I have either been involved in or closely observed some level of government for almost ten years. In that time I have studied a series of local, county and state government entities, as well as an array of government public trusts.

I have spent a good deal of time listening to those groups argue about why they needed to continue receiving taxpayer largesse, need more taxes and fees, or want approval for new debt spending. I cannot recall one single time when a representative of any government group admitted to having too much money and suggested that the money be returned to the taxpayers from whom it was taken.

A naive person who did not maintain a healthy sense of skepticism would quickly adopt the point of view that almost all elements of government are terribly underfunded and much good would be accomplished with higher taxes and more debt spending.

Those who advance the notion of more government spending usually do so in a smooth and professional manner but every once in a while, a bureaucrat mistakenly reveals the true state of affairs. This was illustrated when I recently attended a meeting in which a group government officials listened to a very professional presentation by a representative of a government entity. The presentation communicated the need for money faced by the agency and was not unlike any number of similar presentations I have heard over the years.

Following his sales pitch, the presenter introduced to the group a high ranking official in his agency. Apparently unaware that a few state representatives where in the room, that official announced that he had been very busy lately because his agency was nearing the end of its fiscal year and his boss had apparently discovered a few extra hundred thousand dollars and had tasked him with quickly spending the money before the fiscal year expired. After all, the agency wouldn’t want elected officials to discover they had overfunded the agency, and certainly the agency did not want to run the risk of facing reduced funding.

To hear a high ranking official make this comment was shocking in and of itself, especially following the recently concluded sales pitch of his subordinate. However, what I found to be the most discouraging was the reaction of the audience. Instead of expressing shock or disgust at this obvious waste of taxpayer dollars, several of the government officials met the comments with applause and laughter.

Their reaction created the distinct impression in my mind that those who celebrated these comments support taking from the taxpayer even when it is unnecessary to do so. This speaks to the fact that they no longer consider their positions to be positions of trust in which their foremost duty is to guard the taxpayers’ money.

Incidents like this illustrate the importance of tax reduction and much greater transparency. To this end, I look forward to drafting and sponsoring an aggressive schedule of legislation during the upcoming session that both cuts spending and brings about greater transparency than ever before. The taxpayers must have the easy ability to see how, where and when the government bureaucrats are spending our money.

Rep. Jason Murphey, R-Guthrie, represents House District 31, which encompasses all of Logan County and a portion of northern Edmond. Murphey also owns and operates WebTeks CMS. He may be reached via e-mail at jason.murphey@okhouse.gov.

Tem·po·rar·y – an adjective meaning lasting, used, serving, or enjoyed for a limited time. Derived from the Latin tempora rius, from tempus, tempor-, time.  Synonyms include temporary, acting, ad interim, interim, provisional. Antonym is permanent.

Governor Rendell continues to press for a temporary, 16 percent increase in the Personal Income Tax (PIT), which he argues is the state’s “best option” to balance the state budget.

He says a PIT increase wouldn’t be as bad since roughly half of Pennsylvania households would not pay it. For the half that would end up footing the tax bill, the Governor says the increase would be “less than $5 per week.”

Milton Friedman said:  “Congress can raise taxes because it can persuade a sizable fraction of the populace that somebody else will pay.”

Although $5 may not seem a lot to the Governor, this “temporary tax” adds up to $20 a month, or $240 a year – money I am sure individuals would rather spend elsewhere.

From a look at the definition, “permanent” is an antonym of “temporary;” that is exactly what has become of other “temporary” tax increases throughout Pennsylvania history.

The most famous (or infamous) temporary tax is the 1936 Johnstown Flood Tax.  Enacted as a 10 percent tax on liquor, the toll was set to expire May 31, 1937.  Over the years, the sunset date was extended numerous times until the tax was made permanent in 1951.  The current rate is 18 percent.

A year prior to the Johnstown Flood Tax, the Cigarette Tax was enacted as another emergency tax of 0.1 cent per cigarette. It became permanent in 1951, and the current rate is 6.75 cents per cigarette.

Other “temporary” taxes include the Realty Transfer Tax – enacted in 1951 as a 1 percent temporary tax. The tax was made permanent in 1961 and the rate remains at 1 percent.

The Corporate Net Income Tax (CNI) was first imposed in 1935 at a rate of 6 percent.  The rate “temporarily” was raised in 1977 to 10.5 percent, which was made permanent in 1982.  In 1991, the rate reached a high of 12.25 percent, and in 1995, lowered to its current rate of 9.9 percent.

