Hannan's words to P.M. Brown are too good not to share. If you haven't heard this yet or want to listen to it again, here is the video.
If only this caliber of exposition could be more often available here in the U.S. in a measure which is preventative and restorative towards the destruction of our wealth, currency, and liberty rather than one which will eventually be only restorative.
Really agree with what you read? Really disagree? Somewhere in the middle?....Let yourself be heard in the comments!
_
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Saturday, March 21, 2009
The Fairtax Discussed on the House Floor
Go FairTax!!!
Really agree with what you read? Really disagree? Somewhere in the middle?....Let yourself be heard in the comments!
_
Friday, March 20, 2009
Bailouts, Attainders, & Ex Post Facto
For the last several days, we have had wall to wall coverage about bailouts, bonuses, and an overload of demonization against AIG & it's executives who have taken millions of dollars in bonuses after accepting billions of tax dollars.
Yesterday, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to tax bonus payments of companies who have been given more than $5 Billion in government handouts. So, what's the problem with that? Companies shouldn't be profiting on a taxpayer subsidy. That sounds fair, right? It seems outrageous that a company would accept taxpayer money, and then its upper most echelon line its pockets with the money. I certainly agree it's outrageous. Think of college students (myself included) who's families would like to support them in further scholastic achievement by financing their continued education who cannot because the income which would go to such worthwhile causes is siphoned off by local, state, & federal taxes & fees. Then we see our hard earned money go towards some group of corporate fat-cats who had enough money to buy off a few influential government officials. Think I'm making this up? I don't hold John Stewart as having any debatable serious reporting or commentary stature, but check out 2:58-8:44 of his March 19th show. It's, I believe, fairly accurate and entertaining at the same time.
Honestly, what did you (and I'm talking to all of you who supported TARP & the bailouts specifically) think was going to happen? It was such an emergency that the stimulus spending package be passed in such a short time that no one could read the bill. The very idea that such actions would lead to anything other than corruption is absurd; and in my opinion in this particular legislation, intentional. The whole idea that you tax the citizens to give to entities which don't function in a prosperous manner is inherently backwards. This is the same thing as if AIG, GM, Chrysler, and all the rest who got their hands on tax payer dollars broke into everyone's home and stole what they wanted. (See my comments on mortgages on the force of government for a little more lengthy discussion on this idea.) There is a reason why we didn't buy their services/products to begin with. Let's maybe look at this a different way. I'm a typical person who is watching his money and trying to make it though the recession with as little effect to my finances. Does it make sense to take out a loan to buy a car from GM or Chrysler or possibly go out and give money to AIG out of my finances which, if you are following your grandmother's advice to not spend what you don't have, doesn't exist. That's essentially what the government has done. Ask yourself, does it make sense? Would you do it with your own finances? And just for those of you who think all of this money is coming from the rich, The bailout has increased the U.S. debt limit by $700 Billion. It's not coming from the rich, its coming from our creditors. I don't know about you, but I'd like not to owe China anything let alone make our children beholden to them.
Now as bad as this is, lets put this into perspective. AIG was given $182.5 billion. AIG's people got $165 million in bonuses.
Of 182.5 B, $165 M is .09%. Pretty astounding how much difference a few decimal places makes. This means that if someone gave you $100, you would keep ¢9 (that's $0.09) to keep the same percentage. So go ahead, be outraged about the 165 million dollars. Go ahead, be worried about the pennies. Don't think to ask where the rest of it went. I'm sure it doesn't matter.
Now, back to the taxing of the bonuses. As reprehensible as the bonuses are, I cannot see justice being done by taxing the bonuses. There are constitutional issues with taxing the bonuses. Some say there isn't, but I think they might be wrong in some cases.
Here are the general provisions which some say are in contests with taxing the bailouted thieves' bonuses: Bills of Attainder, Ex Post Facto, Contract Clause, & the Fifth Amendment.
I think there may be some validity to the arguments in the above referenced piece in regards to the Contract Clause and the Fifth Amendment; however, I believe the Ex Post Facto & Bills of Attainder provisions in the Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution are clearly in contrast to this type of taxation.
Bills of attainder: Congress is singling out these people. Writing the bills in a broad sense may be a technical way around it, but the problems I see in it is that 1.) it may not be broad enough to pass a challenge in court; 2.) it makes the tax code that much more complicated; & most importantly 3.) the purpose is still the same. Lets say I want something my neighbor has. This thing is really cool, and I don't think he should have it for himself. Even though my representative sympathizes with my plight, he can't do anything because of the prevention of bills of attainder which wouldn't allow him to pass a law singling out the specific neighbor who has that really cool gizmo. Well, my neighbor doesn't have the same street address as I do; what if we write the law that says everyone who has a street address which ends in odd numbers (encompassing the neighbor's address and excluding my own) will be taxed at the cost of the really cool gizmo and such funds be directed to addresses ending in even numbers. Problem solved. Just because this law may be very broad natured, it doesn't remove the fact that I want a bill of attainder passed against my neighbor. Bills of attainder, regardless of how broad, exist as entities of purpose and not domain.
Ex Post Facto: This provision of the Constitution has been debated from the 1700's. The primary area of debate is whether the Ex Post Facto Clause applies to civil law in addition to criminal law. Everyone is familiar with the idea of criminal ex post facto. No one should fear drinking from a clear glass because if drinking from clear glasses were to be outlawed, no one would be subject to the penalties during the time previous to the passage of the laws when such activities were not subject to lawful penalty. No one disputes this, but what if legislatures are allowed to injure its population by passing laws to architect its will when such actions are contrary to agreements between two people? There would be no way to conduct business in any manner which derived it's intention from any expectation of the ability to be free from interference from a legislative body. In such a situation, no agreement can be binding. The Cato Journal has a very in depth piece on the civil application of the Ex Post Facto Clause in which quotes, as I do now, Federalist Paper 44 by James Madison.
The single problem with all of these issues in the replacement of the spirit & word of the law with the word of the law. The only way one can ignore the laws as they are intended is if they construe the wording to mean what is popular at the moment for the will of those who dismiss the purpose and distort the language of the law. This is why when people quote the Constitution or the law without addressing the Constitution or law's purpose, they do it often with the intention to dilute its meaning. When we hear people speak about the Constitution, how often do we hear the same people quoting the Federalist or Anti-federalist Papers or other documents discussing the purposes of the laws about which they speak? We must be very careful not to accept the law but deny its purpose. I have for some time now argued for a simplification of laws particularly with the tax code, but it is for the same reason as I am arguing now that people should be aware of the purposes for which laws are written. Many of today's problems are those which originate at the contortion of the Constitution and at the abandonment of the purposes of its clauses. This is not to say that the language is irrelevant, but a partner to the law's purpose. The wording of laws originate only from the meaning behind them; and without the meaning from which words are used to construct our laws, they have no purpose. The rule of law can only exist within the continuity of the purpose & language of the law; without which leaves little room to be filled with anything else but the rule of man. It seems that James Madison saw more purpose in the Ex Post Facto Clause than just a criminal application. Funny I don't hear much about Mr. Madison's views on this when someone wants to tax someone else at 90%; and if the government can do it to the people at AIG, who can't they do it to?
Really agree with what you read? Really disagree? Somewhere in the middle?....Let yourself be heard in the comments!
_
Yesterday, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to tax bonus payments of companies who have been given more than $5 Billion in government handouts. So, what's the problem with that? Companies shouldn't be profiting on a taxpayer subsidy. That sounds fair, right? It seems outrageous that a company would accept taxpayer money, and then its upper most echelon line its pockets with the money. I certainly agree it's outrageous. Think of college students (myself included) who's families would like to support them in further scholastic achievement by financing their continued education who cannot because the income which would go to such worthwhile causes is siphoned off by local, state, & federal taxes & fees. Then we see our hard earned money go towards some group of corporate fat-cats who had enough money to buy off a few influential government officials. Think I'm making this up? I don't hold John Stewart as having any debatable serious reporting or commentary stature, but check out 2:58-8:44 of his March 19th show. It's, I believe, fairly accurate and entertaining at the same time.
Honestly, what did you (and I'm talking to all of you who supported TARP & the bailouts specifically) think was going to happen? It was such an emergency that the stimulus spending package be passed in such a short time that no one could read the bill. The very idea that such actions would lead to anything other than corruption is absurd; and in my opinion in this particular legislation, intentional. The whole idea that you tax the citizens to give to entities which don't function in a prosperous manner is inherently backwards. This is the same thing as if AIG, GM, Chrysler, and all the rest who got their hands on tax payer dollars broke into everyone's home and stole what they wanted. (See my comments on mortgages on the force of government for a little more lengthy discussion on this idea.) There is a reason why we didn't buy their services/products to begin with. Let's maybe look at this a different way. I'm a typical person who is watching his money and trying to make it though the recession with as little effect to my finances. Does it make sense to take out a loan to buy a car from GM or Chrysler or possibly go out and give money to AIG out of my finances which, if you are following your grandmother's advice to not spend what you don't have, doesn't exist. That's essentially what the government has done. Ask yourself, does it make sense? Would you do it with your own finances? And just for those of you who think all of this money is coming from the rich, The bailout has increased the U.S. debt limit by $700 Billion. It's not coming from the rich, its coming from our creditors. I don't know about you, but I'd like not to owe China anything let alone make our children beholden to them.
Now as bad as this is, lets put this into perspective. AIG was given $182.5 billion. AIG's people got $165 million in bonuses.
$182,500,000,000
vs.
$165,000,000
vs.
$165,000,000
Of 182.5 B, $165 M is .09%. Pretty astounding how much difference a few decimal places makes. This means that if someone gave you $100, you would keep ¢9 (that's $0.09) to keep the same percentage. So go ahead, be outraged about the 165 million dollars. Go ahead, be worried about the pennies. Don't think to ask where the rest of it went. I'm sure it doesn't matter.
Now, back to the taxing of the bonuses. As reprehensible as the bonuses are, I cannot see justice being done by taxing the bonuses. There are constitutional issues with taxing the bonuses. Some say there isn't, but I think they might be wrong in some cases.
