrarily set the tax brackets based upon the prevailing political winds of the day. And change them constantly. How’s that for equal treatment? Now the 10th Amendment becomes relevant. If the Constitution does not specifically empower the Congress, it cannot act; but rather must defer to the States acting as agents of the People. So, in carrying out its 16th Amendment power to levy income taxes on the citizens, the Congress must also be guided by the equal protection concepts of the 14th Amendment. To do otherwise would be acting extra-constitutionally or even un-constitutionally. Passing legislation to set progressive tax rates does not and cannot amend the Constitution. Gotcha, I cry! He is unfazed. Ah well, pearls before swine.
The rub is that he really knows that I am technically correct, but that to admit so would begin unraveling a huge quilt leading to the undoing of 50 years of progressive chinks (chunks) in the Constitution. The result would be a federal government about 10% of its current size and power. The States’ power would thus grow proportionally. And it’s much easier to control one capital than it is fifty. Also, under this scenario the importance of Presidential, Congressional and Senatorial races would be greatly diminished. The importance of which party controls the federal government is likewise less critical. There would be very little mischief for them to meddle in and much less damage that they could do to our pocketbooks and our freedoms.
What we are rapidly approaching is a return to simple democratic majority rule, which is of course tyranny of the majority over the minority. Since we have strayed so far from the actual text of the Constitution it has become almost meaningless to many politicians. Why not just take out a lighter and finish the job? Without our constitutional moorings the federal government is free to do anything it pleases without repercussion. That is why it does matter so much these days which party is in power and why these national elections matter so much. Conservatives tend to meddle less than liberals in our pocketbooks and freedoms, but it would be far better to remove the ability and temptation altogether.
Let’s return to the actual Constitution as it is written. And at the same time return to the constitutionally required flat-tax rate for all citizens equally under the law; or just pass a Constitutional amendment to institute a national sales tax (not a V.A.T.).

Constitutional Amendments

"Article. V. - Amendment
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate."
Let's see, can the President amend the Constitution by Executive Order? No.
Can the Congress amend the Constitution by simple legislation? No.
Can the U.S. Supreme Court amend the Constitution? No.
Then who can amend the Constitution? Well what do you know, it's the States. I wonder why that might be...

Full Disclosure

I think it would be great if Congress were required to specify at the beginning of each bill, unique topic within each bill and each amendment to a bill passed and sent to the President for signature; the exact language from the Constitution and its Amendments explicitly authorizing and empowering the Federal Government to engage in those activities. Furthermore, such disclosure should include ellaboration by Congress on the quoted Constitutional text so as to explain its understanding of why and how that language does indeed empower and authorize the Federal Government to engage in those activities. Full disclosure is required on a can of peas, why not Federal legislation?

Constitutional Amendments I Would Like to See

Abolish the Department of Education, no Federal funding of education
Enforce borders, deport illegal aliens immediately, no ID cards/Drivers licenses, no medical/education/welfare benefits (life or death emergency only pending deportation), no U.S. Citizenship for children of illegal aliens born on U.S. soil.
English as official and only language of Federal business
No Federal estate tax
No Federal capital gains tax
No Federal income tax on corporations
Abolish Federal Social Security
No Federal unemployment insurance or medical insurance/payment programs
The Interstate Commerce clause refers only to taxes levied by one State on real goods manufactured in another State and then sold in that State. It shall not be broadly interpreted and applied.
Personal income taxes shall be paid quarterly by the individual, not their employer. Move to the FairTax, a national sales tax, NOT a value added tax.
Federal personal taxes of all types, names and intended uses shall not exceed 10% of a person’s total yearly net income.
The powers and authorities of the Federal Government shall be strictly limited to the express and explicit enumerations contained within the Constitution, as amended.
There shall be no Federal Minimum Wage.
Enforce the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, and the First and Second. How about all of them?
There are no penumbras or emanations from the Constitution or Bill of Rights.