- Home
- News Grid
- Local News
- Green Hawk
- Business
- Politics
- School Zone
- Nonprofits
- Missing Pets
- Multimedia
- Arts
- Movies
- Outdoors
- Sports
- News Releases
- Columnists
- Blogs
- Opinions
- Classifieds
- Advertise
- Donate
- Partners
Harris Sherline: The Tyranny of the Majority
When I was in high school in the 1940s, we were taught to believe that majority rule was best, that the function of government was to help us, that our system of justice was intended to be a “search for the truth.” These ideas were widely accepted as immutable truths. Today, more than 60 years later, to my eye, they are no longer as true as we once thought. The cause may be directly attributable to our treasured democracy in action.
A brief examination of four major issues — taxes, tobacco, health care and property rights — helps illustrate how the rule of a simple majority has been affecting our rights as American citizens.
» Taxes: Everyone should pay their “fair share,” especially the rich. But, who are the rich? How many people do you know who think they are rich?
According to recent IRS figures, 50 percent of all taxpayers pay only about 3 percent of the total federal income tax burden, while the top 10 percent pay about 66 percent of the bill. Nearly half of all those who file federal returns pay no tax at all, the top 25 percent contribute 86 percent of the total, and the top 1 percent pay about 39 percent of all income taxes collected.
Is that fair enough? Or should the “rich” pay even more? Remember, the definition of rich probably includes you, no matter how you view yourself, since taxpayers with adjusted gross incomes of about $55,000 are in the top 25 percent of taxpayers. So, is the “fair share” concept really fair?
» Tobacco: The tyranny of the majority is also seen in matters involving the tobacco industry. Tobacco companies have been cast in the role of villains and should be punished for selling a legal product but lying to the public about the effects of smoking on their health.
The power of the government has been used to levy a massive tax on the industry through litigation and settlement of court cases, in spite of the fact that cigarette packaging and advertising have carried warning labels for 25 years. Whatever you may think about the tobacco companies, we should question the actions of federal and state governments extracting money from any industry by this means and using it to fund pet projects that couldn’t gain the necessary public support to increase taxes to pay for them. If they can do that to the tobacco industry and get away with it, who will be next?
» Health care: Government intervention in health care has become a major focus. It’s no longer possible to escape the consequences of Big Brother’s involvement in health care. Driven by the votes of a growing elderly population, the “tyranny of the majority” continues to expand government intervention in our lives with cries for government funding of health care for all Americans.
» Property rights: Here, too, the “tyranny of the majority” is at work. Do you actually own your real property? Your home? The apartment complex or commercial building you bought as an investment? Your ranch or farm? If you think you do, consider just some of the following limitations on your ownership:
The government can take your property if it wants it for some public purpose (eminent domain).
Even if your property is paid for, you still have to pay a form of rent — forever (in the guise of property taxes and assessments) — to keep it. If you fail to pay, the state will eventually take it from you and sell it at public auction.
Limitations on the use of your land can be forced on you for such purposes as riding trails, access to the beach, power lines, view corridors, roads and highways, and maintenance of public areas. Zoning laws tell you what you can build — how to build it and what it must look like, how much you can charge tenants (rent control), and a host of other restrictions too numerous to include here.
The answer to the question “Who owns your property?” is — you don’t! Not really. You may have the title, but your control is limited.
It’s important to note that a majority is only “one” over half. One vote more than 50 percent is enough to win an election. One is enough to rule. And that “one” often delivers the power to dictate to the other half. One-half plus one can truly be a tyrannical majority in every key aspect of life in America: taxation, gun control, abortion, education and school choice, defense, Social Security, health care, property rights and land use — you name it.
Perhaps a “super majority,” say 60 percent to 65 percent, should be required to pass certain types of legislation, such as tax increases, bond issues and major programs such as health care.
— Harris R. Sherline is a retired CPA and former chairman and CEO of Santa Ynez Valley Hospital who has lived in Santa Barbara County for more than 30 years. He stays active writing opinion columns and his blog, Opinionfest.com.
