President Bush gave the topic of tax reform a metaphorical shot in the arm when he highlighted it during his convention acceptance speech. As a long-time advocate of fundamental tax reform, I applaud him for his attention to this issue.

Since President Bush took office in 2001, Congress has passed several major tax cuts at the President's urging. This tax relief has reduced the tax burden for millions of families while making a number of important steps towards fundamental tax reform. Indeed we have made some progress, but simplicity and fairness in our tax system are still not a reality.

Everyone knows the problem. Each year Americans waste billions of hours and billions of dollars complying with the complex tax code. Time is precious, and we never have enough for raising our families. Time is money, and valuable resources are lost that could be spent on productive activities such as growing the economy and creating jobs.

This complexity is the outcome of dozens of deductions and exemptions stemming from years of trying to drive a social agenda with the tax code. The result is the almost unintelligible federal tax code which provides some people an opportunity for tax avoidance by exploiting loopholes and tax shelters.

In 1993, I encountered what I call of the “Clinton paradox.” Ninety-three was the year that Congress increased the tax rate, retroactive to the first of the year. By some quirk of fate, Mr. Clinton and I earned almost an identical amount that year. But when it came time to settle and pay-up to the federal government, Mr. Clinton paid just over 20%, and I paid over 30%. Why should such a discrepancy exist? What is the benefit for the country when we are taxed at different rates on exactly the same income?

Currently, simplicity and fairness in taxes are sacrificed for the sake of pursuing a social agenda. But a social agenda is not the purpose of the federal income tax code.

Numerous changes could be made within our existing system. Full expensing of business capital investment, permanently repealing the estate tax and abolishing the alternative minimum tax are a few possibilities.

President Bush’s recent savings initiative would also help simplify the tax code by consolidating all of the current fragmented savings vehicles into three tax-free savings accounts.

A recent suggestion, by Congressman Chris Cox, Chairman of the House Republican Policy Committee, to simplify the tax code would be to allow taxpayers earning $100,000 or less to file a 1040 EZ form. Currently, taxpayers with an income above $50,000 must file a more complicated 1040 form.

Future incremental reform is an important step towards tax simplification. This Congress has done a good job with incremental tax reform. The temporary alternative minimum tax relief provided by last year’s tax reform package was helpful.

But Congress must soon act to prevent a huge tax increase on the middle class. It is estimated that more than 30 million taxpayers will be subject to the Alternative Minimum Tax by the year 2010 if Congress does not act. This is truly a gathering storm. I believe that as more and more taxpayers must handover these ever-increasing amounts of money, the impetus behind fundamental tax reform will grow.

I am a strong proponent for fundamental tax reform. I think simplicity and fairness demand that we replace our current tax system with a single rate system that taxes income only one time. And the good news is with all of the incremental reforms passed since 2001, we are on a glide path for a simpler and fair system.

Over one year ago, I introduced the “Freedom Flat Tax Act” which would allow taxpayers to opt into a consumption based single rate flat tax system that would replace the federal income tax with a flat 17% wage tax rate. There would be no deductions, nor loopholes; however, some personal exemptions would be allowed.

It is important to note that the Freedom flat tax does not tax Social Security income. Additionally, the Freedom flat tax does not tax savings or investments. In this time of deficits, we should in fact be encouraging these types of pro-growth activities.

The Freedom flat tax act will create a system that promotes fairness and economic prosperity by treating everyone the same, regardless of income or occupation, and removing the special preferences and disincentives for economic growth which characterize our current tax system.

At the same time, the decision to move to a single rate system would be entirely up to the individual or business, not up to the government. If someone has constructed with their domestic finances, or their business finances, to maximize earnings under the current federal income tax code, they would be allowed to stay within the code. There would be no ability to move between the two systems.

A flat tax would be much less costly, saving taxpayers more than $100 billion per year and reducing tax compliance costs by over 90 percent, according to one estimate. The resulting increase in take-home pay will give people and businesses more money to spend, ultimately boosting economic activity.

Fundamental tax reform remains a worthwhile goal, and this Congress should continue its pursuit. With the clouds on the horizon provided by the Alternative Minimum Tax, the wind is at our backs for affecting some type of fundamental reform, and we should do no less than seize the day.