Birmingham Post-Herald

Commentary
Birmingham Post-Herald
Last updated: March 3, 2000  



OUR VIEWS

Gimme shelters

The Clinton administration has launched an overdue regulatory attack on abusive corporate tax shelters that Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers says cost the Treasury — and, by extension, those who pay their taxes fairly — $10 billion a year.

Tougher legislation is to follow, and if, as Summers says, the abusive tax shelters are both "the tip of a growing and deeply submerged iceberg" and "the most serious compliance issue facing the American tax system today," then the legislation should follow quickly.

Abusive tax shelters are defined as risk-free transactions with no economic purposes other than evading taxes. Thanks to the increasing complexity of tax laws, the shelters can be difficult for the Internal Revenue Service to discover, and so tax lawyers and accounting firms have developed a thriving industry in designing and peddling these shelters to businesses.

Rather than waiting for IRS auditors to stumble on abusive shelters, the Treasury has taken the promising route of attacking the problem from the other direction, through disclosure requirements. Basically, the new regulations require both the taxpayer and the promoter of the shelter to disclose its existence to the IRS and require the promoter to keep a list of clients for the IRS to inspect. That way, the IRS can quickly determine whether a shelter is abusive and, if so, quickly track down the businesses that are taking advantage of it.

In 1945, individual income taxes accounted for 41 percent of federal revenues, and corporate taxes, 35 percent. Since then, the corporate share has steadily fallen. This year, estimates are that individual taxes will account for 48.6 percent of the tax load, corporate tax, 9.8 percent. (The rest is from Social Security and excise taxes).

The legitimacy of this mix provides hours of wonky fun for economists. Some argue that the less business pays in taxes the better for the economy because the money is ultimately either invested or distributed as dividends. Others argue that all taxes end up being paid by individuals anyway.

But that ignores an important issue: To be successful, a voluntary tax system has to be seen to be fair, and to be seen to be fair it has to be enforced. These regulations and the legislation to follow will reinforce the perception of fairness.

Could have been avoided

As lawsuits go these days, the Walker County Board of Education got off cheaply in settling a lawsuit challenging a portion of its dress code for students. In addition to whatever the board pays its own attorneys, it must pay $30,000 to cover the legal expenses of Kandice Smith, who sued the board because the dress code forbade her to wear a cross on a long necklace outside of clothing. The code is to be amended to permit students to wear similar expressions of their religious beliefs.

A prolonged court fight would have cost far more, no matter how the courts ruled.

However, the board could have avoided even this expense if it had used some common sense. The dress code appears to go beyond what might be needed to produce a school environment conducive to education.

A more basic flaw is the arbitrary manner in which the code was imposed last year. It was clear when the board adopted the code over the vocal objections of a significant number of parents that no consensus existed in support of the code. There is even doubt that a majority of parents approved of the code.

To be successful, dress codes as strict as Walker County's must be supported by much more than a majority of parents. Unanimity may be impossible, but imposing a dress code that is not supported by at least 75 percent of the parents is inviting lawsuits and other challenges.

Good job, must relocate

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright is coming up on a career crossroads: Where to go next in public life when the Clinton administration and her tenure come to an end next January.

Because Albright is not American-born, the Constitution says she cannot be president, and she is a longtime resident of Washington, which has no governor or U.S. senators, so a run for those offices is out, too. But several senior officials of the Czech Republic, including its president, Vaclav Havel, have urged her to seek the Czech presidency when Havel retires in 2002.

Albright was born in Czechoslovakia, but her family fled the Nazis and didn't return because of the Communists.

There is precedent for Americans becoming leaders of foreign nations. Golda Meir, prime minister of Israel, was an American, and so is Valdas Adamkus, the president of Lithuania.

Albright says she is flattered but has declined. However, the Czechs might want to consider another high-profile U.S. official, who will be leaving office with Albright: Bill Clinton.

It's worth a try. Every chance he gets, Clinton says how much he loves being president and how much he laments his dwindling days in the White House. Being president of the Czech Republic beats running a library in Little Rock.

YOUR VIEWS

Witt owes apology for labeling Fines

THE MAIL

[ In Elaine Witt's Feb. 5 column, "Norman Case is Racial Grenade" she states she got a phone call from a representative of the National Association for the Advancement of White People concerning something she wrote about Judge Carnella Greene Norman. She said, "When I hung up I wanted to be sick."

Later in the column she writes "Well, it happens that a race discrimination lawsuit is pending against Norman, in which several court workers, black and white, have signed sworn statements claiming she actively dislikes whites," This of course did not disturb Ms. Witt's stomach one whit.

Also, she refers to radio talk show hosts Russ and Dee Fine as "'right wing" for calling Norman a "black female judge" and a "racist judge." Later in the article she states that "the Fines have been basically correct in questioning Norman's judicial temperament and performance,"

I think Witt owes Russ and Dee Fine an apology, and in the future when referring to them in her column if she feels she must define their spot on the political spectrum, she should refer to them as constitutionalist. Witt obviously does not like the Fines and by attaching the label "right wing" to them she has tied them to the same political group as the Nazis.