Comments
Noozhawk's comments are moderated, but by posting here you accept your responsibility to follow our rules as part of Noozhawk's shared online community. Please keep your comments civil and helpful. Don't attack other readers personally, and do not use vulgar, abusive or discriminatory language. Use the "Report Abuse" link if a comment violates these standards or our Terms of Use.
» on 01.10.10 @ 08:52 AM
It is almost impossible to read this opinion without gagging. But let me pose a question——Is it Sherlines opinion that conditions will improve if we allow ourselves to be ruled by the tyranny of the minority?
Of course not, because no matter how the issue is sliced the majority makes the rules. Otherwise every Tom, Dick and HARRY would set themselves up as the rule maker and that way we have anarchy, but consider(charitably) , this opinion suggests that we should dispense with majority rule.
From the tenor of the article it is apparent Sherline condones lying without consequences—-see tobacco.
He thinks that there is some agreement with disease that when it affects the sick, there is a silent agreement not to affect the well. He believes that people in need of medical attention should be allowed to suffer if they cannot pay for the necessary treatment——see health care
The anglo-saxon common law for almost the last 800 years, and more recently in 1776 has required government to provide for the common welfare (see the US constitution) and which is the basis for our legal system, permits government to take your property for public uses with just compensation.
But the biggest canard is about how we are overtaxed, in spite of the fact that the USA tax system is substantially lower than many industrial countries.In fact we get a good deal for our modest taxes, see the following.
Taxes provide us with substantial law and order, like police and courts, and the military for defense against invasion and insurrection, help in resisting the terrible effects of fires, both in public and private conflagrations, disease control, providing for oversight on the food supply chain, and a multitude of other agencies that relate to the general welfare of our citizens.
Lately I have come to the conclusion that utterances by the atavistic among us must be rebutted because there are impressionable minds that might think there is some sense in the remarks, particularly from the poorly thought out maunderings of Sherline and others who have a pen but no pensee.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 01.10.10 @ 02:47 PM
Harris starts his discussion of Taxes with the question: “Who are the rich?” He finds no answer and suggests no direction for inquire. This 147 word meandering is perhaps a rather long winded western koan in the manner of “What is the sound of one hand clapping?” I will ponder it over an expresso- the beverage of the elite.
Tomorrow I will consider the question: In what sense is a Litigation Settlement a Tax?
Enlightenment one expresso at a time.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 01.11.10 @ 11:40 PM
Uh, the heroin, cocaine, and marijuana industries also complain about `government control’ and restriction of their profit-making ability. I guess Harris Sherline would support free access to heroin, cocaine, and marijuana, particularly for elementary school students.
Harris Sherline make a comfortable living through outrageous overcharges in he Cottage Hospital system for crappy medical care. It is disgusting that he drone on about free behavior when his money comes from really poor value and overcharging of people in desperate need of care.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 01.15.10 @ 09:38 AM
Here is a description of the extortion similar to that which made Harris Sherline a rich hypocrite:
http://www.independent.com/news/2010/jan/06/all-marked/
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
More Local News »
Harris Sherline: Obama Administration’s Contempt for Law at Core of Energy Policy
White House's worst offense has been to ignore a ruling denouncing the restriction on offshore drilling
Harris Sherline: Asset Forfeiture Laws Amount to Legal Theft
Forfeitures should be treated as cost recovery for law enforcement agencies, not as a revenue source
Harris Sherline: Outsourcing Is Simply a Part of Doing Business
In the long run it's a good thing in our ever-changing world
Harris Sherline: Let’s Hear It for the Good Kids
Meeting with Santa Ynez Valley Union High School students restores faith and respect in today's youth
Harris Sherline: Zealots Take Beliefs to Ill-Guided Extremes
Violent fanatics are nothing more than spoiled brats who use their particular cause as the rationale for temper tantrums
Weather: Fair 61.0º
Search Noozhawk »
