No taxation without representation
Posted: Mon Mar 02, 2009 2:37 am
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, made into law on February 17th, proves the above still happens today."No taxation without representation" was a slogan in the period 1763-1775 that summarized a primary grievance of the American colonists in the Thirteen colonies. The colonists complained that taxes were imposed by Parliament without the consent of the colonists, which violated the traditional rights of Englishmen dating back centuries. The point was that the colonies had no representation in Parliament; the British responded that they were "virtually" represented. The Americans said these "virtual representatives" knew nothing about America.
The Americans strenuously rejected the Stamp Act 1765 (which was repealed), and in 1773 violently rejected the tax on tea imports at the Boston Tea Party. Britain retaliated against Boston in a chain of episodes that led to armed rebellion in 1775 and the American Revolution. The colonists formed militias and seized control of each colony, ousting the royal governors. The complaint was never officially over the amount of taxation (which was low), but always on the decision-making process by which taxes were decided in London, without representation for the colonists in British Parliament.
Less then a hand full of the entire body of Congress, including the Present, did not read the bill. They voted to pass it blind. We do not vote in, and pay these people to have aids, assistants, secretary's or the girl scouts read the bills they vote for.
In reality, those who did not read the bill, did not represent the people of their district, thus voting on a bill that taxes people with out representation. The same thing England did, that started the revolution. The same thing that will, at some point soon, start a new one.
So, is Touc right? Do we need a new Constitution? One that ban's any taxes from being enacted with out the people voting on those taxes?
