TABOR-ites try to ignore Colorado
Greg Stanford's Sunday column in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel says that TABOR backers who fail to learn from Colorado's bad experiences may be doomed to repeat them.
Supporters of the new constitutional amendment, Bride of TABOR, insist this one is nothing like Colorado's. Then they defend what happened in Colorado and say it all worked great.
Stanford says:
Colorado squeezed its state finances into a straitjacket called the taxpayer bill of rights in 1992. TABOR, a constitutional amendment limiting the growth in public revenue, worked even better than advertised. Government shrunk drastically.Read the rest.
There were side effects, however - fiscal and political. First, services - health care, roads and bridges, schools and universities - worsened. Next, for the first time in 30 years, the Republican Legislature turned Democratic.
TABOR die-hards pooh-pooh the link between revenue caps, a Republican signature, and the Democratic takeover. Yet a crowning achievement of the new Legislature was a voter-approved suspension of TABOR.
So what lessons have Wisconsin Republicans drawn from the Colorado debacle? Amazingly, enact TABOR or something like it.
posted by xoff @ 3:01 PM
2 comments
2 Comments:
I know lots of people in Colorado. They all think that TABOR has been a disaster for the quality of life in their quickly growing state. A constitutional amendment to cap spending is a public admission by the Republicans that they can't stop themselves from spending.
How can 1999 seem like an eternity ago?
Speech to Bethel Lutheran Men’s Group, Madison
March 16, 1999
Todd A. Berry, President, Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance
What is an economist, a tax guy, and a bean counter, doing talking to a bunch of church folks? It is a good question. After all, what is an economist? Someone who has called 13 of the last six recessions, someone God created to make weather forecasters look good.
Nevertheless, it’s my job as President of the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance to try to better educate the press and public, students, teachers and business people about state and local finances—how Wisconsin government works, how it taxes, how it spends. We do this in hopes that reliable, factual information will raise public knowledge, encourage citizen involvement, and promote informed, civil discourse on public issues.
Why? (Among other reasons…)
The New Age of Professional Politics
Why do we do this when it is so contrary to the way we manage our household budgets? My explanation lies in a fundamental change in Wisconsin politics over the past 30 or 40 years. Today’s legislature is relatively well paid and well staffed. The benefits are excellent. The legislature considers itself a full-time, professional body, one of about 10 or 12 in the nation. Open a state Blue Book and read the legislative biographies; you will find the leading occupation of our lawmakers is not farmer, lawyer, teacher, or small business owner, as it once was. The primary occupation is full-time legislator.
This orientation has fundamentally changed the way governors and lawmakers plan for the future. In an era of rapid and continuous change, contingency planning is a must. We have to think five, ten, fifteen years out. However, for the full-time lawmaker, who views his or her job as a professional career, the time horizon is more like ten or fifteen months. There is always an election coming. Moreover, if lawmaking is your job, you understandably worry about next month or next year, not the next decade. The result? Little planning.
I have shared with you several basic "truths" that I believe help to understand why Wisconsin is a high-tax state. State taxing combined with local dependency on state-collected revenues, the lack of long-range planning, and the advent of the career lawmaker are three I would like to discuss further.
On reflection, some of the factors that explain why Wisconsin is a high tax state—the disconnect between state taxing and local service delivery and the professionalization of politics—may have something to do with our general civic health, as well. From the perspective of the career politician, the name of the game is control. Whether it’s the tax system, the economy or state aids to localities; state agencies, the UW or local government, full-time legislators want a say in raising revenues, running agencies and controlling purse strings and programs. Whether they are in Madison or Washington, they prefer to make decisions, rather than leave them to Muscoda or Wausau.
Part of the reason is obvious: When lawmaking is a full-time job, it is taken seriously. Many of the people who involve themselves in public life genuinely want to have an impact.
Another explanation is more cynical: The full-time legislator wants to stay in office and does that by controlling the policies and monies that enable one to reward friends, punish enemies and advance one’s career. Self-preservation requires this. Increasingly, it also seems to require continual fund raising, a large campaign budget and nasty TV ads.
Think about it. If the name of the "game" is control and career, doesn’t that also explain . . . state mandates? State and federal meddling in local affairs? Endless tinkering with the tax code? And the shift of power from town halls or school districts to state or national capitals?
The professionals in Washington are moving into issues once thought entirely the province of local government – policing, teachers, and so on. And Madison has chosen to involve itself in local issues as diverse as public employee residency and benefits, pesticide use, municipal gun ordinances and school testing. The state legislature awards $6b in state aid to local units each year. Remember: this is 60% of the state budget and often the leading source of local revenue. Certainly, it acts to consolidate and build state influence over local decisions.
As we stand at the end of the century and look back, we see that state and federal taxes have risen inexorably and are now at their largest share of GNP in national history. Citizens are confused by the tax code and alienated from state and federal governments that are too far away, making too many decisions. They do not know whom to hold accountable. And without accountability, democracy faces trouble.
Why become involved in local government when the money is controlled from Madison or Washington? Why write letters or place telephone calls to protest high taxes or poor services, if finger pointing and blame shifting is the name of the game? Unhappy with high property taxes, you write your mayor or school board. They tell you they have no control and complain of inadequate state aid. They suggest you write your state legislator, which you do only to be told: The state does not levy property taxes; it is a local function.
Post a Comment
<< Home