It's not a question of history, but of the way the bill is written. In stark contrast to the law that is the topic of this thread, the bill has been online to

It's not a question of history, but of the way the bill is written. In stark contrast to the law that is the topic of this thread, the bill has been online to view for years, and even has a summary in plain english: http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/PlainEnglishSummary_TheFairTaxAct2007.pdf http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/PlainEnglishSummary_TheFairTaxAct... How do I know the income tax will really be gone? Section I of the bill abolishes all income, estate, payroll and gift taxes, repealing sections A, B, and C of the Internal Revenue Code in their entirety. Sec 301 disbands and defunds the IRS, and requires that all its records be destroyed in a year. And sec 401 contains a sunset clause that negates the whole thing (both the sales tax and the abolishment of the income tax) if the 16th amendment to the constitution is not repealed within seven years. Thereafter, any attempt by congress to bring back an income tax would be, not merely unpopular, but actually unconstitutional. And they'd have to build up the infrastructure from scratch. These guys are deadly serious. Why would politicians give up power like that? Not sure. But there are a lot of them who say they'd be willing to: http://www.fairtax.org/cgi-bin/scorecard.cgi http://www.fairtax.org/cgi-bin/scorecard.cgi Whether or not you think the Fair Tax is a good idea (and obviously I do), it's a model for how law ought to be made. In public, with a lot of visibility and discussion up front, a lot of time for question and answer, the full technical details exposed. The bill is not a tangled mess of amendments, but a well thought out and cohesive whole.