Misinterpretation of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution

Fred Elbel.

Website by Fred Elbel, Elbel Consulting Services, LLC

Quite simply, the Fourteenth Amendment currently is being interpreted to grant automatic birthright citizenship to children born in the United States of illegal alien parents (called anchor babies because under the 1965 immigration Act, they act as an anchor that pulls the illegal alien mother and eventually a host of other relatives into permanent U.S. residency). This clearly is contrary to the original intent of Congress and the States in ratifying the Fourteenth Amendment.

While it has been the practice to bestow citizenship to children of illegal aliens, this has never been ruled on by the Supreme Court.

Professors Peter Schuck and Rogers Smith have noted1 that:

“The present guarantee under American law of automatic birthright citizenship to the children of illegal aliens can operate…as one more incentive to illegal migration and violation by nonimmigrant aliens already here [.] When this attraction is combined with the powerful lure of the expanded entitlements conferred upon citizen children and their families by the modern welfare state, the total incentive effect of birthright citizenship may well become significant.”


1.   Professors Peter Schuck and Rogers Smith, “Consensual Citizenship” (Chronicles, July 1992)

Any tax without prior voter approval is a bad tax

For those Missourians contemplating buying or selling a motor vehicle to another person, the purchase of that vehicle just became more expensive.  On February 18, 2013 the Missouri Senate passed Senate Bill 182, a bill regarding levying a local sales tax on all motor vehicles sales.

SB 182 stops counties and municipalities from collecting a local use tax on the sale of motor vehicles, trailers, boats, or outboard motors. Instead of a use tax, local government entities will impose a local sales tax on the sale of all of the aforementioned items, regardless of whether they were purchased in Missouri. The home address of the buyer is used in determining what local tax rates apply.

The total sales tax for motor vehicles, trailers, boats, or outboard motors sold at retail is the sum of the state sales tax (4.225%) plus the local sales tax (varies according to locality). The sales tax for all non-retail sales of the preceding items is the sum of the state highway use tax (4.00%) plus the local sales tax (varies according to locality).

All counties and municipalities that did not previously approve a local use tax must put to a vote of the people whether to discontinue collecting sales tax on non-retail sales of motor vehicles. If a local government does not hold such a vote before November 2016, the taxing jurisdiction must stop collecting the sales tax. Counties or cities may at any time hold a vote to repeal the tax. Language repealing the tax must also be put to a vote of the people any time 15% of the registered voters in a taxing jurisdiction sign a petition requesting such.

Why did the Missouri Senate pass this bill?

Quotes from several state and local elected government officials, business advocacy organizations, and local car dealers in a Southeast Missourian article titled “Sales tax fallout hits dealers, others” dated February 21, 2013,  stated a “level playing field” is needed between the car dealers in Illinois and Missouri. Whenever officials allude to fairness, bad things happen. One can conclude these officials support a statist approach to concentrating economic controls in the hands of the government. Being “fair” to all car dealers in Missouri can encourage an overall centralization of economic control at the state level.

The proper role of government is to protect equal rights, not provide equal things. This bill violates the rights of local governments by intruding upon the taxing authority a local government has with its citizenry. The state senators want to dictate to locally elected officials of Missouri how to run their communities. This is a huge usurpation of power of the state from the counties and cities.

Each local government in Missouri has made a social contract with its citizens. The contract provides for public order, protection of property, and access to public services such as highways, roads, and sewer. The citizens and their local governments determine the limiting of rights and the duties of each other.  The Missouri Senate overstepped its authority by directing local governments to collect sales tax on the purchase of vehicles without a vote of the people at the local level. Although there is a requirement to put the measure on the ballot of counties and municipalities that did not have a use tax prior to the passage of SB 182, it is a deep-rooted “Principle of Liberty” to get voter approval before imposition of a new tax. The Senate’s action in regards to the SB 182 smacks of governing at their whim rather than by law.

Even though SB 182 has passed in the Senate, the bill must go to the House. The Senate and House need to agree to the final language of the bill before sending it to the governor for his signature. The governor can veto the bill or sign it into law. But that is not the end of it. At any time, with 15% of the registered voter in a taxing authority’s jurisdiction signing a petition to put it on a ballot, the voters can nullify the tax.

It is time we send a strong message to the Missouri Senate by directing our local elected officials and our state representatives to kill this power- grabbing bill before rather than after it becomes law.

A Discussion of the Missouri Taxpayer Relief Act – Part 3

I appreciate Mr. Epps’ fervent defense of eliminating the sales tax on food. He is not altogether off-base but John McMillen has it right. It’s very much like a whack a mole game, you address one issue and they simply choose another to attack.

Mr. Epps is correct that the food sales tax is an emotional issue. He is incorrect that farmers will oppose it because of the food sales tax. We know through extensive polling, surveys and focus groups that with the production of agricultural goods being tax exempt with no sales tax applied until the sale at final consumption that the agricultural community as a whole does not oppose the proposal.

One counter argument to the emotional appeal of the opponents regarding the food sales tax is that it is highly likely the Catholic Conference and the bishops may in fact come out in support of this measure. This would go a long way to offset the emotional argument.

The proposal to place a sales tax on internet sales is actually already in place, it just can’t be implemented. There is nothing in the measure that would prohibit anything that is not exempted from being taxed. In fact, everything not exempted will be taxed. The problem with internet sales is that states cannot require a vendor who does not have a physical location in the state to collect and remit state and local sales taxes. It’s an interstate commerce issue that the federal government must resolve. Once they do, this measure is able to handle the outcome.

As I told Mr. Epps, the food sales tax is not the predominate issue being used against the proposal. The predominate issue is that the opponents are saying that it will cause a shortfall of $2.5 – $3.5 billion to the state. That is why the proponents and opponents have both brought legal action against the fiscal note summary of the initiative petition. Once that is resolved and we have every reason to believe it will be resolved in favor of no shortfall, the opponents will reach for other issues. The food sales tax may well be one of them but that simply illustrates the point that if not food sales taxes it WILL be some other excuse.

It is inaccurate to suggest that the proposal as exists is not in-tune with the best interest of the people of the state of Missouri. Mr. Epps has failed to show that to be the case. He has demonstrated his opinion that the food sales tax is a problem to the measure’s passage via an emotional argument. He has not demonstrated and cannot demonstrate that the measure is not in the best interest of the people of the state because it is. Income taxes are the worst form of taxation you can assess.

I found the new to me twist on history that our patriot predecessors rejected a tax on food to be interesting, knowing that the Boston Tea Party was the culmination of many grievances and the tax on it and the way it was accomplished represented the last straw. If there are specific writings from our patriot predecessors that they did in fact specifically oppose tax on food I would be interested in reading them. Is there a body of work similar to the Federalists papers that show that to be the case?

I am always glad to engage in discussion on the measure. At this point, the measure is already in place and approved for circulation. The court decision will clear the final barrier to full petition gathering. Until then, I believe the sponsors of the initiative, Let Voters Decide, will cautiously collect signatures as they have in the 7th CD. As I stated last evening they do so at risk since any change including the want they would want to be the outcome will result in the disqualification of any signatures gathered to that point.

Best regards,

Carl Bearden

Executive Director United for Missouri

(314) 560-4597



A Discussion of the Missouri Taxpayer Relief Act – Part 2

By John McMillen:

David, thank you for your opinion.  We all have our own opinion of how we would like things to be, and an opinion on what would best sell to this special interest group or that special interest group, etc.  That is why we now have a 72,536 page federal income tax code and a state income tax code that mimics the federal. Both are onerous burdens to the working man and the small business entrepreneur.

I won’t try and debate you on an academic scholarly level, as I can see you’re well school in that area.  And, I am not as well qualified as Carl of course to defend the features of the “Missouri Taxpayer Relief Act.”  But, as a common layperson who has followed this effort from the very beginning. I can assure you there is no magic formula in coming up with an “income tax replacement” measure that can’t be demonized to death by opponents who want to exploit emotions, and play fast and loose with the facts.

The current measure has exempted dozens of categories as is pointed out in the handout I gave you last night.  (Since there are many who were copied on this email that weren’t present last night, I’ve attached a copy)  Here

But even though they’ve been exempted, the opposition still lies and says they are taxed when they are not.  The opposition won’t even talk about a specific measure; they just refer to some vague “tax everything” tax in recent articles in area newspapers and radio spots which have been enlisted to perpetrate that lie. The opposition are the ones who are really scared. They are scared of the facts, so they get emotional.

In the beginning there was a proposal to rebate back all taxes spent on food and all sales tax spent on the basic necessities, but that didn’t keep the opposition from ignoring that fact and lying to scare people by telling them basic necessities are going to go up, and it will “hurt the poor.”

