Too many pokers in the fire

Over the years the government has grown. It has become enormous in breath and scope trying to serve the people. New programs, expanded services, continuing and growing regulations, oversight, licensing, and numerous departments, task forces, bureaus, agencies, etc. are created and given more responsibility every year. It succeeds in some of these tasks. In others, however, almost everyone agrees that the government may not be the best entity to manage the endevour.

There is constant discussion and debate about making schools better for our children. Standards are created. Children are tested. Teachers are scrutinized. Schools are put on closure lists just to be re-purposed into another school with the same students and a different name. This seems to be an area where government has failed to live up to the expectations of its people. People are looking to create a system that works. To me, the private sector has created a system that works. Anecdotal and empirical data prove that, time and time again, private schools outperform public schools.

The majority of people agree that society benefits from educating our children. Government is efficient in funding schools, but I don't think they should run the schools. Possibly, we could create a system of vouchers or reimbursement to schools directly for the children that attend. There may even be a system that everyone could agree on to reward good grades. As a professional returning to college, I know that I am highly motivated to make good grades that result in my employer reimbursing me for a portion of my expenses. Parents could be incented to get involved with their kids school work if it lessens their tax burden or results in a higher valued voucher. Students would likely repay society in the long run by being more productive members of society. The free market would most likely clear out the poor performing schools. Teachers that aren't able to produce results would probably be weeded out as well. It may be time to bring this service back to the people and give our society a boost toward being as highly educated as possible.

Let's take it further

I completely agree with my fellow blogger that the tax code is ridiculously, and needlessly, complex.  Through favors to large donors, social engineering, pet projects, compromises, etc., the code has been made into an unwieldy conglomerate of worksheets, rules, schedules, adjustments, line items, etc.  Those who are most well versed in the intricacies of the code are able to manipulate it to such a degree that they are, in many cases, able to avoid most of, if not all of, their obligation.  This was brought to light by the events that were mentioned in the blog.  The large corporations are able to hire the most tax educated individuals to work the system to their advantage.

However, I would like to take their argument and extend it a bit.  I don’t think that the problem is that the businesses are exploiting the built in loopholes and tax breaks.  I think that the problem is the existence of those loopholes and tax breaks.  We need to simplify the tax code to prevent such “abuses”, for lack of a better word.

As is pointed out, the American public is who ends up footing the bill for corporations who avoid their obligations.  And I would submit that the public also pays for companies who fully pay their tax obligation.  I think anyone would agree that all costs are passed along to the public.  With that logic in mind, why wouldn’t we reduce the tax revenue stream to the common factor?  If I were to rewrite the tax code, I would simplify it to a consumption tax only.  Corporations wouldn’t have a tax burden to try to escape from.  They wouldn’t have to use shady, if legal, practices to avoid taxes.  Individuals would be able to see the cost of government in a transparent way when they purchase an end product.

An unintended consequence would possibly be creating a favorable business environment.  Most people agree that cost of business is what causes companies to relocate or establish themselves outside of the United States.  I think it would be a powerful move to make the United States a tax haven for businesses and bring jobs back here.  The United States would be the country that everyone outsourced to instead of the other way around.  I can imagine that this would go a long way to resolving our country’s financial woes.

Having a public who can see their taxes clearly every time they make a purchase would hopefully make them even more financially aware of government spending.  It would encourage accountability in our elected leaders and would encourage people to save.  With a consumption tax, you are only taxed when you spend.  If you save, you won’t be taxed.  You’ll have more money working for you and, when you do spend, more to spend which increases tax revenue for the government.

Limits aren't always bad

In the spirit of the change movement that has swept the country, I'd like to bring up a topic that has been discussed often, and then is just as often dismissed.  I'd like to remind everyone about the possibility of term limits for Congress.

We, as a people, have determined that it is the right decision to, generally, limit the President to two terms in office.  But we have had, or currently have, politicians who have served in the House and Senate for over fifty years.  On average, Congress is comprised of House Members that will have served five two year terms (ten years) and Senators will have served two six year terms (twelve years).

There are many problems that term limits could help address.  Spending in Congress has been out of control recently.  Term limits would naturally limit this spending due to the fact that the official wouldn't have to be concerned with re-election.  This would likely limit the use of earmarks or creation of tax loopholes.  Lobbyists wouldn't have the crucial carrot of money for leverage when they have an audience with our officials.  Bureaucracies would grow at a smaller rate, if at all.  And the individuals would be less likely to abuse their position as someone who has been in the system for much longer.

As with the Presidency, new ideas and plans would be introduced  on a regular basis.  More citizens will have the opportunity to be involved in the system and possibly serve.  The entitlement mentality of the current members would be gone.  No longer will the prerequisite for chairing a committee be the length of service, but the merits of the individual.  I believe this would set up a productive and competitive environment where the people's work would get done faster and smarter than in our current system.

Of course the problem with initiating such a system is that the individuals who would be voting for the measure would have the most to lose by passing it.  And, that being the case, you can see why this idea is dropped almost as soon as it is brought up.  We, the citizenry, would have to demand a change like this from our leaders.  We must remind them that they are elected to do our work.  And not as a career, but as a passion.  Given the chance, I'd vote for term limits today to create real change in our governing system.