HHR NOTE:  Esteban will be writing for HHR Blog a series of papers he calls the Constitutional Journal. The”Constitutional Journal” will basically explain why in several scenarios why he belives the current Congress does not think of the Constitution as a truly valid document.

By Esteban Camacho

In part one of my Constitutional discussion, I mentioned that I would be analyzing the reason why I believe the people now look toward the national government for accountability purposes. This can turn into a complex issue, but I will attempt to make as simple as possible while still maintaining the fabric of the argument.

About 100 years ago, this country was divided into several parties. These parties which I speak of caused the two major parties (Republicans and Democrats) to completely switch their ideological base. For the first time, we saw the Democrat party call themselves a “Progressive Party,” while the Republican party was labeled under the Conservative base. I can most likely write a book about the process and why this occurred, but for the purposes of this discussion I will retain, and instead draw upon a little summary.

This was a period of realignment in the parties. The issue that caused this realignment was the backing of paper money. Movements like the “Free Silver” movement began to rise, opposing the backing of the Dollar by gold. The country was in recession, and people (farmers especially) thought that if the dollar was cheaper, there would be more circulation of money and crops would be sold faster. While this was true to an extent, the movement sparked the creation of one of our most hated agencies, which I will mention at a later time.

At this time in history, the Democratic Party was losing votes and thus, losing power. They then decided to target a new era, one of immigration. Because immigration was rampant, the Democratic party began to gain many votes. In addition, the party began to sell itself as a party of progress, backing the Free Silver movement and other “anti-gold” measures.

A few decades later, once the party realignment was set, we see the election of a very progressive man: Woodrow Wilson. Mr. Wilson’s administration pushed toward the creation of a new tax. Until the times of Wilson, the national government’s primary monetary source came from sales taxes apportioned among the people, as the Constitution demands. In 1913, we witness the passage of the 16th amendment.

” The Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes on income, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.”

Viola. Congress had successfully multiplied its power ten fold (at least). This is when our country began the shift in accountability to the national arena, rather than the States. Mind, the original income tax was miniscule in size. It was originally designed to tax a 1% rate only on those making over $3,000 per year ($65,000 in 2009) and a 6% rate on those making over $500,000 per year (about 11 million today). Obviously, this has changed dramatically: if an individual or family makes over $373,000 per year, they are taxed at a rate of 35%.

All of a sudden, you see direct taxes, not apportioned, from any source, and without regard to enumeration. Thank you Democrats. Oh, and do go around saying that the Democrat party of then is the equal of the Republican party of today, because that is simply not true. All one has to do is look at voting records. The parties have been largely the same since the late 1800′s. After the income tax, (logically) we can now be called government consumers.

Think about it: if a service is free in the private market, one would expect less quality, and instances of customer dissatisfaction are rare to non-existent. However, when a charge is applied, the consumer will want their money’s worth for that service; and with the introduction of the income tax, the entity providing that service was now government. The people now held the federal government more accountable for its actions. This changed the way our country conducted business forever.

We now look to the federal government for most of our troubles. Education issues are blamed on federal laws, even though schools largely use State dollars to run. Local economic issues are blamed on the Presidential administration. Crime is blamed on federal dealings. State social issues are seen as federal issues. These and many more examples can be named.

There is one fundamental issue I see with this choice of accountability: the more we look to the federal government for that accountability, the more power we designate to it. Our nation was designed with a compromise: “The Great Compromise.” This compromise, which created our Constitution, was predominantly successful because the smaller states had a say in it. The small states constantly questioned how powerful the federal government would become under the new Constitution. Madison, Hamilton and Jay, with the introduction of the Federalist Papers, explained that the national government would get its power directly from the states. The Federalist Papers assured the small states that they would still be protected. Unfortunately, the passage of the income tax changed all this. The tax almost naturally transfered accountability from the State governments to the Federal government permanently.

Constitutionally, I believe the income tax is out of the spirit of our founders, and the very spirit this country was built upon. It is a tax that takes almost no regard to the voice of the people. In fact, the founders designed our system so that a tax of that nature would be prevented. Unfortunately, the States did ratify the amendment, but i believe it was unfairly. Had the people known that the income tax would eventually affect not only the rich, but even the lower middle class, I believe ratification would not have taken place.

Fast forward to 2010. Now we are 12 Trillion Dollars in debt, thanks to the easiness of printing money. Our government has full control of its citizens by raising and lowering tax rates constantly, and the power of Congress has grown significantly year after year. I strongly believe this country would be in a better financial position without the income tax and the several entities created after the ratification of the 16th amendment. the system created by the 16th amendment resembles one huge credit card…except we can’t just take scissors and cut it.

Esteban G. Camacho was born in 1989 in Bayamon, Puerto Rico. There he lived in a lower class family with his single mother for 11 years before moving to the contiguous states. Esteban became involved with politics when he reached his senior year of high school. When he got to college, he immediately pursued further education in the fields of government and economics. A staunch conservative and an advocate of the free market economies of the world, Esteban spends his time researching political backgrounds, economic titles such as Wealth of Nations, and strengthening his conservative base. Esteban believes in personal responsibility, individual liberty, equal opportunity, and in the American dream. Among his favorite quotes is: “What would you attempt if you knew you could not fail?” Esteban resides in Las Cruces, New Mexico and is currently pursuing a degree in Political Science.