OCR Text |
Show Is the kind of stimulus the economy needs, and the kind it has not had for far too long. Inside Washington with Senator Jake Gam I have consistently been opposed to any legislation or program that would establish estab-lish any type of federal gun control. There are four major ma-jor areas in which a federal firearms control policy is suspect, and each area probably prob-ably provides sufficient reason rea-son by itself to oppose federal fed-eral gun control. The first area of significant signif-icant concern is the questionable ques-tionable constitutionality of national gun control laws. It is clear that the Second Amendment was intended to protect the rights of an armed arm-ed citizenry. The Amendment Amend-ment reads: "A well regulated regu-lated militia, being necessary neces-sary to the security of a free State, the right of the people peo-ple to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." This aspect of the Constitution is so important that thirty -eight states have similar "right to bear arms" provisions pro-visions in their own constitutions. con-stitutions. The second issue that must be squarely faced by those who seek to control firearms fire-arms is the issue of self defense. How many confiscated confi-scated guns will justify the death of even one person who could have defended himself with a gun if the federal government had not prohibited prohibit-ed that option? No one believes be-lieves that gun control will prevent the criminally-minded criminally-minded from obtaining guns; only the law-abiding will comply with the lawrestric- The average American can count on one major development develop-ment on the tax scene in 1978: taxes will be higher in the beginning of this year than they were in 1977. This is a result of increases in the Social Security tax which have just taken effect. Many of you have already noticed that your first 1978 take-home take-home pay was less than Dec. '77, In some cases, as much as $20 less. In addition to this, another Social Security "emergency" tax was passed pass-ed in the final hours of the last session and this tax will hit us next year. The massive mas-sive tax increases don't even include the potential effects of higher gasoline and fuel taxes which are proposed in President Carter's energy package. As taxation Increases, there is a growing sentiment throughout the country for an across-the-board tax reduction re-duction in an effort to decrease de-crease unemployment and stimulate the dragging economy. econ-omy. The Administration has proposed such a reduction. reduc-tion. But a closer look at the Administration's proposal pro-posal reveals that the cuts will only offset the increases that we as taxpayers must and sales taxes and the business busi-ness entertainment deduction. deduc-tion. Initially, the Carter plan will do nothing more than offset the administrative administra-tive tax Increases of 1977. It will be a mere shuffling of funds through different government doors. On top of this, it will not curb inflation in-flation which will continue to push people into higher tax brackets. The direct effect of this action is that Ameri -cans will be in higher tax brackets, and their tax burden bur-den will increase, which will continue to reduce the incentive in-centive of workers to work and investors to invest. There is too much at stake to labor over the Administration's Adminis-tration's unsatisfactory proposal. pro-posal. For this reason, I have joined in an effort to enact the Kemp -Roth Tax Reduction Act which Ibeleive is a far superior tax cut plan. The Kemp -Roth Plan would reduce all individual income tax rates by an average of 33 percent over the next three years. The highest rates would be cut from 70 to 50 percent. Corporate Cor-porate tax rates would also be reduced, from 48 percent to 45 percent. This Act would reduce unemployment tion gun ownership. We i could then expect criminals ) to prey even more vicious- j ly on society. Although it is j impossible to tell the num - t ber of criminal activi- J ties that are deterred be- j cause the crim inal knows the i possibility of confronting an I armed victim, there is some S deterrent effect. The enact- I ment of gun control laws j would deprive some citi- zens of a means of self j defense. j Thirdly, any federal gun j control law would require a i large, expensive, and intrusive intru-sive federal bureaucracy to ! administer it. There are ' I 1 incur because of these new taxes. In brief, the Administration Administra-tion will cut taxes roughly around $25 billion; families will receive a tax cut due largely to the change of the $750 personal exemption into a $250 tax credit. However, How-ever, for couples earning more than $20,000 annually, this action will mean a tax increase. Corporate tax rates may hopefully be reduced re-duced by two percentage points and the investment tax credit may be made permanent. perman-ent. Several deductions will be eliminated, such as the state and local gasoline r not by stimulating demand but by increasing the incentive incen-tive to work, save, produce and invest. This is accom -plished by reducing tax rates across-the-board so that individuals in-dividuals will receive a greater reward for their efforts. ef-forts. It is essential to cut taxes now. History has proven that a tax reduction was very effective ef-fective during the Kennedy Administration. I believe that this same kind of cut now will encourage individuals in-dividuals to decide that there is some advantage in increased in-creased labor and production, and even in investment. That |