Taxation Without Representation - 21st Century Style

As any schoolchild can tell you, well, at least the schoolchildren who were educated before patriots like Samuel Adams, Patrick Henry, and Nathan Hale were edited out of our textbooks in order to provide room for such historically significant luminaries as Michael Jackson and Oprah Winfrey (unfortunately, I am not making this up), the primary cause for the American Revolution was taxation without representation. Our forefathers found themselves staggering under onerous taxes, imposed by a British political system in which they had no input or influence. This gross unfairness was sufficient for the colonies to revolt against their own country and declare their independence.

Unfortunately, universal suffrage is only a relatively recent phenomenon in the United States. In spite of Abigail Adams’ entreaties to her husband, John, a delegate to the Continental Congress to “remember the ladies,” it wasn’t until 1920 that the 19^th Amendment to the Constitution guaranteed women’s right to vote. In 1870, the 15^th Amendment guaranteed that the right to vote could not be denied by race. Even so, many minorities were prevented the vote by state sanctioned “work-arounds”, such as poll taxes, literacy tests, etc. In 1965, Lyndon Johnson, in conjunction with the Republican legislature, overcame the protests of Southern Democrats to pass the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Since that time, although there have been a few, isolated cases of voter intimidation or suppression, most recently by the New Black Panther Party in Philadelphia in the 2008 Presidential election, there is near universal acceptance that, with a few exceptions (those under age 18, convicted felons, etc.), every American citizen has a right to vote for representation to their federal government.

Once the people have elected their Senator or Representative, as long as the elected representative meets Constitutional criteria, they are invariably seated in Congress, and rightly so. The people have the right to elect whom they choose and to not allow that person to represent his constituents seriously undermines the Constitution. Even when the Congressperson is in a minority, she has a right and responsibility to represent her constituents and allow their voice to be heard in debate. Refusal to allow any representative to participate in the lawmaking process runs counter to the principals on which this country is founded.

Unfortunately, under the Obama-Reid-Pelosi troika, that is exactly what has happened. Bills are being written in back rooms without allowing the input of minority voices and debate. Utilizing arcane rules, when the bills are presented to the full chamber, debate is severely limited and the opportunity for introducing amendments is prohibited. The bills are introduced at the last possible moment, not allowing members to read the bills before voting on them and, sometimes, as in the case of the cap-and-tax bill, the bill is still being written as it is being voted on. If not unconstitutional, this at the very least undermines the very spirit of the Constitution and the American ideal. This, in spite of Democratic promises that this would be the most transparent administration and legislative process, ever.

The most recent example of this abuse is the announcement that there will be no conference committee to reconcile the differences in the House and Senate health care reform bills. Normally, a bill passes the House and a similar bill passes the Senate, then a conference committee is formed to hammer out differences between the two bills. Members of the conference committee are appointed from both the majority and minority parties. Once the conference committee reaches agreement, the final bill is sent back to both the House and Senate, where it is voted on. If it passes both chambers of Congress, it is then sent to the President where, if he signs it, it will become law.

In the case of the current bills, however, Congress plans to depart from this tradition. Instead, the administration and the leaders of the House and Senate will meet behind closed doors to try to hammer out a plan. Republicans will not be allowed in the room. When a compromise is reached, Harry Reid will take the bill to the Senate Democratic caucus and Nancy Pelosi will do the same for the House Democratic caucus. Again, Republicans will not be allowed in the room. Each Democratic caucus will have the opportunity to give suggestions, accept bribes, or have their arm twisted, until there is a final agreement. After the compromise is reached, the final bill will be introduced to each house of Congress for a final vote, probably at the last minute and, almost certainly, before Republicans or the press has a chance to find out what is in the bill.

Let me reiterate the process – first, a bill is written behind closed doors without the input, or even debate, by the minority. It is voted upon before anyone has the opportunity to read it, and then a compromise will be reached behind closed doors without the input of any of the minority party. In other words, a bill to revise 1/6 of our economy, including a rash of new taxes, will be passed without representation of a substantial part of the country. As someone whose duly elected representative to the House of Representatives was not allowed any input or debate on this bill, I have a difficult time seeing how the taking of my taxes is legitimate since I was denied representation.

The first time this happened, there was a revolution. Hopefully, the American people will retain the spirit of the founding fathers and will revolt at the ballot box.