Whither goes Elon next?

by Rob Roper

Elon Musk believes that the future of our Constitutional Republic is in danger due to an erosion of foundational values such as freedom of speech (the reason he bought Twitter) and governmental financial irresponsibility and the crushing debt resulting (the reason he entered the political arena, supported President Trump, and embarked on the DOGE project). He has points.

Frustration with the ultimate lack of political support for the latter effort led to a public split with the president and the billionaire’s quest to form a third party, the American Party. Some have questioned the wisdom of this — rightfully so! — and offered an alternative, first suggested by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis: lead an effort to call an Article 5 constitutional convention. YES! And, BUT!…

DeSantis has wanted a constitutional amendment instituting congressional term limits since before the Trump/Musk spat. To entice Musk into the idea funding a push for an Article 5 Convention of States, DeSantis tossed the idea of a balanced budget amendment into the bargain. This is worrisome. (I love ya, Ron, but no.)

Advocates for a balanced budget amendment seem to assume that passing one would lead to cuts in spending. It could. But if my crystal ball is working at all, it would more likely provide politicians with not just an excuse to raise taxes, but a constitutional mandate to do so – massively. We all would be obligated to raise taxes for whatever spending schemes politicians like Bernie Sanders, AOC, and Zorhan Mamdani, dream up, should they win elections. And, sometimes they do! While this may be good accounting, it’s frightening policy.

So, Elon (and Ron), if you’re listening and considering an Article 5 Convention of States, and I hope you are, here’s an alternative suggestion: an amendment limiting the power of government to tax its citizens. Something like this….

The right of the people to keep and control the fruits of their labor being necessary to a free society, seventy percent [debatable number] of each citizen’s annual income derived from all sources shall be off limits to taxation of all kinds, including fees and regulatory takings, except in times of declared war, during which higher rates may be imposed and used solely for the prosecution of that war.

Call it the “Fair Share” Amendment. We can have a good, national debate over when someone – anyone – has hit the point of paying “their fair share” to the to the collective federal, state, and local governments, and more importantly (the level never discussed by the “fair share” crowd), when someone would be considered paying more than their fair share.

Obviously (I certainly hope), if 100 percent of the value of someone’s labor and industry is forcibly confiscated or controlled by another, the former is a slave of the latter. We outlawed that with the 13^th Amendment. But what about 95 percent? In the antebellum days some slaves were allowed to keep some what they earned. Did that make them any less slaves? What about 51 percent?

At some point I’m sure we can all agree, Bernie Sanders and company excepted, that it is morally wrong to keep squeezing the blood out of any citizen turnip. So, let’s codify that cut-off point in the Constitution, and put a stop the greedy politicians with their incessant, swarm-of-mosquitos-like “We’re just asking for folks to pay a little bit more,” nonsense because, without such protection, they will surely continue on until there are no more little bits more to take.

Convention of States Action is asking Americans to sign onto “An Open Letter to Elon Musk: A Historic Chance to Shrink the Federal Government—For Good.” The meat:

In the last few months, you’ve witnessed it: Washington, D.C., will never fix itself. Politicians talk about cutting spending and limiting power, but they never follow through. In response, you’ve floated the idea of creating a new political party that will embrace true fiscal conservatism.

But conservative leaders across the country… are calling on you to employ your extensive influence in a more powerful way….

Article V is the constitutional mechanism that allows We the People to bypass Congress and impose fiscal restraints, limit federal overreach, and establish term limits with constitutional amendments that can’t be overturned with an executive order when the next administration takes office. Employing Article V and calling the convention will be a historic effort of the people to reduce the size and scope of the federal government—permanently.

Click HERE to read the whole thing and, if you are so inclined, add your name to the petition.

Personally, I like the idea but am holding out until they adopt my idea. As the letter points out, Washington will never reform itself. It will use a balanced budget amendment as a weapon to keep spending – and taxing. The better way to attack the spending problem is from the other end. Close the money spigot. More effective and, I would bet, more popular to boot.

BONUS VIDEO:

Rob Roper is a freelance writer who has been involved with Vermont politics and policy for over 20 years. This article reprinted with permission from Behind the Lines: Rob Roper on Vermont Politics, robertroper.substack.com