|
|
Jewish World Review / June 22, 1998 / 29 Sivan, 5758
Paul Greenberg
SIGNS OF LIFE may have been detected on Mars and, strange as
it may seem, even in the Republican Party.
The GOP hasn't had a new idea since circa 1994, when it
overthrew the old Democratic lords temporal that had
controlled Congress for some 40 years. The grand old party
then proceeded to enact some grand new ideas into law,
including a balanced budget.
Those resurgent Republicans of the 104th Congress even
subjected members of Congress to the same web of rules and
regulations that apply to all other Americans. It was an
exhilarating time, but it passed.
Outfoxed by a president who plays the polls the way Heifetz
did the fiddle, the Republicans retreated, then lapsed into a
coma, just hoping to hold on. It was as if they'd lost their
nerve.
But the grand new party may yet stir again. On Wednesday in
the House of Representatives, Republicans put forward -- and
passed -- the boldest idea about taxes since that little tea
party in Boston: Abolish the Internal Revenue
Code.
That's right: The whole ball of wax and hall of mirrors. And
do it by the 2003. To take its place, a new -- and, one hopes,
simpler -- tax code would have be approved by July 4,
2002. Except for the payroll taxes reserved for Social
Security, the whole tax code would be up for discussion. At
last.
The idea is inviting, and invigorating: Declare a new kind of
American independence. And set a deadline for it. That way,
enacting a new, simpler, clearer, fairer tax system wouldn't be
just something to be done someday, if and when the
politicians get around to it. The job would have to be done by
a date certain.
Is this idea ground-breaking or just wacky? Bill Clinton calls
this approach "an irresponsible scheme." As if the present
tax code were a responsible scheme -- with all its confusions,
injustices, obscurities and crushing burdens, especially on
working families. Why not start clean? By July 4, 2002. If
taxpayers have to meet deadlines, why can't politicians?
Yes, but monstrous as the current tax code is, what would the
new one be like?
Well, there's Dick Armey's proposed flat tax of 17 percent
across the board, which would exempt the first $33,000 of
income for the typical family. It would beat the
Congressman Armey's opposite number in the House, Dick
Gephardt, would tax annual income up to $40,200 at 10
percent, then graduate the tax brackets up to 34 percent.
Under the Gephardt plan, almost all deductions but home
mortgages would go.
Either of these simple proposals would beat the complicated
mess the country has now. Imagine filing your income tax on
the back of a postcard -- and a fairer income tax at that.
There are other reforms waiting in the wings -- if Congress
would act on them, instead of just talk about them. But to act,
Congress may need a deadline -- just like the rest of us. Good
intentions won't get it. Congress needs to do more than think
about reforming the tax code some day, when and if it can
find the time.
Congress needs to be told: Make the time. And
that's just what this bill would do. Instead of another
nonbinding resolution, Congress could use some resolution.
Or at least a deadline. And the sooner it acts, the sooner the
sooner the economy can be unbound from the bureaucracy
and paperwork the tax code imposes on it.
Think of the new, productive world that could be ushered in:
Business decisions might be made on the basis of business,
not tax policy. And imagine what might be accomplished if all
the brainpower represented by those tax lawyers and CPAs
were used for productive purposes.
Unimaginable, say those who can't picture a world without an
internal revenue code that is (a) interminable, (b)
indecipherable and (c) sure to change next year.
Yet the worse the tax code gets, the less the chances of
repealing the thing outright -- because so many interests have
so much riding on so many of the special favors hidden in the
fine print. With the Senate lying in wait and a veto certain,
this bill is doomed, but it might catch the attention of the
American people in an election year. It might make tax
reform a real issue, instead of just another political platitude.
Especially if it becomes a campaign issue in the fall elections.
It'll never come to pass, the experts say of tax reform. They say
a lot of things. They said welfare reform was impossible, too
-- as impossible as a balanced budget. But as the groundswell
for a new, simpler, fairer tax code gains ground, even
politicians might find the idea attractive, especially in an
election year.
To quote one Republican congressman: ``President Clinton
hasn't sounded this upset since he opposed welfare reform, a
seven-year balanced budget and reform of the IRS'' -- all ideas
that Bill Clinton not only came around to, but now claims
credit for. Which is just fine. If politicians cared less about
who got credit for genuine reforms, there might be more of
them in government.
As the vote in the House showed, the Republicans have dared
to dream the most impossible dream since a balanced
budget. Naturally, they'll be denounced by those who can no
longer imagine a new birth of freedom, a new beginning, a
bright new morning in America. The current morass, they
feel, is about the best we can do. To those folks, it's always
night in
Independence Day, 2002
morass we
have now if the aim is a truly progressive income tax. Instead
of the fraud now on the books.
6/18/98: Adventures in poli-speke