A straight sales tax is regressive by nature. But the people working to replace the income tax with a sales tax have been very conscious of that fact and have crafted numerous mechanisms to alleviate that negative impact on the poor.  The opposition has always twisted the facts to caricature us as rich and greedy offspring of Simon Legree or Ebenezer Scrooge, even though there are thousands of working class families like mine across the state of Missouri and millions across this nation who want this more than the ‘so-called rich”, and would be benefited more by it than the “so-called rich.”

If the opposition truly wanted to tax the wealth of the rich, they would be behind this measure 110%.  The reason a Warren Buffet can spout off about his secretary being taxed at a higher “INCOME tax rate than he is, is because he doesn’t report his mega millions and billions as ‘income.”  The working class have no choice in the matter under the current income tax system.  The income tax does nothing to tax wealth.  It taxes the symbiotic driving forces of a free economy, wages and profits.

Facts have got to control our emotions or we will all become emotional cripples totally dependent on the state, which is what the opposition’s strategy truly is.

Here are some facts http://www.ilfb2.org/fff06/51.pdf  in the 1930’s Americans were spending over 20% of their income on food.  In 2004 Americans were spending about 10% of their income on food.  I’m sure it is much the same today.  All the other basic necessities under the “Missouri Taxpayer Relief Act” are not taxed such as shelter, medical, education, childcare, nursing homes, etc… all the things they say we’re taxing but actually aren’t.

An $800 per week wage earner today gives up about 3% of gross pay in Missouri state income tax after working through the standard deductions and arriving at taxable income on a typical Missouri tax return.  Now that’s 3% of his gross. In the case of an $800.00 per wk income earner in this case is about $42,000.00 per year.  ($42,000.00 X .03 = $1,260.00.)

This is about the same annual amount as the “social security tax relief cut” for working families being fought over in D.C. right now and being hyped as a “HUGE FACTOR IMPACTING OUR ECONOMY” by the same camp who oppose replacing the income tax, with a sales tax…for some reason they don’t see this same amount of money as having that same amount of impact, or as a the same significant increase in spendable income for working families.   Hmmmm.

The increase in sales tax on Food under the “Missouri Taxpayer Relief Act” would be about 3% more than present when local sales tax rates are adjusted under the act: 10% of $42,000.00 = $4,200.00.  $42,000.00 X .03 = $126.00

Now which would I rather have… your emotional $126.00? or my logical, factual $1,260.00?  I can get highly emotional about that $1,100 difference!

I think I can get a lot more emotional over losing$1,260.00 than $126.00 if given a choice.

Even if you spend more than 10% of your gross income on food, there’s a wide buffer there before one can scream he has been ‘hurt’ by the “Missouri Tax Relief Act” sales tax.

And, don’t forget the poor who purchase food with food stamps, ARE NOT TAXED.  So the people who are not taxed now won’t be taxed then either; a key fact to keep in mind.

Tennessee has a 5.5% tax on food, and there is no cross boarder shopping as Carl pointed out last night.  Tennessee is the best model this measure could adopt.

Missouri is 48th in the nation for economic growth.  We must change to a system that stimulates a dynamic positive response in our economy.  The “Missouri Taxpayer Relief Act” does just that.

The ‘scare talk’ about taxes on food is just that, a scare tactic.  We can’t avoid the opposition using scare tactics by dropping the sales tax on food and increasing the rate over all, or finding another category to tax.  Scare tactics is all the opposition has.  They will just target something else, lie about it, twist it out of context, blow it out of proportion, and scream to the media and the media will come running like a bunch hogs to a slop a trough like always.  They’re political bedfellows, that’s their shtick, that’s the alliance they have formed, and we can’t change that tactic be giving in to it. We have truth and logic on our side. And eventually truth and logic will win out over time.

If we really want to come together as a the good hearted sincere honest citizens that I know most of us are, we are going to have to quit being manipulated by their lies, slander, and deception regardless of how pervasive it is.  We have got to all step back out of the looking glass and not accept these distorted perceptions created to make right, wrong; and wrong, right…backwards, forward and forwards, backward. We can’t save our state and our nation playing tit for tat in a game of emotional symbolism.  We must look our opponents squarely in the eye, honestly, and come to agreement on solutions based on fact and logic, and what actually works.  That’s the way this country was founded, that’s the only way we will survive as the America we inherited.

John McMillen


A Discussion of the Missouri Taxpayer Relief Act – Part 1

By David Epps:

I attended the Tuesday December 20th, Cape County Tea Party monthly meeting!
John McMillen – Fair Tax / Carl Bearden – Missouri Taxpayer Relief Act were the guest speakers.

