This depends on one’s definition of “inordinate.” Allowing people a pro rata say in how money gets spent is “inordinate” only if one views the purpose of the tax code as, in part, the redistribution of wealth. Fortunately or unfortunately, our highly ‘progressive’ tax system does have this redistributive intent and effect (with, as you note, something like half of federal taxes being paid by 2% of the population).
Obviously, a government set up to take wealth from producers and give it to non-producers is not going to want to afford the producers much direct say in how that money is spent, as the producers would likely tend to steer their payments away from wealth redistribution (“economic stimulus rebates,” subsidized housing, socialized medicine, etc.), and the “taker” class, while they might designate their (minimal) tax payments to the redistributive programs, would never be enough to sustain the giveaway programs.
