The House Ways and Means Committee

The Ways and Means Committee had held interminable hearings upon the Sex Tax bill. Although this was not the only committee to hold hearings, Ways and Means, of course, asserted its primary right to study this unusual piece of legislation. Ways and Means felt that, in accord with the President's expostulation against "living in sin," it must give careful attention to this bill to ascertain that it did not in any way stand in opposition to the President's well-known moral scruples, allowing, of course, for the necessities of the government to collect revenue and thereby balance the budget. The latter was another of his most holy principles, the primacy of which could not be debated.

As might have been expected, the Ways and Means Committee had called upon the Tax Foundation, Inc., to testify. The president of this esteemed foundation came to convey its feelings and scientific findings (if economics can be considered a science, of which there is much respectable doubt).

The Foundation's president began his testimony with an opening statement, which had been Xeroxed for presentation to all members of the committee, with extra copies for the press. In his carefully prepared statement was the surprising conclusion that for the first time in the recent history of the United States a regressive tax was being proposed.

Citing abundant references to sexologists, he pointed out that a level tax assessed upon the male population would indubitably be considered regressive, since the per performance unit tax would be nearly an order of magnitude lower (1/10) than the average for the middle-aged. He cited the well-known "bean pot" theory, which proposed that a couple placing one bean in the pot for every time in the first year of marriage that they enjoyed each other and removed one bean each time thereafter, would never empty the pot.

Immediately, the young members of the committee rose to contest this archaic and unsubstantiated theory. It was ridiculous to advance such a theory in modern times, they said. They proceeded to cite numerous authorities to support a "bachelor's bean pot theory" as more likely. Because the argument was not germane to the present taxation bill, under which bachelors were untaxed, the matter was dropped.

Although one might have supposed that the age of the Ways and Means Committee members would predispose their voting toward a graduated Sex Tax, the older members, in tribute to their mental youth and recognition of the preponderance of young in the voting population, yielded to the level tax proposal.

Perhaps this was because a number of the Ways and Means Committee members, savoring the favors of their secretarial staff, considered themselves younger than a strict chronological survey might have determined. They voted with the more progressive majority, with a sense of fulfillment that might or might not have later been justified. It was Friday evening.

So another hurdle had been passed. The Ways and Means Committee of the House of Representatives had stood solidly behind the bill when it reached the floor of the House.

The Tax Foundation, Inc., felt well rewarded by their lobbying efforts in this session. For the first time a "regressive" tax bill had been passed through the committee. Perhaps this could serve as a precedent for coming times. At least it was a step in the right direction. They knew that the U.S. stood well below the rest of the world in percentage of GNP collected as a tax by sovereign governments and that the future contained only portents of higher taxation, although the economics of countries with high taxation were universally grim.