SUBSCRIBE NOW

Enjoy all your local news and sports for less than 7¢ per day.

Subscribe Now or Log In

The Preamble to the Constitution opens with the words, "We the people of the United States," a phrase our Founding Fathers not only meant to imply that the people choose the government they want, but that political power itself rests with its citizens.

The new government, which began in 1789, would be a republic. Political power rested with the people, then the states, with only limited exclusive powers given to the federal government. Initially, political service was a sacrifice, not a career with benefits exceeding the private sector like it now is.

From the very onset, individual liberty was under attack, but it was not until the 20th century that the real assault began in earnest, starting with the Progressive Era.   Words like progressive take on different meanings depending on the audience.   Synonyms for the word would include improving or better off.

Although that Progressive Era gave us the much needed 19th Amendment on women’s suffrage, it also gave us the progressive income tax via the 17th Amendment. Initially directed at the rich, eventually the tax was broadened to include virtually everyone. Our tax system became the fuel to fund massive government spending programs.

The concept of taxing the rich at higher rates sounds reasonable to most, but economically speaking it is flawed. Statistics show that when taxes are lowered at the higher rates, more revenue flows into the government coffers, and the wealthy end up paying a greater overall share of the income tax burden than they would have at the higher rates.

Just because the rich can afford to pay more taxes does not make it right. Forced charity is not charity at all, but legalized theft. I personally see no reason to tax at a progressive rate successful entrepreneurs like Bill Gates of Microsoft or Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook just because their creativity and ingenuity resulted in a product the public demanded and was willing to pay for.

Why should they be penalized for their success?

It seems to me that if God did not demand a progressive tithe for spiritual benefits back in the Old Testament times, but instead called for a flat 10 percent, that should be good enough for us as well.

The progressives also hijacked education through the efforts of the likes of John Dewey and his friends. The federal government stepped up its takeover by creating a cabinet position for the Department of Education during Jimmy Carter’s administration. Every year more public money has been funneled into education with lackluster results.

Consequently, the home-schooling movement has grown by leaps and bounds. In 1999, it accounted for 1.7 percent of students, while today it has grown to 4 percent. In addition, private schools have experienced a similar growth and now account for 7 percent of the students in spite of attacks by public officials.

When did we come to the conclusion that bigger is better? In 1940, the American population stood at 132 million and had 117,000 school boards. Currently, the United States population stands at 310 million, and there are 15,000 school boards. The net result is that the more educational decisions are removed from the local community, the less productive schools become.

So is the Progressive Era properly named? Are we better off for all the changes it brought forth?

It is time for "We the People" to demand our government be returned to us, and stop the runaway train that has deprived us of our liberty.

Laughlin is a Christian Libertarian. He is an economist, teacher, father, husband and most recently a grandfather. He has written a weekly column for The Tribune for 12 years. He and his wife Gina reside in Meadowlakes. To contact him, e-mail ablaughlin@nctv.com. He is an independent columnist, not a staff member, and his views do not necessarily reflect those of The Tribune or its parent company.