California’s new legislative analyst issued a report yesterday in which he suggested that legislators might want to place a tax increase on the ballot. Quickly the idea has been embraced by some as some sort of epiphany – a breakthrough on how to get past the political impasse on how to solve the state’s overspending-induced financial crisis.
Not so fast. The legislative analyst (the one who, along with his predecessor, has joined in the “we need new taxes” chorus) seems to be drawing the most bizarre of trivial distinctions – the difference between voting to raise taxes, and casting your vote to place a tax increase on the ballot. That may seem like a huge difference to some liberal with a razor sharp focus on what is always the goal – increasing the size of government. But from where I sit on the conservative – libertarian side of the isle, they are one and the same.
We live in a democratic (small d) republic, we the citizenry select, through elections, people to represent them in office, and make decisions. Sure, California has a rich history of use of the ballot box for governing – but frankly the most significant and important policies voted on by the people of this state have been placed on the ballot outside of the legislative process, usually in response to inaction or egregious action by the state government.
State legislators who believe that government should be limited, and who believe that raising taxes, any taxes, is a dumb idea during the best of times let alone during our parade into a recession, must use every means at their disposal to stop this tragic outcome. Of course that means voting against enacting tax increases. But it also means voting against placing those tax increases on the ballot. If the advocates of bigger government and punishing California taxpayers for the chronic overspending of State Capitol liberals is a high enough priority, the public employee unions and other advocates of such a scheme have more than enough financial resources to place their proposals, through the initiative process themselves.
So from where I sit, the distinction drawn between voting to raise taxes, and voting to place them on the ballot – well, it’s indistinguishable. But perhaps it isn’t my opinion that counts. I would like to see a state legislator who did the latter try to convince voters that this wasn’t the equivalent of voting for the increase itself.
In the end, the responsible way to resolve this crisis is to make spending reductions until we meet the state’s projected revenues. Will this be easy? No. In fact it will be quite difficult. In some areas we may be talking about redefining the role of state government. It may mean elimination of current functions – and elimination of a lot of public jobs. While the poor economy is certainly to blame for a lot of our state’s revenue shortfalls, those frustrated with the cuts necessary for state government to live within its means should really look to the big spenders under the Capitol dome. Their voracious appetite to expand the scope of our state government has let us right to the brink. Shame on them.
Californian’s continue to be well-served by those legislators in Sacramento who have drawn the line in the sand, and refused to let these big-spenders tax their way out of this overspending induced crisis. Democrats’ refusal to agree to a real, permanent spending cap makes their quest for higher taxes the equivalent of the proverbial attempt to bail out the sinking boat without plugging the gaping hole in its hull.
Care to read comments, or make your own about today’s Daily Commentary?
Just click here to go to the FR Weblog, where this Commentary has its own blog post, and where you can read and make comments.