In what was perhaps his most prominent contribution to the anthological Federalist Papers published in 1787 advocating for the ratification of the U.S. Constitution, former President James Madison philosophized in Federalist No. 10 about the nature of factions, direct democracy and majoritarianism.
In this essay, Madison expounded on the notion that factions arise because of the nature of diverging opinions, wealth and property among the populace. It is these differentials that induce individuals with similar self-interests to create alliances with one another in order to gain social, political and economic benefits.
In order to limit the damage generated by factions, Madison continued, sources that fuel factions ought to be removed or altered using one of two methods: destroy liberty, which is ultimately the source of factions, or create a society with homogenous beliefs and interests. The former would be undesirable as it has the effect of perverting an individual’s natural rights, while the latter is unachievable.
Since factions are natural social occurrences, Madison propounded that the best solution is to merely limit the effects of factions by assuring that majority factions do not infringe on the rights of minority factions.
This ideal is possible in republics — a system where citizens elect representatives — but not in pure democracies, a system where citizens vote directly on laws. Republics have the potential to promote communal interests, whereas pure democracies have the ability to elevate majoritarian interests at the expense of minorities.
This treatise was written over 200 years ago, but it is fittingly appropriate that we synopsize it now, particularly since Arizonans will be voting directly on education policy this upcoming election.
The Invest in Education Act is an initiative that would increase the income tax rate for individuals earning more than $250,000 a year, or $500,000 for married couples. The tax, which will apply to 1 percent of Arizonans, will generate about $690 million to help with teacher pay and school operations.
With that in mind, let’s make one thing perfectly clear: It is the rich who pay a disproportionate amount of income taxes. According to the Tax Policy Center, in 2014, the top 1 percent of Americans paid nearly half of all federal income taxes, the bottom 80 percent paid 15 percent, while the bottom 60 percent paid less than 2 percent. To put that into perspective, in 2015, 45 percent of all households paid no federal income taxes whatsoever.
At its root then, this initiative really is nothing more than another legal and ceaseless usurpation of income from a wealthy minority by a majority’s ambitious appeal. Even if this majority agrees that more funds should be diverted toward education, which most people agree at this point, the deliberate targeting of Arizona’s affluent class is completely immoral. No one in this majority should have the moral say as to how wealth should be collected and distributed, nor encroach on the earned labor of others.
When Joe Thomas, president of the Arizona Education Association, was asked why all state taxpayers shouldn’t give up part of their income to fund public education, he responded by saying that polls indicated that the state’s highest earners should pay more because responders said, “This is what they want.”
Of course this is what they want! A supermajority of Arizonans are not in the top 1 percent of income earners, showcasing why direct democracy, or the initiation of proposed law by the citizenry, is one of the worst systems of government to ever exist. Given enough passion, majorities in this system can swiftly and effortlessly advance any interest, even if it means injuring the minority.
