THE FLAT TAX

It’s odd, isn’t it, that perhaps the most momentous reform being considered in a Bush second term barely registered in the campaign: a flat tax. It could take the form of a national sales tax, or a flat income tax, or some combination of the two. I might as well put my two cents in. I’ve long been a huge enthusiast for the reform for a simple reason. Forget about the obvious economic benefits. The political benefits are legion. First, it deals a death blow to the cancer of corporate lobbying in Washington. If you restrict shelters to one or two (charity or home-ownership, but I’d abolish the latter), then the whole Washington game is over. Far, far more effective than campaign finance reform. Second, it upholds an important liberal principle: that the government should be neutral among its citizens. I don’t believe in affirmative action, because it means the government discriminates on the basis of race. I oppose heterosexual-exclusive civil marriage, because it means the government discriminates on the basis of emotional/sexual orientation. And I oppose punitive or “progressive” taxation, because it means the government discriminates on the basis of personal success. If we’re all taxed at the same proportionate rate, the successful still pay far more into the public coffers than the unsuccessful. They’re just not penalized even further by a higher rate. If you want to help the disadvantaged, and I do, then focus government spending on programs that help the under-privileged. But don’t penalize work. And don’t defend unequal treatment.

SPECTER’S PLEDGE: Did Snarlin’ Arlen promise Pennsylvania papers that he would make sure abortion stayed legal if he became chairman of the Judiciary Committee? Tim Perry examines the evidence.