Here are the general provisions which some say are in contests with taxing the bailouted thieves' bonuses: Bills of Attainder, Ex Post Facto, Contract Clause, & the Fifth Amendment.
I think there may be some validity to the arguments in the above referenced piece in regards to the Contract Clause and the Fifth Amendment; however, I believe the Ex Post Facto & Bills of Attainder provisions in the Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution are clearly in contrast to this type of taxation.
Bills of attainder: Congress is singling out these people. Writing the bills in a broad sense may be a technical way around it, but the problems I see in it is that 1.) it may not be broad enough to pass a challenge in court; 2.) it makes the tax code that much more complicated; & most importantly 3.) the purpose is still the same. Lets say I want something my neighbor has. This thing is really cool, and I don't think he should have it for himself. Even though my representative sympathizes with my plight, he can't do anything because of the prevention of bills of attainder which wouldn't allow him to pass a law singling out the specific neighbor who has that really cool gizmo. Well, my neighbor doesn't have the same street address as I do; what if we write the law that says everyone who has a street address which ends in odd numbers (encompassing the neighbor's address and excluding my own) will be taxed at the cost of the really cool gizmo and such funds be directed to addresses ending in even numbers. Problem solved. Just because this law may be very broad natured, it doesn't remove the fact that I want a bill of attainder passed against my neighbor. Bills of attainder, regardless of how broad, exist as entities of purpose and not domain.
Ex Post Facto: This provision of the Constitution has been debated from the 1700's. The primary area of debate is whether the Ex Post Facto Clause applies to civil law in addition to criminal law. Everyone is familiar with the idea of criminal ex post facto. No one should fear drinking from a clear glass because if drinking from clear glasses were to be outlawed, no one would be subject to the penalties during the time previous to the passage of the laws when such activities were not subject to lawful penalty. No one disputes this, but what if legislatures are allowed to injure its population by passing laws to architect its will when such actions are contrary to agreements between two people? There would be no way to conduct business in any manner which derived it's intention from any expectation of the ability to be free from interference from a legislative body. In such a situation, no agreement can be binding. The Cato Journal has a very in depth piece on the civil application of the Ex Post Facto Clause in which quotes, as I do now, Federalist Paper 44 by James Madison.
Bills of attainder, ex-post-facto laws, and laws impairing the obligation of contracts, are contrary to the first principles of the social compact, and to every principle of sound legislation. The two former are expressly prohibited by the declarations prefixed to some of the State constitutions, and all of them are prohibited by the spirit and scope of these fundamental charters. Our own experience has taught us, nevertheless, that additional fences against these dangers ought not to be omitted. Very properly, therefore, have the convention added this constitutional bulwark in favor of personal security and private rights; and I am much deceived if they have not, in so doing, as faithfully consulted the genuine sentiments as the undoubted interests of their constituents. The sober people of America are weary of the fluctuating policy which has directed the public councils. They have seen with regret and indignation that sudden changes and legislative interferences, in cases affecting personal rights, become jobs in the hands of enterprising and influential speculators, and snares to the more-industrious and lessinformed part of the community. They have seen, too, that one legislative interference is but the first link of a long chain of repetitions, every subsequent interference being naturally produced by the effects of the preceding. They very rightly infer, therefore, that some thorough reform is wanting, which will banish speculations on public measures, inspire a general prudence and industry, and give a regular course to the business of society.
The single problem with all of these issues in the replacement of the spirit & word of the law with the word of the law. The only way one can ignore the laws as they are intended is if they construe the wording to mean what is popular at the moment for the will of those who dismiss the purpose and distort the language of the law. This is why when people quote the Constitution or the law without addressing the Constitution or law's purpose, they do it often with the intention to dilute its meaning. When we hear people speak about the Constitution, how often do we hear the same people quoting the Federalist or Anti-federalist Papers or other documents discussing the purposes of the laws about which they speak? We must be very careful not to accept the law but deny its purpose. I have for some time now argued for a simplification of laws particularly with the tax code, but it is for the same reason as I am arguing now that people should be aware of the purposes for which laws are written. Many of today's problems are those which originate at the contortion of the Constitution and at the abandonment of the purposes of its clauses. This is not to say that the language is irrelevant, but a partner to the law's purpose. The wording of laws originate only from the meaning behind them; and without the meaning from which words are used to construct our laws, they have no purpose. The rule of law can only exist within the continuity of the purpose & language of the law; without which leaves little room to be filled with anything else but the rule of man. It seems that James Madison saw more purpose in the Ex Post Facto Clause than just a criminal application. Funny I don't hear much about Mr. Madison's views on this when someone wants to tax someone else at 90%; and if the government can do it to the people at AIG, who can't they do it to?
Really agree with what you read? Really disagree? Somewhere in the middle?....Let yourself be heard in the comments!
_
Saturday, March 14, 2009
No more Carrots, Just Sticks
Rutgers reports that the Senate will be debating their version of the "cramdown" bill already passed by the House earlier this month. The senate bill is not only having more successful opposition from Senate Republicans, but it is also seeing some opposition from the Obama administration in the desire for the bill to be “narrowed” as reported by Dowjones Business News.
For those of you who are not aware of the “cramdown” bill or the “Helping Families Save their Homes Act of 2009,” the U.S. Congress is attempting to pass legislation which would give judges the power to reduce the amount of the principal on mortgages whom have filed for chapter 13 bankruptcy. Chapter 13 bankruptcy is a way for people to have bankruptcy law protections while attempting to pay off their debts. The benefits of a chapter 13 bankruptcies are that the debtor can prevent foreclosure proceedings and make loan payments of smaller amounts among others.
I would like to take a few moments to address those of you who think that the Constitution forbids the government to interfere with private contracts. I have heard this more than once recently, and I want to debunk this. The contract clause, which people cite when talking about how they think the Constitution and its application to contracts, is found in Article I, Section 10:
“No state shall … pass any … law impairing the obligation of contracts…”
The most important phrase in Article I, Section 10 is “No STATE shall.” This means the federal government can do anything it wants to impair the obligation of contracts in regards to ArticleI, Section 10. So for all of you who keep ignorantly yelling, “Contract clause, contract clause,” go reread the Constitution. What should limit the federal government is the clause regarding Bills of Attainder and Ex Post Facto in Section 9.3.
Since the question about the “cramdown” bills isn’t about whether we can, we can't…and we shouldn’t. But what if the Constitution allowed it? Should we then? The whole point of a chapter 13 bankruptcy is restructuring. There is renegotiation on how fast payments are made, but now the principal amount. Let’s follow the money. A (Debtor) goes to B (Lender) and gets money for a loan. A then goes and buys a home. A then doesn’t pay the mortgage payments back to B. A then applies for chapter 13 bankruptcy. The judge says A doesn’t have to pay back 30% of the principal. B just got hosed, right? Nope. You just did. What B will do is raise interest rates for everyone else wanting a loan. You might be able to look at it this way. The 30% example from above is essentially a tax on B (the lender) so A (the debtor) can get a government subsidized home. The problem is that B is a bank (i.e., a business); and as much as people seem to be unaware, businesses don’t pay taxes. The bank will increase interest rates or fees or even possibly make you take out insurance against you defaulting on the loan. No matter what happens, the consumer is footing the bill. I am certainly not a fan of borrowing money, but I don’t want to be on the hook for someone who got in over his or her head and can’t pay their bills.
Another thing that this will do is that it will encourage people to declare bankruptcy. If people see a payday at the end of a bankruptcy, do you think that will cause more or less bankruptcy filings? We have had nothing but increases in bankruptcy filings for years, and we want to make bankruptcy more lucrative for dead beats? Check out some of the statistics from the American Bankruptcy Institute. Carrots and sticks people, carrots and sticks. Personally, I think we aught to take a couple lessons from Singapore, get rid of the carrots, and just use the sticks.
Really agree with what you read? Really disagree? Somewhere in the middle?....Let yourself be heard in the comments!
_
For those of you who are not aware of the “cramdown” bill or the “Helping Families Save their Homes Act of 2009,” the U.S. Congress is attempting to pass legislation which would give judges the power to reduce the amount of the principal on mortgages whom have filed for chapter 13 bankruptcy. Chapter 13 bankruptcy is a way for people to have bankruptcy law protections while attempting to pay off their debts. The benefits of a chapter 13 bankruptcies are that the debtor can prevent foreclosure proceedings and make loan payments of smaller amounts among others.
I would like to take a few moments to address those of you who think that the Constitution forbids the government to interfere with private contracts. I have heard this more than once recently, and I want to debunk this. The contract clause, which people cite when talking about how they think the Constitution and its application to contracts, is found in Article I, Section 10:
“No state shall … pass any … law impairing the obligation of contracts…”
The most important phrase in Article I, Section 10 is “No STATE shall.” This means the federal government can do anything it wants to impair the obligation of contracts in regards to ArticleI, Section 10. So for all of you who keep ignorantly yelling, “Contract clause, contract clause,” go reread the Constitution. What should limit the federal government is the clause regarding Bills of Attainder and Ex Post Facto in Section 9.3.
Since the question about the “cramdown” bills isn’t about whether we can, we can't…and we shouldn’t. But what if the Constitution allowed it? Should we then? The whole point of a chapter 13 bankruptcy is restructuring. There is renegotiation on how fast payments are made, but now the principal amount. Let’s follow the money. A (Debtor) goes to B (Lender) and gets money for a loan. A then goes and buys a home. A then doesn’t pay the mortgage payments back to B. A then applies for chapter 13 bankruptcy. The judge says A doesn’t have to pay back 30% of the principal. B just got hosed, right? Nope. You just did. What B will do is raise interest rates for everyone else wanting a loan. You might be able to look at it this way. The 30% example from above is essentially a tax on B (the lender) so A (the debtor) can get a government subsidized home. The problem is that B is a bank (i.e., a business); and as much as people seem to be unaware, businesses don’t pay taxes. The bank will increase interest rates or fees or even possibly make you take out insurance against you defaulting on the loan. No matter what happens, the consumer is footing the bill. I am certainly not a fan of borrowing money, but I don’t want to be on the hook for someone who got in over his or her head and can’t pay their bills.
