Congress

When Representative Smith arrived in Washington, he was accorded much more attention than usual for a freshman congressman. The news and TV reporters actively recorded his arrival, which hastened the Sex Tax legislation. Indeed Congress was waiting for the Sex Tax. In an otherwise controversial season, where every piece of legislation had its proponents and bitter opponents, the Sex Tax looked like a winner.

The majority party, somewhat put off because it could not sponsor the legislation, decided that the majority party would extend the debate by amendments-if they could think of any.

Minority party staff had prepared the bill for introduction in both House and Senate, although this was considered an appropriations bill, which must originate in the House. John Smith was to introduce the bill and lead the debate. The calendar was cleared by mutual consent and the bill moved to the Ways and Means Committee consideration immediately.

Although the minority party would have been willing to limit the committee hearings, the majority party, calculating that this was their main chance for political exposure, insisted upon complete bearings. Indeed, several of the other committee chairmen maneuvered to get certain aspects of the bill into their committee bearings to increase their own national attention.

There was a move considered to bring the Madam back for testimony, but this was rejected as "warmed-over eggs." Some suggested that Mafia chieftains be subpoenaed, but they were unavailable. Economists of every stripe were eager to appear, but they offered little good publicity for the committee.

The international scene and "Foggy Bottom" (State Department) had no contact with the Sex Tax until the committee hearings. The Sex Tax concept was wholly new to Europe and had evoked little interest. Sometime in the previous decade European governments had introduced the "value added" tax, with disastrous results. Now they were very leery of untried taxation schemes. The Arabs were the beneficiaries of an oil legacy discovered by the Americans, who were now paying all the Arabian taxes, so Arabs had no great interest. They did appreciate the benefits of the "barem tax" as it was called, however.

The Communists, as expected, were opposed. They were primarily interested in exposing and exploiting the decadence of the capitalistic system; Communism had long espoused "free love." To the glory of the Socialist Republics, Communists had taken an heroic stand against the capitalistic exploitation of the last frontier of the socialist citizen, the bedroom. Pravda pointed out how the unfortunate oppressed proletariat was being forced to pay an entire month's Soviet wages and more to enjoy the rights enjoyed free by a Soviet citizen. Pravda did not point out that a small fraction of an American's other earnings were also permitting satin sheets and champagne for the bedroom scene.

Whether a bedroom tax was oppressive to human rights was actively debated by third world countries, some recognizing copulative rights as paramount human rights and using this as an example of how they were more cognizant of human rights than America. Population increase and birthrates were cited as evidence, definitive evidence, of the outstanding bedroom rights enjoyed by citizens of the developing nations.

To counter such charges, and there was the certainty that the developing-nation majority in the United Nations would adopt a resolution against the United States, the congressional committees called a number of sociologists as witnesses to prove the freedom of copulative expression in the United States.

The FBI had considerable data on the sex habits and frequency of congressional and national figures, which they offered, but this data was gratefully refused, The Kinsey Memorial Foundation also had information, which it presented, much to the disbelief of the congressmen present. The frequency figures set all the congressmen to thinking, and there were several inquiries to the Masters and Johnson School of Sexual Performance among the committee members, who, after the committee hearings, felt something was lacking in their own sex lives. Even the public was surprised at the potential sexual frequency figures presented by the nutritionist group, who linked vitamin E with performance.

It was the huge sales of the pill and other devices that provided the refutation to third world charges that American sexual rights were being abridged. If there were restraints, they were believed to be cultural, but a subcommittee was immediately appointed to study the matter and give oversight to the HEW efforts toward restoring any neglected human rights HEW could find.

There were many other revelations to the press from the committee hearings. Not since the days of Kinsey and his report had the American public been so shocked. For the first time they realized that matters of welfare, civil rights, defense, and the environment had been put ahead of basic conjugal and copulative human rights. How had the pursuit of the great society robbed the American culture of such a simple and inalienable right as sex? the American taxpayer asked himself.

Both liberals and conservatives latched on to the new political issues. The liberals maintained they were breaking through the cultural barriers to a new freedom for man, freedom of the bedroom as guaranteed by the Sex Tax. The conservatives hoisted the banner of "return to old rights."

Becoming a taxpayer was now the "in" thing. Who would have expected that a congressional committee could have achieved so much for the American culture in so short a time? Verily, it was another "Green Revolution," at least seed-wise.

There were those, however, who did not look with pleasure and favorable expectation on the new tax movement. The IRS was now adamantly opposed. This was a great surprise to the committee, perhaps the most unexpected event of the hearings. Congressmen had expected the IRS to be close to euphoric at the thought of new taxes. Instead, they found the IRS witnesses very negative and depressed over the optional tax payment, Title 69.