John McMillen illustrated how the faith in God is being replaced by a faith in statism. Is not The Tea Party an attempt to replace statism with a belief in individual freedom and empowerment of self? The whole fair tax debate should be about restoring control of the government purse strings to the individual at the check out line. The joining of the two efforts is a natural coalition.

I was very disheartened by the inclusion of food being subject to a sales tax increase! I am really getting tired of running with the Turkeys when they could soar like Eagles! Appeals to prejudice win more arguments than logic! Carl Bearden appealed to the logic and on that score the Missouri Taxpayer Relief Act will win the debate. That’s Eagle Soaring! But it will lose the argument because the Act will cause food prices to go up and there is not an equally emotional counter argument. That’s Turkey running.

When the topic of food tax increase came up, Carl Bearden used rational debate points; food stamps are excluded, the Act needs the additional revenue stream from the tax on food. And of course the increase in sales tax is offset by no income tax. I suspect, however, on a deeper level that Bearden does not want to use emotional arguments because in his mind that would not be according to Hoyle. The opposition does not play according to Hoyle and will use the emotional argument and Carl Bearden and the ACT have nothing on that score. You can’t win a debate or an argument if you have nothing.

To win against community organizers you have got to appeal to the emotion. Accept it, do not turn the other cheek, that is the way today’s game is played.

According to Hoyle:
A Logical Fallacy is a false argument that appeals to emotion or prejudice rather than to logic, facts of the issue, or reason. These fallacious arguments sometimes can win arguments quickly. But most importantly an emotional argument based on truth will always win.

The false argument is that food prices go up. Well no they don’t because the income tax offsets the increase. But because food prices are emotional subject all other factors are ignored.Unfortunately, the decisions arrived at through such false arguments are sometimes poor ones. Not all appeals to emotion are false arguments, however The real world abounds with both examples.Ethanol wins because the arguments that it eliminates pollution is stronger than corn is a food.

  • The Ohio’s Issue 2 Anti-Union Law was defeated because policemen and firemen were included!
  • The House republicans are losing their 1 year tax reduction argument which they passed.
  • Herman Cain withdrew based on accusations of womanizing even though the evidence was hearsay!
  • Farmers will balk if food prices go up because they take all the blame regardless of the reason.
  • Missouri Taxpayer Relief Act will go down in defeat because it increases the cost of food.

Each of the arguments could have been turned around if you follow simple rules:

  1. Never concede the emotional argument.
  2. Always supply an emotional argument in favor of the proposition.
  • Ethanol eliminates pollution, the EPA says so!
  • As long as policemen and firemen come to our rescue let them get whatever they need.
  • The House bill included JOBS, JOBS, JOBS! Boehner should have pressed that point home.
  • Cain should have fessed up to associations and leaked even more to the press.
  • Farmers will love anything that is perceived as reduction in food prices!

The people will vote for anything that reduces their living expenses.To counter Carl Bearden debate point, It is irrelevant if a proposition cannot work incertain of its details. The Senate just passed a 2 month tax reduction even though the government says that it is impossible to implement. The Senate Republicans sabotaged their House brethren effort by voting for the Senate 2 month extension, that can’t be implemented.Now are John McMillen and Carl Bearden in it to win, or not? When they propose an increase of taxes on the basic necessities of life, food, housing, and energy, I think not.

I propose that since they are going to all the trouble to change the Missouri tax system. Supply an emotional argument in favor and let it soar like an Eagle. The necessities were never subject to a tax after we dumped the tea in the harbor. The American people have always supplied their own food, shelter, and energy. We neither want the government to provide those for us nor do we want the government to take those from US.

Eliminate all state sales taxes on food, rentals, and energy, the necessities of life! After all, an appeal to emotion against the tax on tea,  morphed into a cry for revolution and the founding of a new country!

Women, by the way, will decide the fate of the Missouri Taxpayer Relief Act!
Why? Because Women know, The way to a mans heart is through his stomach!

David Epps
Cape Girardeau, MO


  1. Add Missouri state sales tax on internet sales to make up the revenue lost by elimination of sales tax on food. This will create an even playing field for Missouri’s merchants.
  2. Also, to counter the Realtors objection to the Missouri Taxpayer Relief Act just point out that they too made money, and lots of it, through out the lead up and during the housing market collapse. They were present when the property sale closed to get their commission check and knew exactly what mortgages were being signed and by whom and they said nothing!