The news media is able to do this because of the public's lack of understanding about the political spectrum. The Nazi party was National Socialism, and socialism of any kind is left of center. If Witt feels she must continue when referring to constitutionalist and or conservatives as "right wing" she should in all fairness change her by line to read Elaine Witt "Left Wing."

Jim McLendon

Race baiting

I am amazed at the credibility that Birmingham newspapers and television give Russ and Dee Fine by treating them as more than the right-wing yahoos they are. How dare they hold a forum on racism!

Their repeated attacks on Judge Carnella Greene Norman are race-baiting of the worst sort, designed to appeal to their litany of listeners who believe only in guns, Southern heritage, the Republican Party and the repeal of affirmative action.

Monitor their morning talk show. Hear their world views, which are beyond bizarre. Radio guests in the past year have included Randy Weaver, who, by illicitly dealing firearms, managed to get his family caught in a crossfire with federal agents. Now he's profiting by appearing at gun expos and appearing on right-wing talk radio (Welcome to Birmingham, Randy).

I have even heard Russ say that he believes the federal government was involved in the Oklahoma City bombing. Not quite a mainstream opinion, unless you live in Survivalist City, Idaho.

There was a time 40 years ago when decent people let racists prevail in Birmingham. It was not pretty to watch and we are still judged throughout the world by our actions then. Some of the same racist rhetoric is re-emerging and carpetbaggers Russ and Dee are leading the chorus in singing that sad old song.

Murphy Garmon

P.O. Box 911

Gadsden

Borrowing?

Is Al Gore taking a page from President (Impeached) Bill Clinton's campaign book? Where Bill (Impeached), during his presidential campaign, tossed in wife Hillary to offer ''Two for the price of one," Vice President (Impeached) Al just may begin offering ''Two Al's for the price of one." Could the GOP beat a Gore/Sharpton ticket?

Armond ''Si" Simmons

104 Wadsworth Lane

Pell City

No wonder

The use of ''Sir" and ''Ma'am" has always been a way of showing respect. The politically correct crowd tell us that we must respect the differences in people but to show respect to your elders or leaders in this manner is politically incorrect. When I hear school students objecting to the use of these terms, it is no wonder that we have problems in school.

There is one conclusion that can be drawn from the students' objection to showing respect to their elders and leaders. They will never go into the military service. I would not want to serve with a person who was refused to respect authority. They will not only get themselves killed but anyone around them is in danger. The military is better off without these people.

Donald Dunlap

1335 Montevallo Road

Irondale

16th-section land answers needed

I respect Dr. Ed Richardson's quick actions to take over the Jefferson County school system finances. However, before he tries to sell 16th-section public trust school lands here, he needs to answer the following questions:

  • How many acres of 16th-section school lands are still in existence in Jefferson County? My records indicate as of April 8, 1998, 2,464.19 acres out of an original 19,840 acres.

  • Where does the revenue, current and future, from 16th-section school lands in Jefferson County "go"? Alabama Code 9-15-39 reads: "The revenue derived from any sale of timber or minerals from, or rental or lease of, any school lands shall be paid by the commissioner of conservation and natural resources to the treasurer to be deposited to the credit of the proper township or townships as provided by the constitution and laws of Alabama. An itemized statement of the revenue derived from such sale or lease shall be immediately forwarded by the commissioner of conservation and natural resources to the state superintendent of education ... . The superintendent of education ... shall immeidately cause a report to be transmitted to the treasurer showing which township or townships shall receive credit for such revenue and the amount of credit which shall be made thereto." Thus, Richardson should have a current, moving revenue tally of the sources of 16th-section revenues today in Jefferson County and the various city — not county — school systems, this revenue should be disbursed to. Every city school system that has a 16th-section bit of land inside it that is still state owned is a revenue earner. Public city schools 16th-section land revenue report please?

  • Alabama Code 9-15-9 reads in part: "If at any future time any of the said lands shall be leased or sold or otherwise disposed of, or should unused lands become used lands or used lands become unused lands, such facts or circumstances shall be noted on said record to the end that a complete and current inventory of all state lands shall be available at all times." Richardson should thus be able today, in 2000, to get an up-to-date 16th-section school lands ownership and land use summary, and should promptly make this public in Jefferson County.

  • Jefferson County 16th-section school lands belong to the city schools, not to Jefferson County schools. This is clearly spelled out in the state Constitution. Richardson wrote me in 1998 that these lands and revenue were paid to the county school system because they had an elected school board. This sounded and sounds to me like a gerrymandered interpretation. Richardson needs outside legal opinion first as to who owns each 16th section or part thereof at each geographic location throughout Jefferson County before he acts to sell. And, once that question is clearly and publicly answered, the issue should be whether improved land use and lease income, recurring, wouldn't be of more benefit to fund city schools budgets vs. one time, outright land sale?

    If Richardson needs help in compiling these required school lands reports that should have been of public record for years now, I suggest he turn to the the Examiners of Public Accounts, whose entire departmental budget is paid from the Education Trust Fund at the rate of over $5 million a year. Perhaps a cut in the examiners' budget could be redirected by Richardson to help with the Jefferson County School System budget deficit on a yearly, recurring, basis?

