Talk:Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution/Archive 9

message: Another editor has renamed this article from "Sixteenth" to "16th" under the theory that this conforms to other like articles. I'm confused, as I cannot find a single other article on U.S. constitutional amendments that is worded this way. All I see is "First," "Second,", etc., and not "1st, "2nd" and so on. The archive history for this article has been lost as a result of the change, although I presume there's a way to fix that.
Anyway, I would suggest that the article be changed back to the title "Sixteenth." Any thoughts, anyone? Famspear 22:09, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Renaming of article

message: Q: When the Sixteenth Amendment is referenced in other articles, should it be italicized?  I would consider it the title of a document, which generally is italicized but I haven't seen this in our other articles. Morphh  (talk) 1:47, 03 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The answer to this is No, since it is constitutional or legal document (see Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_%28titles%29#Neither). Morphh  (talk) 12:42, 06 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Italics

message: The page says that the amendment was ratified after the 36th state ratified it. According to the Constitution 3/4 of the states would have to ratify it making it 37 or 38 states.  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.155.194.209 (talk • contribs) 16:42, June 8, 2007 (UTC)
:Alaska and Hawaii weren't yet states, so it's 3/4 of the 48 states, which would be 36.  — Arthur Rubin |  (talk) 20:42, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Ratification

message: A new user named "Drive the Nation" has repeatedly inserted the following material:
::According to various sources, new evidence and rigorous research has laid down the framework for proving that the 16th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is Unconstitutional, and therefore, illegal.
::Bill Benson is one of the most influential 16th Amendment historical researchers who has extensively investigated the ratification process of the 16th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. In his findings he concluded that the 16th Amendment was fraudulently claimed to be ratified, as the required amount of States never ratified, or never legally ratified the Amendment under Constitutional law. Bill Benson started his research in January, 1984. He investigated and traced paperwork and legal documents from all of the 48 State Legislatures in the "ratification" of the 16th Amendment. He surprisingly found that there were many errors and false claims of State ratification when no such legal authorization existed.
::
::Bill Benson writes in his book "The Law That Never Was":
::
::The Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States was never ratified by a majority of the sovereign States.
::This is the Amendment that allegedly entitled the Federal Agent (government) in the federal territory of Washington, D.C. and their private collection company, the IRS, to collect "income tax" as falsely declared to be ratified in February 1913.
::After an exhaustive year long search of legislative records in 48 sovereign states (Alaska & Hawaii were not admitted into the Union until after 1913). The only record of the 16th Amendment having been confirmed was a proclamation made by the Secretary of State Philander Knox on February 25, 1913, wherein he simply declared it to be "ineffect", but never stating it was lawfully ratified.
::Bill Benson has also proclaimed in his book The Law That Never Was Vol. 1 & Vol. 2- that he obtained damaging documents and proof, through the national archives and public records, that can charge hundreds of state officials with Obstruction of Justice over the past 70 years. He was arrested for not paying income taxes, but once released, he still refused to pay income taxes- and fought the IRS using his book as his defense- and to this day, they don't arrest him.
::
::
::Article One Section 2: Clause 3 & Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution permits the Federal Government to collect an apportioned tax from the people- and since the 16th Amendment permits a direct tax without apportionment, it is still considered Unconstitutional by people today. Other sources indicate that even "if" the 16th Amendment was legally and properly ratified by 3/4 of the States, that there are only 3 ways the Federal Government would be permitted to tax: 1. Import Tax 2. Export Tax 3. Excise Tax (sales tax).
::Though other sources claim that the necessary amount of States ratified the 16th Amendment, after reviewing the evidence and documentation of these claims, it has been proven otherwise.
::
::
[end of material from "Drive the Nation"]
Dear Drive the Nation: You may want to discuss this material below. Yours, Famspear 14:07, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Old tax protester rhetoric from a new user: "Drive the Nation"

message: Substituted at 22:03, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment