By Shields H.R. No. 573
76R11100 CCK-F
R E S O L U T I O N
1-1 WHEREAS, In 1990, the United States Supreme Court, in the
1-2 case of Missouri, et al. v. Jenkins, et al. (495 U.S. 33), chose to
1-3 disregard Article I, Section 8, of the United States Constitution,
1-4 which reserves to the legislative branch of government the power to
1-5 tax the citizenry; and
1-6 WHEREAS, In drafting that constitutional section and
1-7 allocating the power of taxation, the founding fathers drew upon
1-8 the Petition of Right, an English law initiated by Sir Edward Coke,
1-9 then approved by the British House of Commons and accepted by King
1-10 Charles I on June 7, 1628, which states in pertinent part that
1-11 ". . . no man hereafter (may) be compelled to make or yield
1-12 any . . . tax . . . without common consent by Act of Parliament
1-13 . . ."; and
1-14 WHEREAS, In 1787, the framers of the United States
1-15 Constitution reiterated that time-tested principle of limited
1-16 taxation, specifically vesting with the legislative branch the
1-17 ". . . Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and
1-18 Excises . . ."; and
1-19 WHEREAS, Their intent is unambiguous, made clear by the
1-20 analysis of James Madison, who observed in The Federalist No. 48
1-21 that ". . . the legislative department alone has access to the
1-22 pockets of the people . . ."; and
1-23 WHEREAS, The same view is expressed by Alexander Hamilton,
1-24 who asked rhetorically in The Federalist No. 33, "(w)hat is the
2-1 power of laying and collecting taxes but a legislative
2-2 power . . . ?," and follows consistently in The Federalist No. 78,
2-3 in which he argued that the judiciary should be the least dangerous
2-4 branch of government inasmuch as judges would have ". . . no
2-5 influence over either the sword or the purse . . ."; and
2-6 WHEREAS, Yet today, Hamilton's argument no longer rings true;
2-7 through legal orders and the exercise of judicial threat and
2-8 intimidation, federal courts have usurped the power of the
2-9 legislative branch and applied it to non-federal levels of
2-10 government, mandating state and local requirements that have the
2-11 direct or indirect effect of imposing judicial taxes upon the
2-12 states and their political subdivisions; and
2-13 WHEREAS, In so vesting itself by fiat with control of the
2-14 public purse strings, the federal judiciary has contravened and
2-15 overridden the constitutional separation of powers between the
2-16 different branches and levels of government, threatening creation
2-17 of a fiscal oligarchy unbeholden to influence by the electorate;
2-18 and
2-19 WHEREAS, The states and Congress have too long ignored this
2-20 self-proclamation and seizure of taxation powers, and it behooves
2-21 all Americans to preserve their rights by the adoption of an
2-22 amendment to the United States Constitution, re-establishing the
2-23 fundamental link between taxation and representation; and
2-24 WHEREAS, Seeking to reverse the aforementioned Jenkins
2-25 decision of 1990, lawmakers in 14 other states, beginning in 1993,
2-26 have already adopted and transmitted to Congress memorials
2-27 requesting that Congress propose an amendment to the United States
3-1 Constitution, and those memorials have been entered in the
3-2 Congressional Record as follows:
3-3 the Missouri General Assembly in 1993 (Senate Concurrent Resolution
3-4 No. 9) designated as POM-175 in Volume 139 of the Congressional
3-5 Record at page 14565;
3-6 the Colorado General Assembly in 1994 (Senate Joint Memorial No.
3-7 94-2) designated as POM-569 in Volume 140 of the Congressional
3-8 Record at page 15070;
3-9 the New York Senate in 1994 (Senate No. 3352) designated as POM-578
3-10 in Volume 140 of the Congressional Record at page 15073;
3-11 the Tennessee General Assembly in 1994 (Senate Joint Resolution No.
3-12 372) designated as POM-580 in Volume 140 of the Congressional
3-13 Record at page 15074;
3-14 the Arizona Legislature in 1995 (Senate Concurrent Resolution No.
3-15 1014) designated as POM-523 in Volume 142 of the Congressional
3-16 Record at pages 6586 and 6587;
3-17 the Louisiana Legislature in 1995 (Senate Concurrent Resolution No.
3-18 11) designated as POM-525 in Volume 142 of the Congressional Record
3-19 at page 6587;
3-20 the Massachusetts Senate in 1995 (unnumbered resolution) designated
3-21 as POM-625 in Volume 142 of the Congressional Record at pages 14940
3-22 and 14941 and designated as POM-638 at page 15486;
3-23 the Nevada Legislature in 1995 (Senate Joint Resolution No. 2)
3-24 designated as POM-287 in Volume 141 of the Congressional Record at
3-25 page S11605;
3-26 the Alaska Legislature in both 1996 and 1998 (House Joint
3-27 Resolution No. 30 in 1996) designated as POM-622 in Volume 142 of
4-1 the Congressional Record at pages 14939 and 14940; (House Joint
4-2 Resolution No. 57 in 1998) designated as POM-515 in Volume 144 of
4-3 the Congressional Record at page S9042;
4-4 the Michigan Legislature in 1996 (Senate Concurrent Resolution No.
4-5 278) designated as POM-444 in Volume 144 of the Congressional
4-6 Record at page S5515;
4-7 the South Dakota Legislature in 1996 (House Concurrent Resolution
4-8 No. 1010) designated as POM-526 in Volume 142 of the Congressional
4-9 Record at page 6587;
4-10 the Delaware General Assembly in 1997 (House Concurrent Resolution
4-11 No. 6) designated as POM-120 in Volume 143 of the Congressional
4-12 Record at page S5252;
4-13 the Alabama Legislature in 1998 (House Joint Resolution No. 261)
4-14 designated as POM-416 in Volume 144 of the Congressional Record at
4-15 page S9405; and
4-16 the Oklahoma Legislature in 1998 (Senate Concurrent Resolution No.
4-17 50) designated as POM-479 in Volume 144 of the Congressional Record
4-18 at pages S6404 and S6405; now, therefore, be it
4-19 RESOLVED, That the House of Representatives of the 76th
4-20 Legislature of the State of Texas, Regular Session, 1999, hereby
4-21 memorialize the United States Congress to propose and submit to the
4-22 states for ratification an amendment to the United States
4-23 Constitution to prohibit federal courts from ordering or
4-24 instructing any state or political subdivision thereof, or an
4-25 official of any state or political subdivision, to levy or increase
4-26 taxes; and, be it further
4-27 RESOLVED, That the Congress be respectfully requested to
5-1 entertain the following text for an amendment:
5-2 "ARTICLE ______
5-3 "Neither the Supreme Court nor any inferior court of
5-4 the United States shall have the power to instruct or
5-5 order a state or political subdivision thereof, or an
5-6 official of such state or political subdivision, to
5-7 levy or increase taxes"; and, be it further
5-8 RESOLVED, That the chief clerk of the Texas House of
5-9 Representatives forward official copies of this resolution to the
5-10 vice-president of the United States, to the speaker of the United
5-11 States House of Representatives, and to all members of the Texas
5-12 delegation to the Congress, with the request that this resolution
5-13 be entered officially in the Congressional Record as a memorial to
5-14 the Congress of the United States of America to propose a federal
5-15 constitutional amendment to prohibit judicially-imposed taxes.