Another thing that this will do is that it will encourage people to declare bankruptcy. If people see a payday at the end of a bankruptcy, do you think that will cause more or less bankruptcy filings? We have had nothing but increases in bankruptcy filings for years, and we want to make bankruptcy more lucrative for dead beats? Check out some of the statistics from the American Bankruptcy Institute. Carrots and sticks people, carrots and sticks. Personally, I think we aught to take a couple lessons from Singapore, get rid of the carrots, and just use the sticks.
Really agree with what you read? Really disagree? Somewhere in the middle?....Let yourself be heard in the comments!
_
Saturday, March 7, 2009
Vehicle Registration Laws of TN, Knox County, & Knoxville
Selections of Tennessee State, Knox County, & Knoxville Laws on Vehicle Registration:
Really agree with what you read? Really disagree? Somewhere in the middle?....Let yourself be heard in the comments!
_
How often do you read through these regulations before purchasing a car? How much of this do/could you understand? How sure are you that you follow all of them? What would happen if you didn't? Do you think all of this is necessary to buy a car?...or might it be necessary to make taxes less transparent in order to make you pay more to the government?
55-4-101. Registration required before operation — Application — Issuance of registration and license plates — Rules and regulations — Temporary permit — Transfer of registration when changing vehicles — Fees — Safety rules for homemade trailers. —
(a) (1) As a condition precedent to the operation of any motor vehicle upon the streets or highways of this state, the motor vehicle shall be registered as provided in this chapter.
(2) The registration and the fees provided for registration shall constitute a privilege tax upon the operation of motor vehicles.
(b) The commissioner shall be, and is constituted, the registrar of motor vehicles and, except as otherwise provided in chapters 1-3, this chapter and chapters 5 and 6 of this title, every owner of a vehicle intended to be operated in this state and required by this chapter to be registered shall, before same is operated, apply to the department for the registration of, and the registration plates for, the vehicle.
(c) Application for registration shall be made, in the manner prescribed by the commissioner on forms provided or approved by the department, to the county clerk of the county of the owner's residence or of a county wherein the vehicle is based or is to be operated, except that a nonresident may apply directly to the department for registration. Any applicant for registration under any allowance or requirement for the apportionment of the fee shall apply to the department.
(d) (1) (A) Upon finding the title to the vehicle or application for the title in order and all fees required under chapters 1-3, this chapter and chapters 5 and 6 of this title duly tendered, the county clerk shall forward the application for registration, together with the proper fee, to the department in the manner provided by law, and the department upon registering the vehicle shall issue or cause to be issued a registration certificate and license plate or plates to the owner; provided, that any person operating a vehicle under the terms of a bona fide lease agreement of not less than ninety (90) days' tenure may, with the written consent of the owner and other reasonable evidence of right to possession of the vehicle as the commissioner may require, apply to the department for, and be issued, registration and plate or plates thereunder.
(B) The lessee-registrant shall be deemed to be the lawful holder of the registration with all rights in and to it as may be provided under this chapter for owner-registrants, except that each application requiring the owner's consent to register shall be accompanied by a fee of two dollars ($2.00) in addition to other fees required by law.
(C) Any requirements in this title to the contrary notwithstanding, the commissioner is authorized to approve registrations and issue the certificates and plates thereunder, and the several county clerks are designated deputies to perform duties in connection with approving registrations and issuing certificates and plates as the commissioner may prescribe; provided, that the commissioner's authority to remove plates to a point of central distribution to the applicants for registration is limited to those issued for freight motor vehicles, other than farm trucks, in weight classes of eighteen thousand (18,000) or more pounds or for vehicles owned by nonresidents and other vehicles as may be registered under a proration program or like plan allowing the apportionment of fees; and provided further, that any clerk taking an application to be forwarded to the department shall likewise be entitled to the fee provided in § 55-6-101(a)(1).
(D) The commissioner is empowered to make all rules and regulations respecting the manner in which applications shall be made and the manner in which any application and fee shall be forwarded to the department.
(E) Notwithstanding any other law to the contrary, the commissioner has the authority to establish a procedure to accept electronically any and all remittances, titling and registration transactions.
(2) The commissioner shall not issue a registration for a vehicle based in a county that has been designated by the Tennessee air pollution control board to have a motor vehicle inspection and maintenance program in order to attain or maintain compliance with national ambient air quality standards, except in accordance with terms and conditions as are established in rules of the board.
(e) The department, in its discretion, may grant a temporary permit to operate a vehicle for which application for registration has been made, where the application is accompanied by the proper fee pending action upon the application by the department.
(f) The registration shall be valid from the time of issuance until the date provided for the annual expiration of registration, except it shall likewise expire upon the prior transfer of any interest by operation of law or otherwise in or pertaining to the vehicles so registered; provided, that upon the registration becoming void by reason of the transfer of ownership, the owner-registrant may, upon application to the department through the county clerk by surrender of the certificate and payment of a fee of one dollar ($1.00) plus the clerk's fee, register another vehicle for the unexpired portion under the same number and be issued a new certificate properly identifying the vehicle to which the license has been transferred. If the vehicle to be registered is of a weight or classification that requires the payment of a higher fee, the applicant must surrender both the certificate and the plate or plates to the clerk, and, upon payment of the amount being the difference between the fees required for the two (2) registrations as of that date, together with the one dollar ($1.00) transfer fee and the clerk's fee, be issued a new certificate of registration and appropriate plate or plates. Further, it shall be allowable for one holding a license as an individual to submit it, under this subsection (f), in application for reassignment to a vehicle which this licensee holds by the entireties with the licensee's spouse. If a vehicle is permanently withdrawn from a proportionally registered fleet and a replacement vehicle is added to the fleet in the same calendar month, the replacement vehicle shall be considered fully registered as provided in this section if the vehicle is registered for a weight equal to or less than the vehicle permanently withdrawn or if the additional registration fee, one dollar ($1.00) transfer fee, and clerk's fee are paid when the replacement vehicle is registered for a weight greater than the vehicle withdrawn. If a vehicle is permanently withdrawn from a proportionally registered fleet and is not replaced by another vehicle in the same calendar month, credit shall be allowed as follows:
(1) The credit shall be a sum equal to the amount paid with respect to such vehicle when it was first proportionally registered in the registration year, reduced by one-twelfth (1/12) for each calendar month or fraction of the calendar month elapsing since the beginning of the registration year;
(2) The credit may be applied against subsequent additions to the fleet or for other additional registration fees assessed; and
(3) In no event shall credit be allowed for fees beyond such registration year, nor shall any such amount be subject to refund.
(g) With the approval of the registrar, a license issued for a vehicle that has been destroyed or necessarily removed from service may be transferred to a replacement vehicle in the same manner and under the same conditions provided under this allowance for the reassignment of registration.
(h) (1) When the registrar has issued two (2) valid registrations for the same vehicle, title to which remains vested in the same person, the second registration being taken only for the purpose of qualifying it for operation under a lawful requirement for proration of the registration fee, a refund may be made of the unused portion of the fee paid for the first issued of the two (2) outstanding registrations, less ten dollars ($10.00). Surrender of both the first certificate of registration and the related license plate, and the submission of any other documentation as the registrar may require, is a prerequisite to the payment of the refund, that shall be proportionate to the number of full months remaining in the registration period when the second registration was taken.
(2) When the registrar has issued a valid registration for a vehicle to a lessee-registrant for the purpose of qualifying it for operation under a lawful requirement for proration of the registration fee, and the bona fide lease agreement pertaining to the vehicle is terminated, the lessee-registrant may transfer the license issued to a replacement vehicle in the same manner and under the same conditions provided under this allowance for the reassignment of registration, or surrender both the certificate of registration and relative license plate and any other documentation as the registrar may require to secure a refund of the unused portion of the fee paid, which shall be proportionate to the number of full months remaining in the registration period for which registration was issued; provided, that the annual license fee for the surrendered license plate is one hundred fifty dollars ($150) or more.
(i) (1) The registrant may surrender the certificate and plate or plates to the department through the county clerk in an application for a registration of some other class or classification for the same vehicle and be issued a new certificate for it, together with appropriate plate or plates, upon the payment of a fee of one dollar ($1.00) and the clerk's fee, and if the new registration requires a higher fee, that amount being the difference in the fees required for the two (2) registrations as of the date of application.
(2) Any person registering a motor vehicle under § 55-4-113, who during the registration year exchanges the original registration for a registration in a lesser class and subsequently desires to register the vehicle in the class of the original registration or some lesser class, may do so upon the payment of a fee of one dollar ($1.00) and the clerk's fee.
(3) In addition to this allowance for the reregistration of the vehicle by reason of some change in its use or design, it shall likewise be permissible for a vehicle to be reregistered, in the same class under the same license number, when the owner, an individual, makes an assignment to self and spouse for the purpose of establishing tenancy to the vehicle by the entireties.
(4) Application under this subsection (i), an exception to the requirement for an original registration, shall be made in the manner described in subdivisions (i)(1)-(3) except the fee shall be two dollars and fifty cents ($2.50) plus the clerk's fee.
(j) The reassignment of registrations as provided in this section shall be allowable among all classifications and, in computing a reassignment fee, the value of the registration being surrendered shall be determined by establishing that amount which would be the fee required for its issuance as of the date of the application for reassignment. Any law to the contrary notwithstanding, no fee shall be charged for the transfer of registration of any motor vehicle to any person acquiring title to the motor vehicle as a result of the death of the spouse of this person if application for transfer is made within one (1) year from the date of the spouse's death.
(k) The owner of a motorized bicycle may, subject to the approval of the commissioner, apply for registration and registration plates for the motorized bicycle. The commissioner shall by regulation provide for the manner in which single applications are to be made and the conditions under which they may be allowed; however, this subsection (k) shall not be construed as granting the commissioner authority to issue registration and plates for motorized bicycles on any basis other than as is required in this chapter. Each applicant for registration under this provision shall be charged the same registration taxes imposed on Class (A) motor vehicles by § 55-4-111.
