LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: WHEN YOU SUBSIDIZE AN ACTIVITY, YOU GET MORE OF IT

To the Editor:

With a congress that regularly exempts itself from the laws they pass, is it any wonder they feel exempt from the laws they haven't passed?

Noted economist Walter Williams regularly cites this basic law of human nature: "When you tax an activity you'll get less of it; when you subsidize or legalize an activity you get more of it." Just as it would be foolish to pass a law that violates the laws of equilibrium, so too is it folly to ignore this law. Yet time and time again congress and the president do just that.

Candidate Clinton proclaimed he was "pro-choice, not pro-abortion." Yet President Clinton has mandated state Medicaid to subsidize abortions. The result will be predictable, and the president should know it. As governor he regularly subsidized business interests to promote growth in his state.

Congress cannot claim ignorance of Williams Law as they deliberate subsidizing abortion either. They've just outlawed several types of fire arms to deter their proliferation; they talk about taxing bullets and tobacco to reduce their use.

The problem is that "We the people" have been lax in our oversight duties. We have not demanded meaningful impact statements. We have ignored the hidden effects of legislation.

Consider the tax code. This year a married couple, each earning $15,000 with two children pays $2,164.00 in federal income taxes. The same couple, if unmarried, RECEIVES $542 in refund. This $2706 amounts to an 11.7 percent marriage tax on your net take home pay. A double whammy comes when you realize that eligibility for AFDC, food stamps, Pell grants, housing subsidies, etc. are available to the unmarried couple. The whole war on poverty has been waged using this misguided logic. Good intentions and hope cannot overcome our basic flawed policy.

Government schools have become notoriously inefficient and declining in their standards, yet they remain 100 subsidized. The worse they do, the more money we pour into them. Private schools are put at an economic disadvantage by this and once again efficiency is discouraged by the government.

No one would suggest that marriage is an economic decision, however; difficulties often revolve around money in troubled marriages. If our policies are not neutral we should expect them to be supportive of an institution that has proven value to society as a whole. Just as welfare has enslaved many in the lowest economic rung, the Earned Income Tax Credit has the potential of corrupting many more.

Any talk of welfare reform should start with a serious look at a repeal of many of the "gifts" congress has bestowed upon us. Section One of every law should be "Williams Law" so we don't lose focus of the bottom line.

KEN SCHAEFER

Cape Girardeau