Dear All;
A week or so ago I sent a WSJ article on the Massachussets initiative to repeal taxes. The WSJ of course supported the repeal and said why. Now the NY Times says vote no and why - as usual the NY Times rounds up the usual suspects - you can't cut spending it'll hurt the poor and middle class.
They also conveniently use the example of Prop 13 and how much that hurt. I say pass the initiative and make the cuts. Then pass an initiaitve to cap property taxes and sales taxes. Cut spending not peoples incomes.
Ron Getty - SF Libertarian
Hostis res Publica
Morte ai Tiranni
Dum Spiro, Pugno
Courting Chaos in Massachusetts
Massachusetts Proposal Would Repeal Income Tax (September 28, 2008)
Next month, voters in Massachusetts will face a tempting ballot question: whether to eliminate the state’s income tax. This is a reckless proposal that would hurt all taxpayers. Voters should reject the idea.
Massachusetts’s residents currently pay a flat 5.3 percent levy on their income that provides the state with about 40 percent of its nearly $32 billion budget. Under the ballot proposal, the tax rate would be reduced in two stages. It would be cut in half on Jan. 1, 2009, and eliminated the following year. To say that this would create budget problems is an understatement.
The state’s Constitution, federal law and other obligations prohibit cuts in $12.5 billion in state spending — including aid to public schools, interest on the state’s debt and part of Medicaid. This means to make ends meet, the remaining $19.5 billion in annual spending would have to be slashed by 70 percent.
There’s no way that Massachusetts can cut that deeply, especially on short notice and especially now, as the economic downturn calls for more, not less, state spending. To keep spending at current levels, after eliminating the income tax, would require big increases in property and sales taxes, which, in turn, would hurt the poor and middle class.
A similar ballot question was offered six years ago and nearly passed. To make sure that the latest proposal goes nowhere, Massachusetts officials need to educate voters quickly as to just how wrong its proponents — chiefly the Center for Small Government, an anti-tax organization — really are. The organization claims, falsely, that the state budget is $47 billion, significantly higher than it is. That exaggeration allows its members to claim that eliminating the income tax is, proportionately, not so big a deal after all.
Legislating through popular ballot initiatives has been shown to be a blunt instrument in many states, most famously California. It is still suffering the consequences of Proposition 13, which gutted property taxes. Many Massachusetts voters have said they want to approve the proposal to send a message that they are dissatisfied with the Legislature. Surely they could find a less destructive way to communicate.