(l) (1) Trailers, semi-trailers and pole trailers domiciled in Tennessee which are homemade or materially reconstructed, as defined herein, shall not be titled or registered, where required under the provisions of this title, to operate over the roads and highways of Tennessee, unless the department certifies that the trailer, semi-trailer or pole trailer complies with the provisions of § 65-15-113 and with any applicable safety rules and regulations promulgated by the department.
(2) It is unlawful to operate trailers, semi-trailers and pole trailers titled or registered in accordance with this chapter that are subsequently materially reconstructed during the term of the title or registration for the trailer without certification from the department that the reconstructed trailer complies with § 65-15-113 and all applicable safety rules and regulations.
(3) As used is this subsection (l ):
(A) “Homemade” means the construction or assembly of a trailer from new or used parts, using a body or frame not originating from any previously manufactured trailer, and not originally constructed under a distinctive name, make, model, or type by a generally recognized manufacturer of vehicles; and
(B) “Materially reconstructed” means substantial alteration or modification made to an original manufacturer's specifications. Substantial alterations or modifications shall be deemed to have occurred if the trailer has undergone a major manufacturing alteration, which has materially changed the original configuration, structure or specifications of basic components of a previously assembled or manufactured trailer.
[Acts 1951, ch. 70, § 40 (Williams, § 5538.140); Acts 1953, ch. 167, § 5; 1955, ch. 52, § 3; 1963, ch. 143, § 5; 1963, ch. 145, § 3; 1963, ch. 156, § 1; 1965, ch. 272, § 1; 1965, ch. 337, § 1; 1970, ch. 549, §§ 1, 2; 1972, ch. 627, § 1; 1973, ch. 234, § 2; 1976, ch. 432, § 1; impl. am. Acts 1978, ch. 934, §§ 22, 36; Acts 1979, ch. 247, § 3; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), § 59-401; Acts 1981, ch. 130, § 1; 1986, ch. 798, § 1; 1988, ch. 817, § 3; 1993, ch. 416, § 1; 1995, ch. 305, § 109; 2001, ch. 233, § 1; 2007, ch. 484, § 34; 2008, ch. 1007, § 6.]
55-4-103. Registration plates furnished by department — Form and contents — Size — Replacement plates — Reissue of plates — County name strip — Recycling of plates. —
(f) (1) To promote highway safety and increase visibility and legibility on registration plates, the plates shall be fully reflectorized. The commissioner has the authority to establish specifications covering reflectorization.
(2) In addition to the fee imposed in subdivision (f)(3) and in addition to all other motor vehicle registration fees prescribed by law, there shall be paid to the department the additional fee of seventy-five cents (75¢) at the time of the issuance of registration plates or the renewal thereof.
(3) In addition to all other motor vehicle registration fees prescribed by law, there shall be paid to the department the additional sum of one dollar ($1.00) at the time of the issuance of registration plates or the renewal thereof.
(g) When any plate becomes so mutilated or effaced as to no longer meet the requirements of the law, the holder shall apply to the department for suitable replacement. The commissioner is authorized to promulgate rules and regulations as may be necessary to provide for the replacement of lost or destroyed plates and to collect a fee of ten dollars ($10.00) for each application.
55-4-104. Expiration of certificates and plates — Renewal — Decals — Fees — Renewal of special plates. —
(a) All certificates of registration and registration plates issued under chapters 1-3, this chapter and chapters 5 and 6 of this title shall expire at twelve o'clock midnight (12:00) on March 31 of each year. These certificates of registration and registration plates shall be available for renewal and purchase commencing on March 1 of each year.
(b) There is excepted from application of subsection (a) all of the registration classes for private passenger motor vehicles, motorcycles registered after March 23, 1994, under Class (A) of § 55-4-111, and Class 1 registrations only of the combined farm and limited private trucks classification. The application of the provisions contained in subsection (a) do not apply to registration plates for handicapped drivers, and this subsection (b) for registration renewals at alternative intervals apply to registration plates for handicapped drivers. With respect to these motor vehicles, the commissioner shall establish a system of registration renewals at alternative intervals which will allow for the distribution of the registration workload as uniformly as is practicable throughout the calendar year. Registrations issued under the alternative method are valid for twelve (12) months, and expire on the last day of the last month of the registration period. However, during a transition period, or at any time thereafter when the commissioner shall determine that the volume of work for any given interval is unduly burdensome or costly, either registrations or renewals, or both of them, may be issued for terms of not less than six (6) nor more than eighteen (18) months; provided further, however, that if a motor vehicle or motorcycle owner attests that the owner will be absent from the state during the owner’s annual registration renewal month and all other requirements for registration have been met, then during the ninety-day period immediately preceding the annual registration renewal month, the registration may be renewed for the original registration period. The commissioner shall provide all registration plates, tabs, stickers and other required devices to county clerks at least ninety (90) days prior to each registration period to facilitate such early renewal. The fee imposed for registration of any vehicle under the alternative interval method for a period of other than twelve (12) months shall be proportionate to the annual fee fixed for the vehicle and modified in no other manner, except that the proportional fee shall be rounded off to the nearest quarter of a dollar (25¢).
(c) (1) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a) to the contrary, the commissioner shall establish a system of registration and registration renewals for vehicles registered pursuant to § 55-4-113, whereby these registration and registration renewals expire one (1) year after the purchase or lease for vehicles that are purchased or leased after July 1, 1996. If registration plates are transferred to these vehicles from a vehicle previously registered pursuant to § 55-4-113, then the fee for the registration plate shall be prorated accordingly.
(2) Certificates of registration, registration plates and renewals of registrations and plates registered pursuant to § 55-4-113, that expire February 28, 1997, are extended until twelve o'clock midnight (12:00) on March 31, 1997. Thereafter renewals of the registration and registration plates shall be in accordance with subsection (a).
(d) (1) Upon proof of the payment of all fees accruing therefor, the commissioner shall have continuing authority to revalidate motor vehicle registration plates for a period of one (1) year at a time, or one (1) or more quarters of a year, and is authorized to supply the county clerks of the several counties with tabs, stickers, or other devices, that shall be affixed to the registration plates revalidated to indicate the period for which these revalidated registration plates shall be valid.
(2) The commissioner shall not issue a registration renewal for a vehicle based in a county that has been designated by the Tennessee air pollution control board to have a motor vehicle inspection and maintenance program in order to attain or maintain compliance with national ambient air quality standards, except in accordance with terms and conditions as are established in rules of the board.
[Acts 1951, ch. 70, § 41 (Williams, § 5538.141); Acts 1959, ch. 307, § 1; 1968, ch. 525, § 1; impl. am. Acts 1970, ch. 420, § 1; Acts 1971, ch. 157, § 1; 1976, ch. 484, § 1; impl. am. Acts 1978, ch. 934, §§ 22, 36; Acts 1979, ch. 157, § 1; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), § 59-404; Acts 1981, ch. 15, § 1; 1984, ch. 806, §§ 2, 3; 1987, ch. 434, § 1; 1989, ch. 414, § 1; 1991, ch. 244, § 3; 1993, ch. 416, § 2; 1994, ch. 668, § 1; 1995, ch. 195, § 2; 1996, ch. 839, § 1; 2008, ch. 1196, § 1.]
55-4-105. Renewal certificates and registration plates — Application — Mail order service — Issuance — Replacement of lost registrations — Locations for obtaining renewal. —
(a) (1) Application for renewal certificates of registration and registration plates shall be made by the owner by the surrender of the owner's old certificate of registration or other indicia thereof as the commissioner may authorize to the vehicle and the payment of the required fee for renewal registration.
(2) The office of county clerk may make inquiry into an owner, including, but not limited to, review of driver records for the purpose of establishing an owner's residence or address, before issuing a renewal of registration or a tab, sticker or other device as a prerequisite to payment of wheel or road taxes. Upon request of the office of the county clerk, the department shall provide a current list of the names, drivers' license numbers and addresses of drivers from the requesting county.
(b) The registrar of motor vehicles, or deputy as provided by law, may receive applications for renewal certificates of registration and registration plates and issue the certificates and plates commencing on March 1 of each year.
(c) Each county clerk shall provide a mail order service for the renewal of registrations whereby registrants may apply for and receive the renewal certificates and plates or decals through the United States postal service. Except as otherwise required by law, an application for renewal by mail must be postmarked not later than twenty (20) days before the license expiration date to allow time for processing. Each county clerk may impose a fee of two dollars ($2.00) for the service of handling mail orders of plates and decals.
(d) In the event a plate or decal is lost after issuance and mailing, and before delivery to the registrant, the county clerk shall, as agent for the state, process a replacement registration at no charge upon application and affidavit from the registrant. The county clerk shall verify the registration and date of mailing.
(e) (1) The holder of a valid and outstanding certificate of registration for a noncommercial vehicle shall apply for its renewal through the office of the clerk of the county of the owner's residence. The registration issued for a commercial vehicle may be renewed through the office of the clerk of the county of the owner's principal place of business within the state, or of the county of incorporation in the case of a corporate owner or of any other county in which the owner or corporate owner maintains an office or place of business. Any applicant for the renewal of a registration under which the fee is to be prorated or apportioned and any nonresident applicant for renewal shall, within the discretion of the commissioner, make application directly to the division.
(2) For the purposes of this subsection (e), “commercial vehicle” means any vehicle that is operated in the furtherance of any commercial enterprise; provided, that vehicles registered with Tennessee Association of Realtors new specialty earmarked license plates shall be deemed not to be commercial vehicles.
(3) A violation of subdivision (e)(1) for the renewal of a motor vehicle license in certain locations is a Class C misdemeanor.
(A) If a county wheel tax or like local fee is due and owing to local government for the use of the vehicle, the owner or operator shall, upon conviction, be punished in accordance with a Class B misdemeanor and subject to the fine only.
(B) In instances of violations in which it is found that the wheel tax or local fee has been paid or is not due, the court may, in the event of a conviction, substitute, in lieu of the punishment set forth in subdivision (e)(3)(A), a fine of not less than five dollars ($5.00) nor more than ten dollars ($10.00).