The Sales and Use Tax was enacted in 1953, and eventually evolved into support for public education.  The tax started at 1 percent and currently is at 6 percent. The initial 6 percent imposition was also to be temporary until 1969, however, later that year the 6 percent was made permanent. Philadelphia and Allegheny County impose another 1 percent on purchases in their jurisdictions.

The Personal Income Tax (PIT) was imposed in 1971 at 2.3 percent.  Throughout the years, the rate has varied and some increases automatically sunsetted.  The PIT reached its current high in 2003 when Governor Rendell raised the rate to its current 3.07 percent.

As you can see, temporary taxes are rarely temporary and higher taxes are simply no good for Pennsylvania’s future or economic recovery. We must get government spending under control and have additional choices other than raising taxes – even if only “temporary.”

Mike Folmer [send him email] of Lebanon, Pennsylvania is a Pennsylvania State Senator who represents the 48th Senate district, which includes all of Lebanon County and portions of Berks, Chester, Dauphin and Lancaster Counties.

Healthcare continues to dominate the agenda on Capitol Hill as House leadership and the administration try to ram through their big government healthcare plan.  Fortunately, they have been unsuccessful so far, as there are many horrifying provisions tucked into this massive piece of legislation.

One major issue is the public funding of elective abortions.  The administration has already removed many longstanding restrictions on abortion, and is unwilling to provide straight answers to questions regarding the public funding of abortion in their plan.  This is deeply troubling for those of us who do not want taxpayer dollars funding abortions.

Forcing pro-life taxpayers to subsidize abortion is evil and tyrannical.  I have introduced the Taxpayer’s Freedom of Conscience Act (HR 1233) which forbids the use of any taxpayer funds for abortion, both here and overseas.

The most basic function of government is to protect life.  It is unconscionable that government would enable the taking of it.  However this is to be expected when government oversteps its constitutional bounds instead of protecting rights.

When government supercedes this very limited role, it cannot help but advance the moral agenda of whoever is in power at the time, at the expense of the rights of others.

Free people should be left alone to follow their conscience and determine their own lifestyle as long as they do not interfere with other people doing the same.  If morality is dictated by government, morality will change with every election.  Even if you agree with the morality of the current politicians and think their ideas should be advanced, someday different people will inherit that power and use it for their own agendas.  The wisdom of the constitution is that it keeps government out of these issues altogether.

Many say we must reform healthcare and treat it as a right, because that is the moral thing to do.  Poor people should not go without healthcare in a just society.  But too many forget the immorality of stealing from others in order to make this so.  They also forget the morality and compassion that naturally exists in communities when government is not fomenting class warfare with wealth redistribution programs.

Many doctors willingly volunteer, accept barter or reduced payment from patients who can’t pay, or give away services for free.  Many charities help the poor with food, housing and healthcare.  These charities are much more responsive and accountable for helping people in need than government ever could be.

This is the moral way that private individuals voluntarily deal with access to healthcare, but government intervention threatens to pull the rug out from this sort of volunteerism and replace it with mandates, taxes, red tape, wealth redistribution, and force.

The fact that the national healthcare overhaul could force taxpayers to subsidize abortions and may even force private insurers to cover abortions is more reason that this bill and the ideas behind it, are neither constitutional, moral, nor in the American people’s best interest.

Ron Paul is a republican member of Congress from Texas.

In 1819 U.S. Supreme Court decision “McCullough v. Maryland,” Chief Justice John Marshall wrote, “An unlimited power to tax involves, necessarily, a power to destroy; because there is a limit beyond which no institution and no property can bear taxation.”

Today, 190 years later, Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell has called for a 16 percent increase in the Personal Income Tax, saying, “The simple truth is we have no good choices. There are no shortcuts out of this crisis, no magic bullets, no painless path out of this morass. We can do the easy thing for the moment or the right thing for Pennsylvania’s future. The fairest plan is to spread the pain across the board, and let our economic recovery begin.”

I disagree higher taxes are good for Pennsylvania’s future or economic recovery and believe we have additional choices other than raising taxes.

Our nation was founded because Americans were upset about taxes.  The colonists were angry their government spent their money without giving them a say.  Patrick Henry gave the rallying cry, “no taxation without representation.”

What would our Founding Fathers feel about our nation today?   While we have taxation with representation, we certainly are taxed…a lot. The federal government spends trillions (and incurs trillions in additional debt) and states spend billions; despite which level of government (federal, state, county, municipal, or school district) spending you refer to, it is all taxpayer money – your money.

