Skip to main content

Income Tax and Self-Ownership: A Matter of Principle

By Matthew Hayward


Madam Speaker, distinguished colleagues, and fellow legislators, I rise before you today on behalf of my constituents who have expressed their concerns regarding the issue of income tax. As their representative, it is my duty to ensure that their perspectives are taken into account and that their deeply held principles are given the consideration they deserve.


Some of my constituents hold the belief that an income tax suggests the state has ownership over its citizens and possesses the authority to determine how much of their hard-earned income they are allowed to keep. They argue that this concept bears a concerning resemblance to slavery, as it infringes upon the fundamental right to self-ownership.


I understand that this may be a contentious viewpoint. Still, it is crucial that we, as legislators, listen to the concerns of all citizens, regardless of whether or not we personally agree with them. In doing so, we uphold the democratic principles that our great nation was founded upon.


While calls for adjusting the income tax rate or percentage seem like a feasible compromise for some, for those who believe the concept of income tax is an affront to their core values, no adjustment will suffice. It is not merely a matter of numbers or percentages but an issue of principle and individual liberty.


Therefore, I urge my esteemed colleagues to engage in open-minded dialogue and debate as we seek alternative solutions that align with the beliefs and values of a free society. We must seek to work together to create policies that truly represent the best interests of the people we serve.


In conclusion, Madam Speaker and fellow legislators, let us not simply focus on compromising on rates or percentages but instead strive to find solutions that respect and honor the deeply held principles of our constituents. Through respectful, open-minded dialogue, we can build a society that respects individual liberty and fosters an environment where all citizens can thrive.


Thank you, Madam Speaker and fellow legislators, for your time and attention to this critical matter.




Labels:
Location: Olympia, WA, USA

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

When Government Demands Papers We Refuse

 By Matthew Hayward  9/19/2025  The Supreme Court just paused a lower court order that had limited federal immigration stops in Los Angeles. That stay lets federal agents resume roving patrols and interior operations that critics say rely on appearance, language, job, or neighborhood to pick people for questioning.  This matters because it normalizes a posture of suspicion. Checkpoints miles inland and roving patrols turn movement inside the country into a condition to be earned rather than a freedom to be enjoyed. The government already claims expanded authority inside the 100-mile border zone. That claim, plus an open green light for stops based on appearance, is a recipe for arbitrary enforcement.  Philosophy of resistance John Locke told us that the consent of the governed is the foundation of legitimate power. When rulers invade life, liberty, or property, or when they become arbitrary disposers of people’s lives and fortunes, the social compact is dissolve...
1 comment
Read more

The National Guard Was Never Meant to Be a Federal Tool

By Matthew Hayward 7/13/2025 Let me say this clearly: the National Guard was created to defend the states, not to enforce the will of the federal government. It was meant to serve as a local militia—an armed extension of the people under the control of the state. The highest authority a Guard member was ever supposed to answer to is their elected governor, not a bureaucrat in Washington, not a federal agency, and certainly not a sitting president weaponizing military force on domestic soil. Yes, I know the laws have changed. I know the Montgomery Amendment, the National Defense Act, and the Supreme Court's decision in Perpich v. DoD rewrote the rules. But legal doesn’t mean constitutional. Gradualism doesn’t legitimize usurpation. You don’t get to trample foundational principles and call it progress. What’s happening now—federalizing state forces to deploy them in cities without gubernatorial consent—is blasphemous. It's an insult to the very spirit of the Constitution. The ...
Post a Comment
Read more

How the Drug War Killed Liberty

 By Matthew Hayward 10/25/2025 When the State Declares War on Behavior Earlier this month, President Trump ordered United States military strikes off the coast of Venezuela, killing alleged “narcoterrorists.” He later boasted, “ We’re just going to kill people that are bringing drugs into our country. ” Those words should chill every American who believes in liberty. Fifty years after Nixon declared his war on drugs, it has evolved from domestic raids to international executions, all under the same failed philosophy that government violence can cure human vice. When the state declares war on human behavior, it always loses and takes the people down with it. Every prison cell, every overdose, every cartel bullet is a monument to the arrogance of government trying to legislate morality. Back in 1988, Ron Paul said it best on The Morton Downey Jr. Show: “You can’t legislate morality. You can’t force people to be better by passing laws. If you want to solve moral and social problems, y...
Post a Comment
Read more