(f) Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, the office of county clerk shall not be required to review the driving record of any owner before issuing a certificate of registration or a tab, sticker or other device as a prerequisite to payment of wheel or road taxes.
[Acts 1951, ch. 70, § 42 (Williams, § 5538.142); Acts 1969, ch. 53, § 1; 1970, ch. 357, § 1; 1971, ch. 157, § 2; 1972, ch. 540, § 7; 1973, ch. 5, § 1; 1973, ch. 234, § 1(b); 1977, ch. 23, § 1; impl. am. Acts 1978, ch. 934, §§ 22, 36; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), § 59-405; Acts 1980, ch. 744, § 1; 1989, ch. 136, § 2; 1989, ch. 218, § 1; 1989, ch. 591, § 113; 1991, ch. 232, § 1; 1993, ch. 529, § 1; 2003, ch. 178, §§ 1, 2; 2008, ch. 924, § 5; 2008, ch. 1165, § 38.]
55-4-107. Lost, mutilated or illegible certificates — Replacement — Fee. —
In the event any certificate of registration is lost, mutilated or becomes illegible, the owner of the vehicle for which the certificate was issued, as shown by the records of the county clerk for the county where the vehicle was registered, or the owner's legal representative, shall immediately make application for and obtain a replacement certificate of registration upon the payment of the fee provided in § 55-6-104.
[Acts 1951, ch. 70, § 43 (Williams, § 5538.143); impl. am. Acts 1978, ch. 934, §§ 22, 36; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), § 59-407.]
55-4-108. Signing registration certificate — Carried in vehicle or on driver's person — Display — Exception. —
(a) Every certificate of registration shall at all times be carried in the vehicle to which it refers or shall be carried by the person driving, or in control of the vehicle, who shall display the certificate upon demand of any officer or employee of the department. The owner may, in order to ensure its safekeeping, provide a duplicate or facsimile of the certificate of registration to be kept in the vehicle for display by any person who may legally operate the vehicle under the owner's registration.
(b) The provision of subsection (a) requiring that a certificate of registration be carried in the vehicle to which it refers, or by the person driving the vehicle, shall not apply when the certificate of registration is used for the purpose of making application for renewal of registration or upon a transfer of the vehicle.
(c) A violation of this section is a Class C misdemeanor.
55-4-109. Number of plates — Issuance. —
In registering any motor vehicle, the county clerk shall cause to be issued one (1) registration plate.
[Acts 1951, ch. 70, § 45 (Williams, § 5538.145); Acts 1953, ch. 167, § 6; 1955, ch. 52, § 4; 1959, ch. 26, § 1; 1975, ch. 128, § 1; impl. am. Acts 1978, ch. 934, §§ 22, 36; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), § 59-409.]
55-4-110. Display of registration plates — Manner — Penalty for violation. —
(a) The registration plate issued for passenger motor vehicles shall be attached on the rear of the vehicle. The registration plate issued for those trucks with a manufacturer's ton rating not exceeding three-quarter (¾) ton and having a panel or pickup body style, and also those issued for all motor homes, regardless of ton rating or body style thereof, shall be attached to the rear of the vehicle. The registration plate issued for all other trucks and truck tractors shall be attached to the front of the vehicle. All dealers' plates, as provided in § 55-4-221, and those registration plates issued for motorcycles, trailers or semitrailers shall be attached to the rear of the vehicle.
(b) Every registration plate shall at all times be securely fastened in a horizontal position to the vehicle for which it is issued so to prevent the plate from swinging and at a height of not less than twelve inches (12²) from the ground, measuring from the bottom of the plate, in a place and position to be clearly visible and shall be maintained free from foreign materials and in a condition to be clearly legible. No tinted materials may be placed over a license plate even if the information upon the license plate is not concealed.
(c) (1) A violation of this section is a Class C misdemeanor. All proceeds from the fines imposed by this subsection (c) shall be deposited in the state general fund.
(2) A person charged with a violation of this section may, in lieu of appearance in court, submit a fine of ten dollars ($10.00) for a first violation, and twenty dollars ($20.00) on second and subsequent violations to the clerk of the court that has jurisdiction of the offense within the county in which the offense charged is alleged to have been committed.
[Acts 1951, ch. 70, § 46 (Williams, § 5538.146); Acts 1953, ch. 167, § 7; 1955, ch. 52, § 5; 1957, ch. 108, § 1; 1959, ch. 26, § 2; 1973, ch. 234, § 3; 1974, ch. 525, § 2; 1975, ch. 128, § 2; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), § 59-410; Acts 2004, ch. 698, §§ 1, 2.]
55-4-111. Registration fees — Classification of vehicles — Registration taxes. —
(a) (1) In order to facilitate efficient and uniform enforcement of chapters 1-3, this chapter and chapters 5 and 6 of this title, motor vehicles, excepting such motor vehicles as are constructed for the purpose of transporting tangible personal property or other property, and passenger motor vehicles operating for hire, are classified, and the respective registration taxes imposed are fixed as follows:
(2) Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, the first one dollar ($1.00) of each registration fee imposed by subdivision (a)(1) shall be paid into the state treasury and credited to the police pay supplement fund.
(b) (1) Upon receipt of an application on a form prescribed by the commissioner, applying for registration and certifying that the motor vehicle for which registration is being applied is an “antique motor vehicle,” the commissioner may issue license plates to owners of antique motor vehicles in accordance with the provisions of part 2 of this chapter. These license plates shall bear the word “ANTIQUE” in capital letters at the bottom of their plate, and a unique identifying number in the center of the plate. For the purpose of this section, “antique motor vehicle” means a motor vehicle over twenty-five (25) years old with a nonmodified engine and body that is used for participation in club activities, exhibits, tours, parades, and similar uses as a collector's item, and that may be used for general transportation only on Saturday and Sunday.
(2) This registration shall be valid so long as title to the antique motor vehicle is vested in the applicant, and shall not be subject to the provisions of this chapter requiring annual registration.
(3) Any person violating this section, or operating an antique motor vehicle for general transportation purposes on a day other than Saturday or Sunday, shall forfeit the antique motor vehicle registration, shall be liable for the regular registration fee for that vehicle, and shall be barred from applying for or holding antique motor vehicle registration for five (5) years from the date of the violation.
(4) The owner or lessee of an antique motor vehicle may display the license plates from an era when the manufacture of such vehicle occurred instead of the current license plates; provided, that current license plates are maintained in the vehicle by the owner or lessee and produced for inspection upon the request of any law enforcement officer.
(5) The department shall permit owners of antique motor vehicles to register an official license plate issued by the state from an era when the manufacture of the vehicle occurred instead of registering for new license plates in accordance with part 2 of this chapter. The vintage license plate shall be displayed on the motor vehicle in accordance with this chapter.
(c) (1) This section shall not apply to trailers:
(A) Owned by farmers and used for agricultural purposes or hauling livestock between farm and market;
(B) Used for the transportation of boats or drawn by an automobile or truck, unless the owner desires to be registered;
(C) Used in the furtherance of a business; or
(D) That are truck trailers registered under § 55-4-113.
(2) This section shall apply to house trailers and rented trailers as defined in this section and to any personal trailer, including a trailer used for the transportation of boats or other trailer or semitrailer drawn by an automobile, that is not required to be registered but that the owner desires to be registered.
(d) Each person engaged in the business of renting trailers of any description to others for a consideration may register each trailer, for a period of ten (10) years, and annually pay the registration fee; provided, that every owner of automobile utility trailers engaged in the business of leasing such trailers in interstate as well as intrastate commerce shall register with the commissioner that the person is so engaged in the business of leasing such trailers in interstate as well as intrastate commerce, and shall furnish proof to the commissioner that the person has registered in the state, a number of trailers equal to the average number of automobile utility trailers operated by this person during the preceding licensing year in and through this state. Thereafter, all such trailers properly identified as belonging to the registered person and licensed in any state, territory, province, country or the District of Columbia shall be permitted to operate in this state on an interstate and intrastate basis. For the purpose of interstate and intrastate reciprocal provisions of this chapter, the utility trailers shall be classified the same as private passenger automobiles and extended the same privileges. The burden of submitting verifiable data as to the average number of trailers operating during the preceding licensing year in and throughout this state shall be on the trailer owner. The commissioner's determination in and through the state during the preceding licensing year shall be final.
(e) Only one (1) registration plate shall be issued for trailers.
(f) For the purposes of this section, “mobile home” or “house trailer” is a trailer or semitrailer which is designed, constructed and equipped as a dwelling place, living abode or sleeping place, either permanently or temporarily, and is equipped for use as a conveyance on streets and highways, or whose chassis and exterior shell are designed and constructed for use as a house trailer, but which is used instead for the advertising, sales, display or promotion of merchandise or services, or for any other commercial purpose except the transportation of property for hire or for distribution by a private carrier.
[Acts 1951, ch. 70, § 83 (Williams, § 5538.183); Acts 1953, ch. 167, § 17; 1955, ch. 10, § 1; 1955, ch. 52, §§ 6, 7; 1957, ch. 250, § 1; 1957, ch. 388, § 1; 1961, ch. 336, § 1; 1963, ch. 143, § 7; 1963, ch. 145, §§ 1, 3; 1965, ch. 48, § 1; 1965, ch. 269, § 1; 1965, ch. 283, § 1; 1967, ch. 218, § 1; 1973, ch. 234, § 4; 1974, ch. 735, § 1; 1978, ch. 786, § 1; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), § 59-421; Acts 1984, ch. 966, § 10; 1985, ch. 283, § 2; 1985, ch. 402, § 6; 1985, ch. 461, § 1; 1986, ch. 804, § 8; 1987, ch. 446, § 8; 1988, ch. 816, § 1; 1991, ch. 13, § 1; 1994, ch. 603, § 1; 1994, ch. 662, § 1; 1995, ch. 282, § 1; 1999, ch. 98, §§ 1, 2; 2001, ch. 4, § 1; 2002, ch. 620, § 1; 2002, ch. 747, § 4; 2002, ch. 856, § 8a; 2006, ch. 910, §§ 1, 2; 2007, ch. 142, §§ 1, 2; 2007, ch. 601, § 1; 2008, ch. 959, § 3.]
