Tax Resisting Takes a Stand on Tax Day

Last Wednesday was tax day for most Americans. I say “most Americans” because there are some who recognize the legal obligation to pay taxes, but who chose not to pay some or all of their taxes for ethical or moral reasons. And, in big cities all over the United States, groups gathered on April 15 to protest the bank bailouts, gay marriage laws, and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq with the argument that paying taxes to the federal government encourages corporatism, discrimination, or unjust combat.

These guys are presumably HBO subscribers

In the United States, some citizens subject themselves to IRS fines and penalties and actually resist paying taxes. And while many Americans may be disgruntled by Timothy Geithner’s bank plan, tax resisting (not to be confused with tax evasion, which is subject even stricter penalties and possible jail time), has always has been an integral part of American democracy in spite of the the fact that it is subject to fines and penalties. In the 1790s the first US Treasury Secretary, Alexander Hamilton, implemented a controversial luxury tax on whiskey that had some citizens so riled up that they actually tarred and feathered a handful of tax collectors. While Hamilton insisted that the tax had to be instated in order to pay off debts from the Revolutionary War, the tax resisters were not pleased with that explanation, and in 1794 Washington had to send an army of 12,000 to rural Pennsylvania to quell a rebellion (by the time the troops arrived, the dissenters had dispersed).

Of course, Henry David Thoreau is probably the most famous tax resister, spending a night in jail for refusing to pay six years of back taxes on the principle that he did not support the Mexican-American War and institutionalized slavery. But what about today? Is withholding taxes, despite the fact that it is subject to heavy government penalties, still one of the best ways to show anger and frustration towards one’s government?

A resident of Brooklyn, who I will call Barb Smith for purposes of anonymity, thinks that if you’re frustrated with your government, it makes you a “more responsible citizen.” At a demonstration on the front steps of the New York Post Office, she and fellow disgruntled citizens gathered to lend their voice to the anti-war movement. Handing out fliers that document military spending in this country, Smith, a third-year tax resister and war protester, pointed out that, “Money has an impact and where you spend your money has an impact. My decision [not to pay federal taxes] is in alignment with my conscience.”

Also gathered on the steps on the Post Office was a small group of elderly women from an international pacifist organization. One woman brandished a sign that said, “Raging Grannies and their Daughters.”

However, the sign did not mention granddaughters and Smith noted that, “Unfortunately, there are not many young people involved [in the tax resisting movement]. It’s mostly middle-aged and older people who are passionate about the issue.”

Best sign of the day, no contest

However, despite the age gap, the movement definitely gained momentum this year in cities around the country. Fox News had all day coverage of  “tea parties” in cities like Atlanta and Salt Lake City where protesters angrily voiced their tax boycott of the Wall Street bailouts. In Austin, Texas, Governor Rick Perry galvanized a crowd of angry citizens and even suggested that Texas might secede one day while, in downtown Houston, close to 2,000 people turned out to protest the federal government and threaten secession.

In Boston (the home of the first tea party back in 1773) gay rights groups gathered to protest their inability to file federal joint tax returns, even though Massachusetts has legalized gay marriage. A group with similar concerns gathered on the steps of the New York Post Office but when asked, none claimed to be resisting taxes. “We just want Albany to give us equality,” one woman implored.

Yet, despite all the hoopla surrounding tax resisting this year, the demonstrations still beg the question, does tax resisting in spite of the potential penalties really make a difference?

“I don’t know if the IRS cares,” another protester, who I will call Mark Johnson for anonymity, a fifth year tax resister from New Jersey said, “but I’m appalled at what the money is used for and I resist with a token amount.”

When asked what he does with the money he owes, Johnson insists, “I don’t keep it, I give it to organizations that do good that hopefully counterbalance what the government would do with the money. This year, I’m giving the $198 I owe and I’m sending it to the Iraq Collateral Repair Project.”

And, while he admits he only protests with a small amount of money, Johnson notes that there “is not enough outrage” and that he does the little that he can to press the point that he is not pleased with military spending in this country.

Although it is doubtful that Congress or the Obama administration paid much attention to tea parties, protests, or tax resister demonstrations on Wednesday, many see tax resistance, despite the fact that it is illegal, as the one act outside of voting that citizens can participate in to vocalize their disappointment with their government. And, while there is always the possibility that you can be audited, Smith notes that, “This is America. I’m not afraid of the IRS.”

Editor’s Note: This Web site does NOT in any way endorse or condone any act of tax resisting or tax evasion. Because of possibly incriminating statements, the names of quoted individuals were changed at the request of the editor.

