Because, Mr. Speaker, if it was so desirable to have direct taxation of personal income, why did not our Founders include that in the original document called the Constitution or in the first 10 amendments known as the Bill of Rights. They understood the powers that would be abridged, the rights of citizens that would be abridged. Ultimately, it came through the 16th amendment which required a supermajority for ratification. So the balance we strike today in adopting this constitutional amendment is to strike a balance to say, if a supermajority was required for the amendment process, there should be a supermajority required for raising taxes.
NAN A. S. HAYWORTH: “Because, Mr. Speaker, if it was so desirable to have direct taxation of personal income, why did not our Founders…”
Editor's note · Context
Debating the necessity of a supermajority for raising taxes in relation to constitutional amendments.
Share
More from NAN A. S. HAYWORTH
if my friend would yield briefly, I just wanted to return to the floor first of all to thank my colleague from Texas and to state what is obvious to his constituents. He brings a dedication and a passion to this Congress in his first term…
this morning's Arizona Republic carries encouraging news amidst the horrific challenges encountered by the colleague who preceded me on the floor and so many fellow Americans. It is the story of Doyle Smith and family. Doyle has six…
I would implore you that one key aspect of that financial education should be regarding the unintended consequences of Federal intervention in the markets...
my colleagues, I welcome the newest Member of the House from California; and I, likewise, welcome this commonsense amendment because in this amendment the gentleman from California encapsulates the challenge facing this House. We claim we…