55-4-118. Transfer of registered vehicle by owner — Death of owner. —
(a) Whenever the owner of a registered vehicle transfers or assigns the owner's title or interest to the vehicle, the registration of the vehicle shall expire.
(b) The owner shall remove the registration plate or plates from the vehicle and may have the plates assigned to another vehicle, as provided in § 55-4-101, except upon the death of the owner of a registered vehicle, the registration shall remain in effect until the end of the license year unless the ownership passes or is transferred to a person other than the surviving spouse before the end of that year.
[Acts 1951, ch. 70, § 47 (Williams, § 5538.147); Acts 1953, ch. 167, § 8; 1955, ch. 52, § 12; 1963, ch. 328, § 1; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), § 59-433.]
55-4-131. Notice of change of address. —
(a) Whenever any person, after applying for or receiving a title or registration, moves from the address named in the application or title or registration, or when the name of an applicant is changed for any reason, the person shall within ten (10) days thereafter, notify the department of the change or changes.
(b) A violation of this section is a Class C misdemeanor.
[Acts 1999, ch. 98, § 14.]
Knoxville Ordinances
Sec. 17-205. Driver's license or learner's permit required; registration required.No person shall operate a motor vehicle on the public streets of the city or property owned by or leased to the city's community development corporation unless said vehicle is registered in compliance with the laws of the state of residence of the owner of said vehicle, and proof of said registration is in the possession of the operator of said vehicle, and a license plate or other identification is displayed on said vehicle in accordance with Title 55, Part 4 of the Tennessee Code.
Sec. 17-209. Attachment of plates.
(a) No person shall operate a motor vehicle on the public streets of the city or property owned by or leased to Knoxville's Community Development Corporation unless such vehicle is equipped with a registration plate in accordance with Title 55, Part 4 of the Tennessee Code. Every registration plate shall be positioned as set forth in Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-4-110 and shall at all times be securely fastened in a horizontal position to the vehicle for which it is issued so to prevent the plate from swinging and at a height of not less than twelve (12) inches from the ground, measuring from the bottom of such plate, in a place and position to be clearly visible and shall be maintained free from foreign materials and in a condition to be clearly legible.
(b) It shall be unlawful for any person to operate any vehicle with any cover, lens or tinting material of any type over a registration plate, or to use any substance that has the effect of altering the reflectivity of a registration plate, even if the information upon such license plate is not concealed. Frames without covers or lenses may be used on registration plates only if the frames do not obscure identifying letters or numbers or any renewal or other sticker required by law to be displayed on the plate and the plates can be plainly seen and read at all times.
(Ord. No. O-37-05, § 1, 2-1-05)
Knox County Charter
ARTICLE I. IN GENERAL
Sec. 58-1. Motor vehicle registration fee.
(a) For the privilege of using the public roads and highways in the county, there is levied upon motor-driven vehicles, and upon the privilege of the operation thereof, except motor-driven bicycles and scooters, farm tractors, self-propelled farm machines not usually used for operation upon public highways or roads, and motor-driven vehicles owned by any governmental agency or governmental instrumentality and except for other exemptions provided by general law, a special privilege tax for the benefit of such county, which tax shall be in the amount of $36.00 for each such motor-driven vehicle, the owner of which resides within said county.
This tax applies to, is a levy upon, and shall be paid on each motor-driven vehicle, the owner of which resides within said county.
Owners of vehicles subject to the registration tax under this section, who have reached the age of 65 years or older on or before the date that the vehicle registration is due, and who's annual income from all sources is equal to or less than $12,500.00 per year for the 2003 tax year, shall be exempt from payment of the first $30.00 of the tax imposed by this section. Thereafter, such annual income limit shall be adjusted to reflect the cost of living adjustment for social security recipients as determined by the social security administration and shall be rounded to the nearest $10.00. The income attributable to the applicant for tax relief shall be the income of all owners of the vehicle. Any portion of social security income, social security equivalent railroad retirement benefits, and veterans entitlements required to be paid to a nursing home for nursing home care by federal regulations shall not be considered income to an owner who relocates to a nursing home.
Owners of vehicles subject to the registration tax under this section, who have been certified as totally disabled by the Social Security Administration or the U.S. Veteran's Administration, and whose annual income from all sources is equal to or less $12,500.00 per year for the 2003 tax year, shall be exempt from payment of the first $30.00 of the tax imposed by this section. Thereafter, such annual income limit shall be adjusted to reflect the cost of living adjustment for social security recipients as determined by the social security administration and shall be rounded to the nearest $10.00. The income attributable to the applicant for tax relief shall be the income of all owners of the vehicle. Any portion of social security disability income and/or veteran's entitlements required to be paid to a nursing home for nursing home care by federal regulations shall not be considered income to an owner who relocates to a nursing home.
School buses under contract with the county board of education shall be exempt from the vehicle registration tax provided under this section.
Residents of the county who hold a valid and outstanding certificate of registration for a noncommercial vehicle shall apply for its renewal through the office of the clerk of the county. Any county resident who registers a non-commercial vehicle in any county other than the county shall be subject to a fine of $50.00, plus court costs. Registration of commercial vehicles shall be consistent with state law, and improper registration to avoid payment of the county vehicle registration tax shall subject the owner of such vehicle upon conviction to the payment of a fine of $50.00.
(b) The tax herein levied shall be paid to and collected by the county clerk, who is authorized by T.C.A. § 67-4-103, to collect such privilege taxes. The county clerk shall collect this tax at the same time he or she collects the state privilege tax levied upon the operation of a motor-driven vehicle over the public highways of this state. The county clerk shall deduct a fee of five percent as authorized in T.C.A. § 8-21-701(55), from the amount of taxes collected and paid over to the county trustee.
(c) Payment of the privilege tax imposed hereunder shall be evidenced by a receipt, issued in duplicate by the county clerk, the original of which shall be kept by the owner of the motor-driven vehicle.
(d) The privilege tax or wheel tax herein levied, when paid together with full, complete, and explicit performance of and compliance with all provisions of this resolution, by the owner, shall entitle the owner of the motor-driven vehicle for which said tax was paid to operate or allow to be operated such vehicle over the streets, roads, and highways of the county for a period of one year which will run concurrently with the period establishment for the state registration fees by T.C.A. § 55-4-104.
In the event the wheel tax is paid to the clerk for a period of more or less than a calendar year, the tax imposed shall be proportionate to the annual tax fixed for the vehicle and modified in no other manner, except that the proportional tax shall be rounded off to the nearest quarter of a dollar.
(e) In the event any motor-driven vehicle for which the wheel tax has been paid becomes unusable or is destroyed or damaged to the extent that it can no longer be operated over the public roads, streets or highways of said county; or in the event that the owner transfers the title to such vehicle, and the owner makes proper application to the clerk for the issuance of a duplicate receipt to be used by such owner on another vehicle for the unexpired term for which the original receipt was issued, and the clerk is satisfied that the applicant is entitled to the issuance of such a duplicated receipt and the owner pays into the hands of the clerk the sum of $36.00, the clerk will then issue to such owner a duplicate receipt, canceling the original receipt delivered to the clerk by the owner, and such duplicate receipt shall entitle the owner to operate or allow to be operated the vehicle upon the streets, roads and highways of said county for the remainder of the period for which the original receipt was issued. Likewise, in the event a receipt becomes defaced or is destroyed and is therefore illegible and unusable by the owner, upon proper application made by the owner and filed with the clerk, showing such circumstances and facts to be true, then the clerk, upon receipt from the owner of $36.00 may issue and deliver to the owner, a duplicate receipt.
(f) This resolution shall have no effect unless it is approved by a two-thirds vote of the county legislative body at two consecutive regularly scheduled meetings.
(g) For the purpose of approving or rejecting the provisions of this section, it shall be effective upon being approved by a two-thirds vote of the county legislative body at two consecutive regular meetings. For the purpose of collection of the tax herein levied such collection shall begin on the first day of July, 2003, unless this section is subject to a referendum election pursuant to T.C.A. § 5-8-102, whereupon the collection of the tax herein levied shall begin on the first day of the month following the month that this section is approved at a referendum.
(Ord. No. O-03-5-101, §§ 1--7, 6-23-03; Ord. No. O-04-5-101(A), §§ 1--6, 6-28-04)
Really agree with what you read? Really disagree? Somewhere in the middle?....Let yourself be heard in the comments!
_
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Birth Certificates and Voting
Ben Smith's blog entry Missouri Republicans push birth certificate questions to oppose 'tyranny' reports on members of Missouri's state legislature supporting a state constitutional amendment reading:
This potential amendment is under attack from those of liberal persuasion charging that this amendment stems from nothing more than conspiracy theorist charges that President Obama is not a natural born citizen, but let's look at the amendment. What it says is that for candidates who are required by the U.S. Constitution to be born on U.S. soil that the Secretary of State shall request an official copy of their record of birth and that record of being born in the United States be delivered to the Secretary of State within 30 days of the Secretary requesting it. Aside from what may have sparked the support for this amendment, it requires that candidates "officially" prove that they fulfill those requirements. What is the down side to that?
I would suggest to MO representatives that they are probably going about this the wrong way albeit that I have no problem with the amendment. Singling out the natural born citizen requirement invites opposition from those who would say that is just the latest chapter in the conspiracy theorist nut-ball attacks on the President. What MO representatives should be combating is general election reform in addition to this amendment. How many stories were there in the last few elections about voting fraud? Wherever there is an important state in national elections, groups like ACORN and lawyers descend to that state in order to boost the vote for their candidate and to get the votes they don't like thrown out by the courts. How many times do we here of possible fraud in elections? I have no doubt that people are voting more than once, undesired votes (apposed to improper votes) are thrown out, or people who are not eligible to vote are voting. I think that our voting process needs an overhaul to prevent fraud or at least the appearance of fraud.
We often hear lately of the importance of confidence in the market place. How about the voting booth? We need to make sure beyond any doubt that 1) the people who are candidates for offices are eligible to serve and 2) the people placing votes are eligible to place them. Since I live in Tennessee, here is what I would suggest for Tennessee.