The Inauguration and Federal Holidays

I know I’m not the first to bring up the significance of this upcoming week, with the inauguration of our first African American president falling the day after Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. On January 19, our banks and post offices will close to honor a man who truly was a martyr for his cause. On January 20, our citizens and others around the world will turn their attention to the United States Capitol Building where Barack Obama will say the 39-word phrase that will make him the elected leader of the free world.

So at this intersection of celebration, I began to wonder how Dr. King would feel about how his holiday is being celebrated.

Well, after much thought, I’ve decided that I don’t think he would be very happy.

From what I’ve studied about Dr. King, I believe that he would be disappointed at the fact that his whole life, legacy, and accomplishment has been reduced by many to four words: “I have a dream.” I’d be surprised if any child or adult could quote more than a line or two from this famous speech. To most, just like President’s Day, it’s another day off from school or work.  And while I’m sure Dr. King would be very proud that America has elected a man with African heritage, he probably wouldn’t be too pleased with the current state of affairs for many black communities in America, which are facing a violent crime epidemic.

Martin Luther King, Jr. Day became a federal holiday in 1983 when it was reluctantly signed into law by President Ronald Reagan, 15 years after Dr. King was killed. But the new holiday was not accepted everywhere without opposition. Many of the early critics of this holiday, especially in certain areas south of the Mason Dixon line, were against it mainly because of Dr. King’s race; and that was the reality of the time. Racism ran rampant in many parts of the country – hate crimes, violence, and segregated schools, pools, and drinking fountains. So many opposed the holiday – and the man – based on the misguided ideals of an earlier era.

However, many legitimately felt that King shouldn’t be singled out for the accomplishments of many in the civil rights era. Arguably, there are and were equally deserving individuals, such as Cesar Chavez, who had a similar impact with the Hispanic community of the time. The only other federal holidays commemorating an individual are Columbus Day and Washington’s Birthday, and the later has evolved into Presidents Day. Many felt that while Dr. King’s life was significant and full of accomplishment, it was not quite as prestigious as the finder of the new world or the founder of the free world.

And even when the law was passed, some states chose not observe Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. In Arizona and New Hampshire, the holiday broadly includes Civil Rights Day. In Virginia, the holiday used to be called Lee-Jackson-King Day, to honor the two Confederate Civil War generals from Virginia along with King (the irony was not lost on all, and was changed in 2000). Utah called the holiday “Human Rights Day” until 2000. South Carolina became the last state to honor the holiday in 2000. Prior to this, federal employees could choose between a menu of three holidays, one honoring Dr. King, and the other two honoring legends of the Confederacy.

Arizona, New Hampshire, and Utah (Virginia and South Carolina not so much) were definitely on to something. As was the U.S. Congress when it charged the Corporation for National and Community Service  with promoting the Martin Luther King Day holiday as a de facto National Day of Service. However, unfortunately, the idea has not yet caught in the same way as Fourth of July parades or Memorial Day picnics.  Why celebrate one individual who was part of a much bigger principle? Why even focus on one movement as it relates to one race? Why not focus on everything involved with civil rights for all of humanity? Why not focus on the evils of oppression and the spirit of equality? Why not focus on service to those less fortunate?

In my opinion, it has to do with the political correctness surrounding racism and people being too quick to accuse others of being racist. And while most of the sacred cows of America have been slaughtered long ago, racism is still an issue, an excuse, and a knee-jerk reaction for a lot of people. This is especially true of many who, despite the election of an African American President, can’t seem to move beyond the obvious. They don’t seem to realize that the dedication and bravery of one African American preacher from Atlanta should be taken in context of the bigger picture of human rights for all.

Of course, many who would offer such a suggestion would be quickly label as bigoted or prejudiced by those who can’t seem to move beyond the ghosts of the 1960s. “If you’re against a holiday for Dr. King, you must be against all Black people.” Any rational individual knows this simply is not true, but this is an automatic reflex for many.

Let me assure you, I have no intention of diminishing the significance of the accomplishments of Dr. King or of writing some sort of strongly-worded letter to Congress to get the holiday changed. But with the inauguration at hand, should we not also turn our attention to and take inspiration from the holiday that will come about a month later?

This year on February 16, we will celebrate Presidents Day, originally established to honor George Washington, but now expanded to include all the Presidents who have held the position.  As of January 20, this collective group of Presidents will now include one Barack Hussein Obama.

We need to move beyond this tunnel vision. We need to lift up both holidays. Let’s make Presidents Day something more than a day off from work and Martin Luther King, Jr. Day more than just “I have a dream.” When Barack Obama is sworn in on January 20, yes, it will be a little bit about the day before. However, it will also be about four weeks later.