 | ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
|
« The Bush Boom Grows Louder | Main | My Google Myself » March 29, 2004A Fact-Free Editorial
Passing the buck on taxesThey are if they actually do their research, which I did and continue to do, but the paper apparently hasn't. Colorado passed a Taxpayer Bill of Rights in 1992. Some observers say that the measure sparked great job creation over the next 10 years and helped Colorado weather the recession. Others believe it has locked the state into horrid policies, harming social services and education and ruining public universities.That's the problem with The Tennessean - it's relying on "observers" rather than actually sending "reporters" to dig up the facts. And when the paper says "observers," what it really means is "supporters" and "critics." Now, two state lawmakers would like Tennessee to adopt its own version of a Taxpayer Bill of Rights. The proposed amendment, sponsored by Sen. Jim Bryson and Rep. Glen Casada, both Williamson County Republicans, would limit the growth in state revenues by a formula to account for population growth, plus inflation. Revenue in excess of that amount would be returned to taxpayers. Voters would have to approve tax increases.A pretty good summary, though if The Tennessean had detailed a reporter to really follow the story and accurately report on it, the paper would know the proposed amendment has been amended to reflect the current state constitution and current state law, which limit the annual growth in state spending to the estimated rate of economic growth "as determined by law," and under current state law the economic growth rate is determined to be the growth of personal income. Of course, this isn't the first time The Tennessean has gotten its facts wrong re the Taxpayers Bill of Rights. While this measure will have great appeal with some voters, it would mark a step away from representative government and from judgment.Yes it would mark a step away from representative government - because, on the most central issue of government, our representatives have repeatedly over the last two decades shown themselves unwilling to exercise restraint in matters of taxing and spending, and have violated the current constitutional cap on spending 11 out of the last 19 years, by more than $3 billion, even though the spending cap allows for a generous growth in state government. The Taxpayers Bill of Rights would simply strengthen the existing spending cap and give voters the final say over tax increases and the disposition of surplus revenue above that generous cap - and only after all previous surplus revenue had been used to fill a rather large "rainy day" reserve fund. Governing is a matter of setting priorities and making value judgments.Governing would be even more so a matter of setting priorities if the legislature couldn't easily raise taxes on a whim to fund its latest whims, and was forced by a spending cap to actually set priorities rather than claim that everything on a wish list is Priority One and must be funded to the nth degree. Tennessee expects its public officials and its legislators to avail themselves of more information on a given topic than is available to the general public.It's a little ironic that The Tennessean, which often criticizes Tennessee legislators for being beholden to special interests, here portrays the legislature as being a solemn, deliberative body that makes sound judgments based on infallible information - rather than on the size of the contributions from the lobbyists and the PACs. The Taxpayer Bill of Rights, however, would lock in the state on fiscal policy matters.The Taxpayers Bill of Rights would absolutely not "lock in" the state on fiscal policy matters. If the state ran a surplus, the legislature could ask voters in a referendum for permission to retain and spend it. The positive impact of that would be greater dialog between legislators and voters about the proposed spending, the need for it, and what it would cost taxpayers - and incentive for legislators to craft proposals that would have broad appeal. Voters in Tennessee have traditionally demonstrated great common sense. They keep up with matters of state government as well as the citizens of any state. But there is a huge difference between a system where voters choose leaders and representatives and a system where voters actually use the ballot box to make routine governing decisions.We're not talking about letting voters make every "routine" governing decision. The legislature will still make 99.99999 percent of all governing decision in Tennessee state government if this amendment becomes law. They'll still decide things like when deer season begins and what the speed limit should be, how much to spend in education, how to reform TennCare, and whether or not nursing homes should have fire sprinklers and illegal aliens should have driver's licenses. As for the budget and taxes, the amendment will continue to allow the legislature keep and spend about 6 percent more revenue each year just as they do now, and only involve voters and referendums if there's a large surplus above that revenue growth. We're also talking about involving voters in the core decisions of a democracy - decisions about raising taxes or creating new taxes. The best ways for state lawmakers to respect the rights of Tennessee taxpayers are through doing their homework prior to all votes and explaining their decisions to their constituents afterwards - not handing off decisions directly to voters and calling it a ''right.''A weak ending to fact-free editorial of uninformed rhetoric. Notice that the paper apparently believes lawmakers are the highest authority in Tennessee. They aren't. In a democracy, government only has powers granted to it by The People via the constitution. Now, some people are seeking to amend the constitution - which is their constitutional right - and if lawmakers understand and respect the fact that it is The People who are sovereign, they'll pass the proposed amendment so it can be voted on by The People. As for the one state that already has such an amendment on the books, here are some facts The Tennessean was too busy fretting about the danger of letting The People have a voice in matters of taxes and spending to bother to dig up and report to you. Fact 1: By any reasonable economic measure Colorado's economy far out-performed Tennessee's since Colorado voters approved their Taxpayers Bill of Rights in 1992. Fact 2: Voters in Colorado have sometimes voted FOR higher taxes and voted FOR letting government spend surplus funds. Fact 3: Even former critics of the Taxpayers Bill of Rights in Colorado now say it has fostered greater citizen interest in and involvement in government, and fostered a greater sense of accountability and good fiscal management on the part of government while raising the level of the citizenry's trust in their government. You can find all of those facts and much, much more in this white paper I wrote more than a year ago, and in my extensive archive of Taxpayers Bill of Rights information and commentary. You could also have found it in a newspaper column I wrote that was published a little over a year ago. The Tennessean could have found it rather easily. They published it. Posted in Taxpayers Bill of Rights
| Linked By |
Please support HobbsOnline by doing your online shopping at Amazon.com Comments
Re your comments on TN Constitution- while I agree that we need a TABOR, the TN constitution differs from federal and many other state constitutions in that the Tennessee General Assembly's powers are unlimited, except for the express and implied limitations in the state and federal constitutions. The TN supreme court so held in 1823, in the case of Bell v. Bank of Nashville. If more Tenneseeans understood this, I think there would be more of a push for TABOR and other limitations as well. Posted by: Bill West at March 29, 2004 08:34 AM"The TN supreme court so held in 1823, in the case of Bell v. Bank of Nashville". My, God, 1823!! The process then is still the PROCESS NOW. No wonder it takes so long for action to come to completion. The U.S. govt. initiated, passed and enacted a "NO CALL LIST" and put it in to law in less than 4 months. We have to wait until 2006 for a vote on this and a "Homestead Exemption" law for seniors! It STILL might not get accomplished then. HOW BACKWARD, SAD AND TOTALLY UNBELIEVEABLE!! Post a comment
Comments Policy: Your comment is subject to deletion if it is off-topic or includes foul language or personal attack. Readers, please email me if you find comments that include egregious violations of this policy. Comments may not post immediately - do not post twice!
|
|||||||||||
The Tennessean has 