Combating Illegal Voters:
Every American has a voter registration card. Lets make everyone reapply for voting eligibility every year. Here is what you will have to provide:
Combating Illegal Candidates:
Combating Corruption by increasing barriers to serve:
If we don't have control of our elections, the people have no power or voice. Transparency is crucial to this process, and election policy must be oriented in the prevention of fraud from either voter, candidate, or elected official.
Really agree with what you read? Really disagree? Somewhere in the middle?....Let yourself be heard in the comments!
_
For candidates who are required by the Constitution of the United States to be natural born citizens, the secretary of state shall request an official copy of the candidate’s birth certificate. Other certifications, such as a certificate of live birth, shall not be accepted. Should any candidate fail to provide an official birth certificate within thirty days of the request by the secretary of state, his or her name shall not be placed on the ballot.
This potential amendment is under attack from those of liberal persuasion charging that this amendment stems from nothing more than conspiracy theorist charges that President Obama is not a natural born citizen, but let's look at the amendment. What it says is that for candidates who are required by the U.S. Constitution to be born on U.S. soil that the Secretary of State shall request an official copy of their record of birth and that record of being born in the United States be delivered to the Secretary of State within 30 days of the Secretary requesting it. Aside from what may have sparked the support for this amendment, it requires that candidates "officially" prove that they fulfill those requirements. What is the down side to that?
I would suggest to MO representatives that they are probably going about this the wrong way albeit that I have no problem with the amendment. Singling out the natural born citizen requirement invites opposition from those who would say that is just the latest chapter in the conspiracy theorist nut-ball attacks on the President. What MO representatives should be combating is general election reform in addition to this amendment. How many stories were there in the last few elections about voting fraud? Wherever there is an important state in national elections, groups like ACORN and lawyers descend to that state in order to boost the vote for their candidate and to get the votes they don't like thrown out by the courts. How many times do we here of possible fraud in elections? I have no doubt that people are voting more than once, undesired votes (apposed to improper votes) are thrown out, or people who are not eligible to vote are voting. I think that our voting process needs an overhaul to prevent fraud or at least the appearance of fraud.
We often hear lately of the importance of confidence in the market place. How about the voting booth? We need to make sure beyond any doubt that 1) the people who are candidates for offices are eligible to serve and 2) the people placing votes are eligible to place them. Since I live in Tennessee, here is what I would suggest for Tennessee.
Combating Illegal Voters:
Every American has a voter registration card. Lets make everyone reapply for voting eligibility every year. Here is what you will have to provide:
- Proof that your body is linked to the name you will use to vote.
- Proof of United States Citizenship.
- Proof you are a resident of your state.
- Proof you are a resident of your voting district.
- Proof you have obtained the correct age or other qualifications to vote.
- A voting database to reference applications for voting to compare the name you are applying with to names being applied for in other states and also names of deceased.
- Failure to satisfy these requirements means you do not have the privilege of voting
- Every new cycle, the voting "roster" is purged; to vote in a subsequent election requires reapplication.
- I am very suspicious of electronic voting. We have so many problems with computer systems. I believe that the ease at which the 1's & 0's can be manipulated may prove too tempting to resist. With paper ballots, although more resource & time consuming, the ease and temptation to tamper with election results would be dramatically less. -- How many of you have seen what computer code is used to tally the votes? How many of you would understand that code even if you saw it? How many of you can count a stack of papers? See my point?
- At least, a percentage of votes should be selected at random and audited to check for the accuracy in maintaining a sound and accurate voting process.
- The results of such audits should be published.
Combating Illegal Candidates:
- Create an office (and this may already exist) where anyone who would like to be on the ballot must prove with official documents their fulfillment of the requirements to the office for which their candidacy will seek. Age and country of birth requirements could be met with a copy of their birth certificate for example.
- Requirements and fulfillment of those requirements by candidates will be published.
Combating Corruption by increasing barriers to serve:
- I have very little patience for corruption especially in government. I figure if you are going to seek the power of government, your taxes should be audited. If you don't pay your taxes properly, you shouldn't have the power to influence how much the rest of us pay. Not only do I think this should apply to elected officials, but also to appointed ones as well.
- Background Checks. If you can't purchase a gun without one, you cannot seek an office or be appointed to a position which has the power to wield the power of government. Let me remind you that the power of government and lethal force are one in the same.
If we don't have control of our elections, the people have no power or voice. Transparency is crucial to this process, and election policy must be oriented in the prevention of fraud from either voter, candidate, or elected official.
Really agree with what you read? Really disagree? Somewhere in the middle?....Let yourself be heard in the comments!
_
What We Don't Understand About Debt and the Force of Government
On CNN's website Paul Steinhauser posted a blog entry about polling regarding fairness and approval of the bailout plan for people who can't afford to pay their mortgages.
Poll: Majority say Obama mortgage plan is unfair
Poll: Majority say Obama mortgage plan is unfair
In the commetns, Michele wrote:
March 4th, 2009 6:18 pm ETMy husband and I have a mortgage. We bought our house when we got married 3 years ago. We made a decent household income ($75,000) and could easily afford our $153,000 home with a payment of $875 a month. We had savings, paid down our student loans, and began to plan for retirement (we are now 29). Then, my husband's company closed, due to the onwer's extramarital affair and ensuing divorce (easier to close the company than fight over it in court, I guess). There went $50,000 a year - 2/3 of our income. I take home $1,200 a month as a Catholic school teacher. We also have $300 in student loans. My husband has been looking for a job- any job. Our savings will help us for a while, but not forever. We've done everything right, as far as contacting all our creditors and explaining the situation to them. Most are willing to work with us, but not all. We've never been late on a bill and are current on our mortgage, but are terrified how long we can go on like this. The irony is that even if we wanted to sell our house, it wouldn't help us since our home is only "worth" $125,000 in the current market. We'd still owe almost $25,000 if we sold it now. This is so sad. We NEVER spent beyond our means, and it is heartbreaking for people to think because we might lose our home that we were somehow irresponsible. Things happen. Not everyone with mortgage problems is to blame. I wouldn't wish this on anyone, but you do have to be in the situation to understand it.
This seems to be an example everyone who supports the mortgage bailout would have us see as an example of who should be "helped out." A family with $75,000 in income was working to pay off a $153,000 home. In terms of mortgages, this doesn't seem to be an example of overstretching of personal finances, right? Even with their student loans, their total loan payments are close to $1,200 a month. With a $75,000/year income, this is pretty manageable, right? How many of us would see that situation as one which we would volunteer to find ourselves in? I would.
There is, however, a couple points which Michele writes which are not true, but seem to be part of the conventional knowledge about debt held by Americans these days. Michele states that, "it is heartbreaking for people to think because we might lose our home that we were somehow irresponsible," and, "We NEVER spent beyond our means." Both of these statements are based on at least one of a few assumptions:
- It is normal and appropriate for anyone to have a mortgage which they can plausibly pay back with their current financial status.
- Spending more money than you have on a home is not spending beyond one's means, but responsible.
- Everyone has a right to a house.
- The risk associated with debt is only unfair when one cannot afford their payments.
Debt has become such a ubiquitous normalcy in the United States that it is no longer perceived as anything other than par for the course let alone dangerous. Due to car loans, mortgages, credit cards upon credit cards, student loans, etc.; the average American has a net negative value. That this is not dangerous cannot be further from the truth. For any loan, mortgage, or line of credit; you must be able to predict the future for there to be no risk. If you cannot, debt really shouldn't be used. Otherwise, you and only you assume the consequences if something should occur which causes you to become insolvent.
Michele, if you buy a house with a mortgage, YOU ARE SPENDING BEYOND YOUR MEANS! If you cannot repay the mortgage you willingly signed up for, YOU HAVE IRRESPONSIBLY ACQUIRED A MORTGAGE YOU CANNOT PAY FOR.
Let's not forget that government is force. If you support the bailout of anyone, regardless of how good it makes you feel to do so, you support the theft of property at the point of a gun. To illustrate this I'll propose a hypothetical situation. I, in response to the mortgage bailout, decide that I do not want to subsidize everyone's mortgage payments. So, I refuse to pay the taxes associated with the portion of your mortgage you are trying to force me to pay. The IRS eventually finds out about it, and begins to take action. They try to seize my property to pay the taxes and penalties and have me brought up on charges of tax evasion. An officer comes to my home and says that I have to give over my property and accompany him to the local jail. I refuse on the principal that I am not responsible for the contracts of which I am not a party. The authorities would no doubt try to use some tool, whether gas or other non-lethal use of force, to incapacitate me or make my resistance to jail and seizure of property less comfortable than surrender. If I continued my resistance, the authorities would then attempt to physically force me to leave my home. At this point, there are two outcomes assuming I continue my refusal to pay your bills: I with use of my own weapons repel the authorities, or the authorities with the use of their weapons force me to comply. Ultimately, I could be killed for refusing to pay for your mortgage. If you support bailouts whether corporate or personal, you condone this situation. There is no other stance.
I do not believe that the correct government's role is one of by use of force to have one person pay for another's bills. But what recourse do we have? First, we have go abandon the debt culture. If America were to pay down their debt and increase savings, there would be no need for mortgage bailouts. If you have a mortgage which you can't afford, sell it even if it is at a loss, and begin to dig yourself out. It may take a while, but you will not put others at the end of a gun as to steal the benefits of their proper financial decision making.
Second if you either work yourself out of the hole or aren't in a debt hole to begin with, start small. Spend within your means. If you don't have $200,000 for the home you want but do have $60,000 in savings, buy a $55,000 home. It might not be where you want to be; but remember, this is temporary. This will give you a base of operations (you actually own by the way) and you still have capital left over! While you are in your temporary home, save with vigor. In Michele's case, their income was $75,000 a year. If you lived on $30,000 (which can be done, many survive on much less), it would leave $45,000 each year to go toward a future home. You could purchase a $200,000 home in under four and a half years. In addition to this, YOU DON'T PAY INTEREST!! If you mortgage a $200,000 home at 6.5% for fifteen years, you will pay $313,598.65 (mortgagecalculator.org). Buying cash saves you $113,598.65! $113,598.65!!! This is not even including PMI. Including PMI, you would save an additional 15,000 making the total savings for buying cash $128,598.65!! If we approach our own finances in a responsible manner, not only do we spare our neighbors of subsidizing our irresponsible behavior but it's cheeper!
