Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 18:45:55 -0400
From: bobhunt@erols.com
Subject: [libs4peace] (fwd) Some taxpayers grow tired of paying for war
To: Individual-Sovereignty@yahoogroups.com, American_Liberty@yahoogroups.com, libs4peace@yahoogroups.com ("Libertarians 4Peace"), lpaz-repost@egroups.com, sierratimes@yahoogroups.com, Countdown2NWO@yahoogroups.com, wla-discuss@westliballiance.org


Could I apply for a Patriot tax where I would be exempt from all
taxes except defense taxes since I am morally opposed to 
socialism and communism oin the US government???


bob hunt



Some taxpayers grow tired of paying for war

By KENNETH RAPOZA

The Standard Times

New Bedford, MA.

Tax day has come and gone, but guess how much of your federal income
taxes this year went to the Department of Defense?  According to the
U.S.  budget for 2003, roughly 46 percent of an individual's income
taxes are spent on the military.

A quiet, but growing number of taxpayers say they have had enough.

"I absolutely feel like I am paying for this war on terrorism," said
Westport resident Deana Chase.  "Part of my tax dollars is going to buy
the missiles that don't necessarily kill soldiers or terrorists, but
target innocent adults and children.  I have a problem with that."

The total federal outlay for fiscal year 2003 is $1.7 trillion; that
includes $339 billion for past military costs, including veteran's
benefits, and another $437 billion for current military costs.  While
conscientious objectors to war have the legal riht not to serve in the
military, they haven't won the right to refuse to pay for it.  That
oculd change, as several Democratic and Republican members of Congress
have repeatedly tried to enact a bill that would make it legal for
conscientious objectors to demand that their tax dollars be put to other
uses.

Called the "Peace Tax" for short, the legislation would allow people
opposed to war because of religious beliefs to stop paying for current
military costs.  That means conscientious objectors would no longer have
to pay for the activities of the intelligence agencies, war colleges,
Pentagon weapons contracts, or the training and funding of foreign
armies, including allies.  The tax dollars collected would be used for
the non-military purposes of government instead, though Peace Tax payers
would still be required to pay for veterans' benefits and military debts
from past wars.

"There is definitely a heightened interest in the Peace Tax since Sept.
11," said Marian Franz, executive director of the National ampaign for
a Peace Tax Fund, a Washington, D.C., lobbying group.  "People no longer
want to wait for a Peace Tax bill to pass.  They want to stop paying for
war right now.  Church groups are calling looking for information."

Eight members of Congress became co-sponsors of the Peace Tax Fund Act
after Sept.  11, bringing the number of sponsors to 32.  But this bill
has been proposed nearly every year since 1971 and has yet to become
law.

"This bill is not going anywhere," said U.S.  Rep.  Barney Frank, who is
actually a co-sponsor of the House bill known as H.R.  1186.  "I signed
onto it because it was more of a symbolic gesture.  I want to respect
the conscience of these people."

"It's not up to Barney Frank," said Ms.  Chase.  "The reason the Peace
Tax won't see the light of day is because there's not enough of us who
want it to pass."

It's also not very well known.  Even the traditional peace activist
churches, like the Unitarian Universalists, have never even heard of the
Peace Tax.  Two Unitarian reverends in Fairhaven and New Bedford said
they have never heard of the idea.

Ed DuFresne, executive minister of the Inter Church Council on County
Street, who recently heard about the Peace Tax from Ms.  Chase, said,
"The implementation of a Peace Tax Fund would lift up the number of
taxpayers that are concerned with peaceful solutions to war, as well as
the nation's own problems.  I think the tradition of the conscientious
objector should continue and I would support the Peace Tax for that
reason."

Peace Tax advocates say that they are not against having a Department of
Defense, nor are they entirely against combat troops.  They point out,
however, that the ability for the United States to wage war relies less
on soldiers and more on their "drafted dollars" to pay for high-tech
weapons.  They argue that the money used for war, or the preparation for
war, could be put to better use.

Ms.  Chase, a Christian Quaker, says she has thought about withholding
46 percent of her federal taxes as a resistance to war because it
conflicts with her religious beliefs, but weighed the risks of doing so.

Conscientious objectors often risk fines and jail time if they withhold
taxes in protest.  In a highly publicized court case in 1991, western
Massachusetts war tax resister Randy Kehler lost his home and served a
6-month prison term for withholding taxes.

There are an estimated 10,000 war-tax resisters in the nation, although
the IRS doesn't tally the figures.  War-tax resisters often attach a
letter with their 1040 tax form explaining why they have chosen to
withhold a portion of their tax payment.  They show that they donated
that money to charity.  Others have chosen to live below the taxable
income.

"The peak for war tax resisters was during the Vietnam War," said Mary
Loehr of the National War Tax Resistance Committee in Massachusetts.
"But since Sept.  11, we've been getting at least one call a day asking
for information, and that's a lot for us.  People are outraged about
what's going on in Afghanistan, the Middle East and maybe another war in
Iraq.  They are calling to express how they are sick that they have to
pay for all of this.  They don't know what to do."

War-tax resistance "is a high ideal," said Jean Kennison, a Westport
resident who tried her hand at war tax resistance in her 20s.  "But it
is against the law and you can put your personal property at risk.  I
hope that the Peace Tax makes us think about how much money we spend on
war instead of peace."

"I don't want the IRS to create a menu chart of where you want your
taxes to go," said Ms.  Chase.  "But I believe it is wrong to pay for
killing.  It is a struggle for many people I know to make the decision
to pay or not to pay.  I'd immediately use the Peace Tax if it was
enacted into law."


This story appeared on Page D1 of The Standard-Times on April 21, 2002.



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Stock for $4
and no minimums.
FREE Money 2002.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/k6cvND/n97DAA/ySSFAA/nJ9qlB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->