Riley J. Hood: What is wrong with the 9-9-9 Plan?

From ConstitutionPartyWI.com. Riley J. Hood is the chairman of the Constitution Party of Wisconsin and was its write-in candidate for U.S. Senate in 2012. He received 70 votes. 

Better is a little with righteousness
than great revenues without right.” Proverbs 16:8

By Riley J. Hood-CPoW State Chairman

            After the latest IRS scandal, The Constitution Party of Wisconsin has called for the elimination of the Federal Income Tax and the IRS. During the hubbub, all sorts of half-measures have reasserted themselves, the Flat Tax, the Fair Tax, and the 9-9-9 Plan.

While I disagree with the Flat Tax because it is still an Income Tax, I want to address what is wrong with the 9-9-9 plan and by inclusion the Fair tax.

  • What is there to stop the 9-9-9 plan from becoming the 33-33-33 plan?
  • The 9-9-9 plan meant to introduce a new tax. That new tax is called the Value-Added Tax, VAT, or the national sales tax, or the Fair Tax. My position as State Chairman is, “We need no new taxes.”
  • The Fair Tax: One can tell when the socialist goes in for something, because it is “Fair” in their minds. For instance, what I pay in Federal Income Tax, FICA, State Income Tax, Property Tax, and fees on my utility bills aren’t enough. There are people on handouts, who are allegedly in poverty because I’m not, “paying my fair share.” The Socialist idea of fair is the ability to spend all of my earnings on their Utopian programs.

The Constitution Party of Wisconsin doesn’t mean to slow the rate of growth regarding Federal spending, or even to offer a freeze. We mean to cut out every unconstitutional Federal program, and put the ones that remain on a lean budget. Only those areas that the United States Constitution delegates to Congress to fund: will be funded. We mean to cut the Federal Government down to Constitutional size, how is that for limited government? CPoW has been calling for a Constitutionally Balanced Budget, namely Article I, Section 8; for over twenty years.

We mean to eliminate the Federal Income Tax, and replace it with nothing.  According to most studies, the Federal Income Tax provides 33% to 50% of our Nation’s annual income. Trimming this government by one third to one half, still leaves you with big-government.

The Constitution Party has the will to do this. The Libertarian view of limited government seems to be mostly about their party habits, legalizing sodomy, abortion, suicide, drugs, and prostitution. Their view is one of Anarchy. The word “government,” is still in the phrase, “limited government,” which means the government is to punish criminal perverted behavior, not ignore it, and certainly not to subsidize it. The GOP doesn’t have the will to achieve this goal either. Herman Cain wanted to introduce a new tax.  Michelle Bachman thinks every American should pay income tax, when no American should pay that Tax.

It took the passage of the16th Amendment, in an era of socialism, to make the Federal Income Tax “Constitutional.” Direct Federal Taxes, especially the Income Tax are incompatible with Liberty, do not square with original intent, they force-feed the State, they tax the citizen on his existence, rather than on a few purchases: thus they introduce tyranny. Even though we have a 16th Amendment, and it will take another Amendment process to repeal that Amendment, cutting spending and taxes can be done at the Legislative level, and CPoW means to do it.

10 thoughts on “Riley J. Hood: What is wrong with the 9-9-9 Plan?

  1. JD

    It has been mentioned before, by me and I’m sure others, that Grundmann might be a plant. You know someone who is only trying to discredit that which he claims to be, possibly for reasons of performance art. Is is possible that Riley Hood is doing the same thing?

    Seriously, who brags about getting 70 votes and says some of the crazy things he does?

    9-9-9 btw was never studied as or meant to be a serious proposal. It was a marketing slogan and nothing more.

  2. johnO

    He needs a haircut. How does CP rank-and-file take him seriously with a haircut of a women. Thought this was a “Conservative” party. LOL. Looks more like a follower of Cindy Sheehan and Peace and Freedom Party. Also, leave the LP alone they didn’t throw mud on you. Ms. Bachman would be perfect fit for CP opposed to gay-marriage and abortion. I don’t understand why he would burn her bridge. Ok, she probably is Pro-War against Muslims, and not sure if she’s Pro-Income tax but way to grow your base, dude.

  3. JD

    It’s interesting that Fluckinger approved Riley as a state chairman. I participated in one CP conference call and Frank talked about some people he saw at a county organizing onvention. He said they were enthusiastic but that they weren’t the kind of people you would want in a leadership position. I can’t imagine what would make those people incapable of leading a county party while Riley Hood is given an entire state.

  4. wolfefan

    I don’t like the Fair Tax, but Mr. Hood seems to know nothing about it. It is a tax on consumption, not income, which he endorses elsewhere in the article. Also FWIW an income tax does not tax you on your existence. I don’t even know what he means by that.

  5. JD

    It seems a tax on existence would be a straight assessment or membership fee based simply on living.

  6. paulie

    It has been mentioned before, by me and I’m sure others, that Grundmann might be a plant. You know someone who is only trying to discredit that which he claims to be, possibly for reasons of performance art. Is is possible that Riley Hood is doing the same thing?

    Entirely possible.

    9-9-9 btw was never studied as or meant to be a serious proposal. It was a marketing slogan and nothing more.

    Apparently the “economic expert” who came up with it was Herman Cain’s bank teller. Seriously.

    It’s interesting that Fluckinger approved Riley as a state chairman.

    Their national chair appoints their state chairs? Wow, that’s mega-weird.

    an income tax does not tax you on your existence

    Well, if you can live without income I guess it doesn’t.

Leave a Reply