Remember Michele we talked about earlier? She and her husband bought their house 3 years ago. They have had 3 years to pay down on this mortgage. If they had followed what I proposed, they would have bought a small home in about the first year of their marriage (assuming no savings on the date of their marriage). That leaves two years for saving at $45,000 a year. They would have $90,000 of savings toward their home. That is only $35,000 less than the home they are struggling to pay for right now! They would be able to purchase with cash and own their home this year! Even if her husband lost her job, they still have $90,000 on hand. In this situation, they prosper! Eventually her husband will find another job. They will be back on course for buying there home soon. Not only that, but they won't send the government to point a gun in my face to force me to pay for a mortgage they don't need and shouldn't have! Now, tell me which situation you would rather have.
$25,000/year income, a mortgage you can't afford plus student loans, the ability to make $75,000/year;
or,
$25,000/year income, no mortgage, some student loans, a home you own, $90,000 in savings, and the ability to make $75,000/year.
I don't know about you, but I'll take the latter.
I don't know about you, but I'll take the latter.
Really agree with what you read? Really disagree? Somewhere in the middle?....Let yourself be heard in the comments!
_
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
If I Were To Run For President
I would pledge:
1. Never to raise taxes outside of emergency spending. Emergency spending could only be applied to national security, national disaster, or civil engineering emergencies. (See: Support Item 2)
2. Never to go to war without a congressional declaration of war,
3. Never to engage in or support deficit spending,
4. To submit a budget with a 20% cut in spending in the first year.
I would support:
1. The implementation of the FairTax along with the repeal of the 16th amendment (Support Item 3)
2. Changing the budgeting process to only spend taxes levied from citizens the following year within 4 years. Any funds for “emergency spending (See: Pledge Item 1)” would be levied from the citizens only when the following properties are included: a.) A time limit not to exceed the duration of the emergency, and b.) A tax cap as to limit the amount of tax collected to not exceed the cost of the emergency. Ideally emergency spending would be covered through the purchase of bonds,
3. The repeal of the 16th amendment,
4. The repeal of the 17th amendment allowing for appointment of Senators by state legislatures,
5. An amendment or legislation limiting the Commerce Clause only to issues regarding participation in interstate commerce; or preventing the legislation of commerce based on the premise that by not participating in interstate commerce, intestate commerce is affected,
6. An amendment limiting the 14th amendment to apply only to persons born of U.S. citizens,
7. An amendment or legislation acknowledging the right to own property,
8. An amendment or legislation clarifying the 1st amendment’s statements on religion to disallowing any branch of government, either through legislation or opinion, to comment on the exercise of religion,
9. Legislation allowing Medicare & Social Security enrollment to be optional,
10. Legislation banning earmarks or other projects unrelated to national security and interstate commerce (Roads & other civil engineering spending) designated for individual states.
11. Deregulation of the energy production industry (particularly oil product production) as to reduce the cost of production,
12. Domestic oil acquisition,
13. Immigration reform by supporting the following (in order): a.) Legislation outlawing the consumption of federal services, programs, or money by illegal aliens, b.) Legislation severely penalizing business hiring illegal aliens, c.) Free passage for illegal aliens returning to their country of origin,
14. Legislation banning government schools & government involvement addressing topics for educational study,
15. School Choice and vouchers,
16. Returning the Dollar to an asset based monetary unit,
17. Term limits applying to service in either congressional houses,
18. Legislation banning legislation criminalizing thought as in “hate crimes,”
19. Legislation requiring the names of legislators proposing any spending to be attached to the specific proposals,
20. Legislation requiring the identification of voters of national elections.
21. Legislation allowing for the participation in government programs (such as medicaid, medicare, and social security) optional,
22. A 10th Amendment commission to identify federal legislation/policy in conflict with the 10th Amendment.
I wrote this last year during the presidential primaries.
Really agree with what you read? Really disagree? Somewhere in the middle?....Let yourself be heard in the comments!
_
1. Never to raise taxes outside of emergency spending. Emergency spending could only be applied to national security, national disaster, or civil engineering emergencies. (See: Support Item 2)
2. Never to go to war without a congressional declaration of war,
3. Never to engage in or support deficit spending,
4. To submit a budget with a 20% cut in spending in the first year.
I would support:
1. The implementation of the FairTax along with the repeal of the 16th amendment (Support Item 3)
2. Changing the budgeting process to only spend taxes levied from citizens the following year within 4 years. Any funds for “emergency spending (See: Pledge Item 1)” would be levied from the citizens only when the following properties are included: a.) A time limit not to exceed the duration of the emergency, and b.) A tax cap as to limit the amount of tax collected to not exceed the cost of the emergency. Ideally emergency spending would be covered through the purchase of bonds,
3. The repeal of the 16th amendment,
4. The repeal of the 17th amendment allowing for appointment of Senators by state legislatures,
5. An amendment or legislation limiting the Commerce Clause only to issues regarding participation in interstate commerce; or preventing the legislation of commerce based on the premise that by not participating in interstate commerce, intestate commerce is affected,
6. An amendment limiting the 14th amendment to apply only to persons born of U.S. citizens,
7. An amendment or legislation acknowledging the right to own property,
8. An amendment or legislation clarifying the 1st amendment’s statements on religion to disallowing any branch of government, either through legislation or opinion, to comment on the exercise of religion,
9. Legislation allowing Medicare & Social Security enrollment to be optional,
10. Legislation banning earmarks or other projects unrelated to national security and interstate commerce (Roads & other civil engineering spending) designated for individual states.
11. Deregulation of the energy production industry (particularly oil product production) as to reduce the cost of production,
12. Domestic oil acquisition,
13. Immigration reform by supporting the following (in order): a.) Legislation outlawing the consumption of federal services, programs, or money by illegal aliens, b.) Legislation severely penalizing business hiring illegal aliens, c.) Free passage for illegal aliens returning to their country of origin,
14. Legislation banning government schools & government involvement addressing topics for educational study,
15. School Choice and vouchers,
16. Returning the Dollar to an asset based monetary unit,
17. Term limits applying to service in either congressional houses,
18. Legislation banning legislation criminalizing thought as in “hate crimes,”
19. Legislation requiring the names of legislators proposing any spending to be attached to the specific proposals,
20. Legislation requiring the identification of voters of national elections.
21. Legislation allowing for the participation in government programs (such as medicaid, medicare, and social security) optional,
22. A 10th Amendment commission to identify federal legislation/policy in conflict with the 10th Amendment.
I wrote this last year during the presidential primaries.
Really agree with what you read? Really disagree? Somewhere in the middle?....Let yourself be heard in the comments!
_
Monday, March 2, 2009
Deficit Spend or Bust
This morning on 100.3 FM WNOX's Hallerin Hilton Hill show, Dave Foulk interviewed University of Tennessee economist Mathew Murray. Mr. Murray's comments on national policy regarding the economy stated a few things. Included with his comments were the following:
Public finance is not so complicated that you need economists to say what would be beneficial to the economy especially on the basic ideas. The single most influential factor in stimulating the economy is more money in the pockets of individuals. If people have money, they'll spend it. They will spend it on bills, food, consumer electronic devices, investing in the market, investing in business, paying employees, et-cetera. People retain the most money when the least amount is seized from them in the first place. Economists are needed only when one is trying to fine tune economic policy. It is outrageous that anyone could say that tax cuts would result in more debt. I'm not an economist, I just live in reality.
Really agree with what you read? Really disagree? Somewhere in the middle?....Let yourself be heard in the comments!
_
- The only option the government has to encourage the economy is deficit spending,
- Tax cuts would create more debt.
Public finance is not so complicated that you need economists to say what would be beneficial to the economy especially on the basic ideas. The single most influential factor in stimulating the economy is more money in the pockets of individuals. If people have money, they'll spend it. They will spend it on bills, food, consumer electronic devices, investing in the market, investing in business, paying employees, et-cetera. People retain the most money when the least amount is seized from them in the first place. Economists are needed only when one is trying to fine tune economic policy. It is outrageous that anyone could say that tax cuts would result in more debt. I'm not an economist, I just live in reality.
Really agree with what you read? Really disagree? Somewhere in the middle?....Let yourself be heard in the comments!
_
Unlicensed Remarks
Welcome to Unlicensed Remarks. Entries will be posted from time to time about my thoughts about current political occurrences. Since I do not hold any degrees in political science or history, hold any political office, or have any authority in any political party; my remarks will only serve to articulate my own positions which should harbor no authority unless you happen to be of the same mind, are convinced of your error of disagreeing with me, or have the great pleasure of changing my mind.
Now, I know many people feel very deeply about certain issues in which the challenging of their position can elicit a less than cordial response. I'll try and think up some guidelines for commenting on the posts, but the standing rules are that above all; this blog is intended for the INTELLIGENT discussion, challenge, defense, exploration, & debate of ideas. Insults of any kind to me or anyone who contributes, comment spamming, mindless babble, or being a general artard won't even be posted. Passion is welcome and encouraged...just be willing to be disagreed with gracefully. No one will care if your wrong. I'm sure I'll be incorrect from time to time; try and catch me. Let me know if you agree or not and why.
_
Now, I know many people feel very deeply about certain issues in which the challenging of their position can elicit a less than cordial response. I'll try and think up some guidelines for commenting on the posts, but the standing rules are that above all; this blog is intended for the INTELLIGENT discussion, challenge, defense, exploration, & debate of ideas. Insults of any kind to me or anyone who contributes, comment spamming, mindless babble, or being a general artard won't even be posted. Passion is welcome and encouraged...just be willing to be disagreed with gracefully. No one will care if your wrong. I'm sure I'll be incorrect from time to time; try and catch me. Let me know if you agree or not and why.
_
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