    George L. Singleton

    2509 Matzek Road

    OTHER VIEWS

    Hawaii ruling rebukes discrimination to aid 'diversity'

    By GEORGE F. WILL
    WASHINGTON POST WRITERS GROUP

    WASHINGTON — The 15th Amendment, which was ratified in 1870 for the protection of freed slaves and says that the right to vote may not be denied on the basis of race, is a sword not often unsheathed these days. However, last week it was sharp enough when wielded by the Supreme Court to cut down a Hawaii law, which the Clinton administration defended, that said Harold F. Rice and others like him could not vote in a certain statewide election.

    Under Hawaii's constitution, only "Hawaiians" are eligible to vote for the nine trustees who administer programs restricted for the benefit of "Hawaiians" and "native Hawaiians." Rice, a Caucasian whose ancestors came to Hawaii in 1831, was not eligible, even though, as Justice Anthony Kennedy dryly noted, Rice is "a citizen of Hawaii and thus himself a Hawaiian in a well-accepted sense of the term."

    The text of the pertinent statute should make any American wince. It defines a "native Hawaiian" as "any descendant of not less than one-half part of the races inhabiting the Hawaiian Islands previous to 1778 ... provided that the term identically refers to" — herewith begins the definition of a "Hawaiian" — "the descendants of such blood quantum of such aboriginal peoples which exercised sovereignty and subsisted in the Hawaiian Islands in 1778 and which peoples thereafter continued to reside in Hawaii." The year 1778 is seminal because it was then that James Cook, the British captain, arrived, beginning the opening of the islands to novel and disastrous diseases and, eventually, tourists.

    Denied the right to vote for the trustees, Rice went to a federal court, arguing that the denial violated the 14th Amendment's guarantee of equal protection of the laws, and the 15th Amendment. Rice lost in that court, and an appeals court, but the Supreme Court, finding the 15th Amendment sufficient ground for deciding, ruled 7-to-2 for Rice.

    Writing for the majority, Kennedy, whose opinion was joined by Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justices Sandra Day O'Connor, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas (Stephen Breyer and David Souter concurred in the judgment, but wrote separately), said the 15th Amendment "is cast in fundamental terms" that grant "protection to all persons, not just members of a particular race." He cited language from an 1876 ruling: If citizens of one race having certain qualifications are permitted by law to vote, those of another having the same qualifications must be.

    Kennedy noted that Hawaii argued that its law contains no racial category, only a classification defined by ancestry. But, Kennedy said, "Ancestry can be a proxy for race." And "the ancestral inquiry mandated by the state implicates the same grave concerns as a classification specifying a particular race by name."

    In a dissent, joined in part by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Justice John Paul Stevens said "there is simply no invidious" — the devil is usually in the adjectives — "discrimination present in this effort to see that indigenous peoples are compensated for past wrongs, and to preserve a distinct and vibrant culture that is as much a part of this nation's heritage as any."

    Here you have today's liberal jurisprudence, arguing that some discrimination — the kind that is not "invidious" in injuring a government-favored group — is constitutional, even if it involves a stark violation of remarkably plain constitutional language, particularly if the discrimination serves "diversity" by allowing government to manage the culture.

    The ruling was a timely reminder of the stakes in the presidential nominating contests. The next president is apt to nominate three, even four, justices. They could weaken or even reverse the court's current healthy predisposition to treat the legality of both discrimination and reverse discrimination — that which is intended to benefit a particular racial group — as equally suspect.

    It is depressing that two justices — 40 percent of a majority — object to interfering with Hawaii's policy of allocating privileges on the basis of some "blood quantum." Furthermore, the fact that the court's seven-member majority agreed only on the violation of the 15th Amendment suggests that there were not five justices prepared to sustain Rice's claim that the 14th Amendment's equal protection guarantee is incompatible with such racialist policies. Finally, Hawaii's racially restricted spending programs, funded partly from general tax revenues, remain in place, and far from being universally recognized as retrograde, liberals aspire to continue staining America with race-conscious measures called compensation for this or that grievance group.

    All of which illustrates why the most important domestic issue in the current presidential campaign is: Which party should shape the Supreme Court?
    George F. Will can be reached c/o Washington Post Writers Group, 1150 15th St. Northwest, Washington, D.C. 20071-9200

    LOOK BACK

    From Birmingham Post-Herald files:

    50 years ago, March 3, 1950:

    United States lends Marshal Tito's Yugoslavian government $20 million to buy American machinery and other heavy equipment.

    Coal strike forces TCI to lay off 4,000 more employees, leaving 20,000 workers jobless.

    25 years ago, March 3, 1975:

    Gov. George Wallace wants to keep tight rein on Legislature's second special session of year, which convenes tonight to consider increasing unemployment compensation payments.

    183 years ago, March 3, 1817:

    Congress approves creation of Alabama Territory by dividing Mississippi Territory and admitting Mississippi into union as state.

    • Top of page

    Copyright (c) 2000 Birmingham Post Co. All rights reserved.
    Reproduction in whole or in part without permission from the editor is prohibited.