The MetroWest Daily News
Sunday, October 15, 2006
Roll back the income tax
Chip Ford / Guest Columnist
The votersí decision in 2000, by a 59-41 percent
margin, mandated an income tax rollback to 5 percent. This has become a
big part of the 2006 gubernatorial campaign so itís time to shed some
critical light on the topic.
Some candidates who would be governor want to put the voters off yet
again. This has been its policy since 1989, when the Legislature
promised that its increase would be only "temporary."
We taxpayers know too well that tax cuts are temporary, but tax
increases are forever, which is why Citizens for Limited Taxation
opposed it 17 years ago.
But here we are, again, so letís look at this from the perspective of
the losers in the 2000 election. Let us pretend that democracy and votes
really matter here for a few moments, just for the sake of debate.
Weíre told that an alternative to the votersí income tax rollback is
property tax relief. As the drafters and ballot campaign proponents of
Proposition 2Ĺ in 1980, we stand behind none
in concern for property taxpayers. More state revenue sent to
municipalities isnít a bad idea on its own, but unfortunately, that
taxpayer cash has often translated to more money for public employee
unions and other profligacies, and eventually higher property taxes, on
top of the high state income tax.
When the cyclical national economy inevitably slows, where does our
Legislature cut much of its spending? Local aid, because it has the most
Why? Because itís easier than setting sensible state priorities and
cutting off traditional constituencies and legislatorsí own privileges.
So itís up to voters to determine how much -- or how little -- they can
live with concerning local government services provided from that
missing local aid.
Whatís wrong with this? The state is consuming too much of "the pie,"
taking too much from taxpayersí pockets to begin with.
Thus we have continual Prop 2Ĺ override campaigns and often
voter-mandated higher property taxes to provide services which we
rightfully expect from government, from the money we already provide to
it for those.
So the gubernatorial candidates who would allegedly relieve our property
tax burden by ignoring a voter mandate are going to do this -- how? By
giving more of our money to municipal government to squander?
Before you buy this latest promise, ask for a plan that will actually
cut your property tax, and see what they say.
Chip Ford is director of operations for Citizens for Limited
Return to top
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes
only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml