// -- MODERATOR COMMENT -- //

This is our first moderated discussion, and it seems that I couldn't have picked a more sensitive topic.

At the time we started this, you may have just written your check to the IRS, mailing money that was the result of underpaying, or maybe the result of a very good year. If it was the later, congratulations. Making more money is a good thing, and although you may not have liked it, the extra cash in your pocket is a good thing.

This past year was a very good year in terms of unemployment data was concerned. I do, however, think that the data may have been somewhat skewed, especially when the majority of newly created jobs may not qualify as full time positions that would pay a living wage. But that is a future discussion...

Recently Congress had a new amendment to look at introduced by Rep. Pete Sessions, R-Texas. His proposal would not allow Congress to legislate any tax increase without a two thirds majority.

This isn't the first time this kind of legislation has been introduced. The difficulty it faced before from opponents was that there was a fiscal responsibility to raise taxes should there be a budget deficit.

But that thinking is somewhat off. Voting for the amendment would keep the economy strong by leaving money in our wallets to spend. Spending creates jobs, jobs create taxes, taxes pay deficits, or shortfalls.

Taxing a growing economy tends to have a negative effect on the cycle. By taking cash out of our pockets, we have less to spend on food, housing, and in general, the stuff we might want or perhaps need.

v By not buying, companies face the problem from two sides. Products produced aren't purchased, and the government's newer taxes put pressure on growth and expansion.

vPressure like this puts pressure on labor. Labor pays their fair share, and in doing so, helps with the government's revenues.

But this revenue starts to fall when these things start to take pace as a result of higher taxes. An economic pull-back means less revenue paid to the government, and less means that taxes need to go up to raise money.

So the create a sort of death spiral. By making it tougher for Congress to raise taxes, economist believe that the downturns would end sooner and growth would begin sooner as a result.

What difference would this make? A limitation, had it been in place would have forbidden tax increases on four of the last five measures that they have voted on. This points to an even division of voters. Two thirds would ensure a well thought out majority. Those four bills sought tax increases in the $600 billion range, or $6,000 plus per tax paying household.

The gas tax remains in place, and there seems to be a slow rally among Republicans to vote this amendment. This is BlueCollarDollar issue and you should address your Congressman on the subject. Type his or her name in the search on your favorite browser and drop them a line.

Less government in this economic boom would be a good thing indeed.

Your Moderator,

Paul Petillo