It's WHOSE money?

Along with the less savory chants being heard over the CPAC weekend, there were the usual ones that fall into the "just plain silly" tier.

"Drill, Baby, Drill" sounds nice, and it's easy to remember, but this is going to solve the energy problem how? Maybe of we gave a lot of money for drilling in Canada and Mexico, that would help. They are, after all our biggest foreign suppliers. But with Alaska providing some of the highest production costs (once you figure in the money the Federal Government kicks into both ends of the effort), that's not a player, and neither are the fable "secret reserves" under the Rockies. Yet there they were, waving their fists in protest of the horrible plots to keep our energy future in the hands of terrorists. So that would be Saudi Arabia? Kuwait?

And the "No Ba Ma" chant helps underscore the Republic Party premise: "If the President likes it, even if it was one of our ideas, we're against it!"

But by far, the silliest was "It's Our Money!" The theory seems to run like this. Congress mandated this whole series of evil taxes, in clear contradiction of the beliefs of the Founders and the Framers. Therefore, since they have taken our money, and since they are paid from that money, they are our employees. From this, it follows with some elegance that we, the taxpayers, have an absolute right to have approval authority over every penny.

It's attractive, in a simple-minded sort of way. I have paid for government, so, if I don't like the actions of government, I should be able to tell them "Don't spend my money on the office of Faith-Based Outreach! But I want you to spend twice as much on the National Endowment for the Arts!!" One of my neighbors wants more money for farming subsidies, and less money "wasted on welfare." All right, it would take a large army of civil servants, armed with the very latest in information technology just to keep up with the initial input, and they would, in turn, be dwarfed by the people who would have to keep up with those of us who change our minds.

I for example, get quite upset with my local Public TV stations when they air yet another "Celtic" music extravaganza. I like traditional Irish and Scottish music, and I've even picked up a buck or two here and there playing it, but that ain't it. I'm also unhappy with the guy who recycled Positive Thinking from the 1920's and acts like he thought of it himself. So when Fund Raising Week (or fortnight, depending) comes around, just give my share of the NEA money to the Harbors and Waterways Commission.

The obvious point is simple. Once you transfer funds from your care, custody, and control to another party, the funds are no longer yours. We can deal with this in other venues. When you send the mortgage cheque to the bank, you don't attach a little note insisting they use it to make loans to ambidextrous Laotian cat jugglers. Nor do you inform them that you are very upset at finding out your money went to ambidextrous Hungarian ferret jugglers. To quote Falstaff: "Twas mine, 'tis his, and has been slave to thousands." 


If you've not made the connection yet, try this. You are visiting our house. It comes up that we are a bit pressed for funds, and my beloved wife makes a comment to the effect that we need to find $300 by next week or we may not have electricity for long. Out of the kindness of your heart, you quietly write out a cheque for that amount, and hand it to her. She rushes out of the house. You assume she is going to the electric company. An hour later, she comes back with a new set of one-of-a-kind designer sandals and brags about she got them for half price: $250. You may not be coming back for a while, but it's highly unlikely you're going to make a scene. You gave her the money. She spent the money. Unless there was some sort of understanding (not likely) prior to you handing her the cheque, she has every right to do as she saw fit.


When you pay your taxes, either as an annual lump sum, or through the withholding system, or through a mechanism of a sales tax, it ceases to be your money when the funds transfer. The government (federal, state, or local) now has care, custody, and control with the expressed purpose of funding those expenditures required to run the nation, state, or locality. 


I can remember when people were trying to protest military involvement in Southeast Asia by paying that percentage of their taxes that did not go to the military. It didn't work. Now, people have a whole raft ot things for which they do not wish to pay. Same game, different goal, same answer. When the money moves, ou do not retain any form of control. You want the laws changed, elect somebody who agrees with you, and support him or her. When you sign in at the Congress, you get a key to your office, a parking space, a special ID card and a little lapel pin that gets you past the checkpoints, and some neat photo ops with the party leadership. No magic wand, no legal obligation to check with the folks back home before you take any action, on any issue. So you do what you think is best. If people don't like what you do with the monet, there is this wonderful removal tool. We call it an election.