Regardless if you advocate for larger government or smaller government, one thing is certain – government is getting bigger and the private sector is getting smaller, particularly in Pennsylvania.  This certainly was not the vision of Founding Fathers like Thomas Paine, who said, “that government is best which governs least.”

Governor Rendell said his proposed tax increase will “only” cost taxpayers a few dollars each week.  He also said the burden will not fall upon those least able to pay, and insists the increase will be “temporary” (hopefully, more temporary than the Johnstown Flood Tax of 1936).

How we spend the people’s money – your money – does matter.  Taxes should always be the last resort – especially during troubled economic times. People are hurting, jobs are being lost, and the future is uncertain.  Government is the only entity that seems to grow and ask for more when money is tight.

We should not – and we cannot – forget the principles on which our nation was founded:  fair taxes, transparency in the expenditure of those dollars, and recognition that those who pay the bills should not be expected to pay more.  It’s your money.  Government needs to live within its means and not expect any more from you when they don’t.

Mike Folmer [send him email] of Lebanon, Pennsylvania is a Pennsylvania State Senator who represents the 48th Senate district, which includes all of Lebanon County and portions of Berks, Chester, Dauphin and Lancaster Counties.

As various tax-related mail begins to appear in the mailboxes of hardworking Americans across the country, it’s instructive for all of us to reflect on why we carry the burden of our government every April.

Take this morning, for instance. We can credit the “ingenuity of the markets”, and specifically the ingenuity of John Thain, for moving annual executive bonus payments by Merrill Lynch up by a month last November, thus disbursing $15 billion in executive bonuses just before closing Merrill’s acquisition by Bank of America. Fast forward a few months, and the United States taxpayer just gave Bank of America another $20 billion in newly-borrowed funds to put a band-aid on mortar wounds in Merrill Lynch’s balance sheet.

Doesn’t that make you relish the withholding from your paycheck? Seventy-five percent of the cash payment from our latest Bank of America bailout went directly to Merrill Lynch executives.

But wait, there’s more. Large companies predictably demonstrate that the best ways to embrace economic challenges are cost cutting, layoffs, and vaguely-defined attempts at increasing operational efficiency. One underappreciated source of operational efficiency is office redecorating — and in early 2008, John Thain spent $1.2 million renovating his office in Merrill Lynch’s midtown Manhattan office.

Please don’t misunderstand — I have nothing against a $1.2 million office overhaul paid for by Merrill Lynch. I simply object to an office overhaul followed by a massive transfusion from American taxpayers. Where’s my feng shui?

If you’re concerned about where your money is going as you pay taxes this April, I can think of several ways to respond. On one hand, I’d encourage you to consider the American banking system as a new national park. You’ve paid over $350 billion already, with trillions in future guarantees. In the case of Bank of America, the most recent $138 billion bailout dwarfs its market capitalization, so you own it just as certainly as you own Yosemite.

Visit the offices of local TARP-receiving banks. Enjoy a cup of coffee, admire the decorations on the walls. If you’ve been laid off, evicted, or otherwise having trouble making ends meet, you might try camping in the parking lot or on the leather couches inside.

If, however, you’ve had enough of the squandering of our nation’s wealth propping up a pyramid scheme that dwarfs Bernie Madoff’s wildest dreams, you might consider sending your Representative a message on February first. Or perhaps you can convince your Senator that it’s a bad idea to confirm a Treasury secretary who can’t even use TurboTax.

In the cold, hard light of current events, and considering that the vast majority of income tax collected goes simply to cover interest payments on a national debt created by the same banking system we are bailing out, I ask again:

Why do you pay taxes?

As reported by the AP (vis CBS News):

Spending to cover the costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan next year will total nearly $200 billion, according to a budget request the White House will take to Congress next week, making 2008 the most expensive year of those conflicts to date.

The news was first reported by the Los Angeles Times, which cited unnamed Pentagon officials.

The Bush administration has earlier this year said it would need $147.5 billion for fiscal 2008, but the estimates have been raised by another $47 billion. This request is in addition to the Pentagon’s nearly half-trillion annual budget, which omits war spending but covers routine costs, including training, payrolls and weapons procurement.

To keep it simple – that’s over $16 Billion – every single month.  $16 billion that’s taken from you by force and given to the merchants of death – the weapons makers, the contractors, and the like.

A war that can continually be funded through the coercive method of taxation is one that’s not easy to end.

Yet another reason why the income tax needs to go.