TABOR reared it’s ugly head again at the State Capitol earlier this month. This time, the Republicans want to fast track this amendment through the Legislature so there is little time for debate and education among the masses. It’s obvious this is their plan, since they held a so-called hearing on Feb. 15, by invitation only. There may be a public hearing on the issue down the road, according to one of the bills authors, but I’m sure the sponsors will try to keep it under covers as long as possible. Heaven forbid that people understand and have the opportunity to speak out on what they might have to vote for down the line. Not only do the Republicans want to rush it through, but, I’m assuming they’re campaign support from the evil empire of Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce (WMC) is riding on their performances in getting this passed.
The authors claim that this is different than the original TABOR, so the decision was made to rename it as the Taxpayer’s Protection Act. They also want to separate it from all the negative connections to Colorado’s flawed and dying TABOR (see my earlier posting on this). Taxpayer’s Protection (TP) is actually a great name, since this belongs in the toilet anyhow. The bottom line is, no matter what it is called, this is still the same design that will essentially shrink the size of government and slowly erode the services that the citizens of Wisconsin have grown to expect. But, what difference will that make, in 20 years, we’ll all be rolling in the dough because we won’t be paying those high taxes. Oh goody, goody. No one will be around to pick up the garbage, plow the streets or renew your drivers license, but we’ll all have lots of money.
A professor, Andrew Reschovsky, at the LaFollette School of Public Affairs at UW Madison did a quick study of how the amendment would have affected state revenues if it had been enacted 20 years ago. According to his work, state revenues in 2005 would have been $5.2 billion lower than they actually were. This is more than the state spent on the UW System and medical assistance combined in the current budget. So where would this money probably be cut from in the future? I can only guess things like K-12 education, the University and medical assistance, in addition to the above mentioned services.
Reschovsky’s study concluded, as presented in an editorial in the Marshfield New Herald, “Property taxes aren’t out of control, and neither is government spending in relation to personal income, state and local government taxes are lower today than they were 10 and even 20 years ago.”
According to an article in the Capital Times that discussed Reschovsky’s study, Senator Glen Grothman, one of the authors of the new TABOR amendment, doesn’t really have an idea how much savings the amendments limits would create. I guess he just knows that things would be better than what they are now. In fact, at this point, the Legislative Fiscal Bureau can’t even predict the affect of the amendment. So, we should just trust Grothman, WMC and company and vote for something that could send Wisconsin into the dumper (or toilet if you will).
An editorial in The Marshfield News Herald shares, “Because TPA would limit growth of government revenue to inflation, it would result in ever-shrinking government services. Why? Inflation measures increasing prices among all consumer goods and services—groceries, day care, refrigerators, clothes, you name it.”
“But government spends most of its money on goods and services such as health insurance and gasoline, with price increases that have far outpaced inflation. So TABOR would result in massive program cuts.”
“’(The) impact of the amendment would be to continuously reduce the level and quality of public services provided to the residents of Wisconsin,’ Reschovsky concluded.”
In addition to the economic piece of the Taxpayers Protection Act, the amendmenet also includes a change in the State Constitution to only require one vote in the legislature before a Constitutional Amendment is voted on by the voters. Fortunately, that won’t be in place for the vote on the TABOR/TP. This proposed change would make it easier to put what should be legislation into the Constitution, handily sidestepping the Governor’s veto ability. So, if you can’t get an override on Concealed Carry, what the heck, just put it in the State Constitution.
On the local scene, Senator Carol Roessler is one of the major fencesitters on the TABOR amendment. To date, she has not committed one way or another on which way she leans on this issue. You can bet Sen. Roessler will be getting a lot of pressure from constituents to vote against this flawed plan.
Stay tuned…..the fun is just beginning.
