OCR Text |
Show The ists ' EEHIVE St -- ' Dedicated To The Constitution, Liberty, Moralityxand ttiwfr . . . . . .O . . . . . fV ... Volume 3 Number 21 Salt Lake City, Utah 84115 A Look !V A s o 250 Co V; June 2, 1972 at the Issues The two Republican candidates for Utahs second Congress in congressional district are off and running in a heated race for delegate votes at the state convention and then probably for Republican votes in the Sept. 12 primary election. The liberal Republicans are expected to back Lloyd all the way. The conservative votes, representing the majority of the Republican sentiment in Utah, could split between the two candidates or they could swing heavily to Mark Anderson if he i , faces conservative opposition within his Rep. Sherman P. Lloyd own party. In the past he has succeeded in getting a sizeable portion of the conservative vote, but this year he may loose that block of votes when candidate Mark E. Anderson gets the word out about Lloyd's voting record. (R-Uta- h) gets his message across. Claiming that, Utah needs a voice in Washington, not a voice for Washington, Anderson says most Utahns would be shocked if they realized the way Rep. Lloyd has voted in Congress. Congressional candidate Mark E. Anderson is challenging Rep. Lloyd and attempting to gain the GOP nomination in Utah's second congressional district. Anderson is an insurance salesman and an attorney. He was formerly president of the Finnish Mission of the LDS Church. Continued on Page 4 State Tax Commission Challenged Salt Lake City salesman Grant E. Mann has opened a fight with the Utah State Tax Commission, alleging that the state Guaranteed Income is attempting to deprive him of his constitutional rights by trying to enforce collection of taxes on his 1970 income. Stating that his case is not a routine case, Mr. Mann has been asked to appear before District Judge Thornley K. Swan in a preliminary hearing to be held in the Davis County Courthouse at Farmington on July 12, 1972 at 3:30 p.m. The state alleges that $1600 is owed by Mr. Mann on his 1970 income and has made attempts to inquire into his private holdings. Mann has refused to answer such inquiries and has refused to turn his records over to the state for auditing on the grounds that to answer questions and to produce records would violate his privileges against as guaranteed under the 5 th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Mr. Mann Enforcement of the says, collection of this tax by the Lloyd Voted for What causes a Republican congressman to vote for a guaranteed annual income? Mr. Lloyd issued a report June 23, 1971 endorsing HR 1 and the Family Assistance Plan (guaranteed annual income). To justify his support Mr. Lloyd on The UTAH INDEPENDENT through the news media and that all the proceedings are made available to the public. I feel that if all taxpayers understand fully what is going on, some immediate changes in our taxing system will be forthcoming," Mr. Mann said. I expect to use all the legal protections which are carefully given to the criminal element of often painstakingly denied to the good citizenry, he said. Mann has filed a motion with the district court asking for our country dismissal. and so themselves. The initial $2,400 annual wage will increase year after year. are spiraling out of control. . ( 3 ) that there uniformity is no 54 different (4) that present systems penalize work and encourage idleness. (5) that present systems encourage desertion by fathers (however, not in Utah). ' (6) that, although HR 1 will cost initially more, eventually it will cost less. (7) that the present welfare programs promote migration. What are the arguments which refute Mr. Lloyds position? First: HR 1 will cost $14.9 billion the first year $5.5 billion more than the federal government is now spending on Sorialc Order Department Remember the first income tax rate? No one expected income taxes to exceed just a few percent. Second: What is objectionable about 54 different systems throughout the country? Why shouldnt people in every community have the right to determine and operate and pay for their own welfare system? Improvements in a program are easier at the local level. Less bureaucracy is present at the local level. Less corruption is at the local level. Costs are lower in local programs. Programs are better adapted to meet the particular needs of local citizens. On the other hand, changes in Washington impossible. are virtually A federal program Continued on Page 4 Second Class Postage Paid (A)xd- 2459 Major Street, Salt Lake City, Utah 84115 perpetuating and enlarging (1) that present welfare systems are outdated and programs. the full benefit of the Miranda warning which must be included as part of the tax return. If the state refuses to include the Miranda warning on their tax return forms, then complete immunity must be granted by the state in writing before payment of the tax is made. Mr. Mann will represent violate state would my himself in court with the constitutional rights unless professional guidance of several written immunity against any national authorities in the field prosecution and further tax of constitutional taxation. As the case progresses, I will see liability were granted. Any taxpayer signing a tax that my briefs and motions are return, said Mann, must have afforded nation-wid- e coverage will be less expensive later on? Federal programs have a way of minimum (2) that present costs Refusing to turn over his records to the Utah State Tax Commission, Grant E. Mann says he is entitled to his constitutional rights. mushrooming of the federal government believe that HR 1 argued: conflicting. v welfare programs. Can anyone who has witnessed the gigantic at Salt Lake City, Utah 11 3 |