The life of retirement on this quiet street provides an opportunity for time to reflect on some of the great political thinking of our times as well as some of the not-so-great ideas. State legislators can be counted on as great thought-fodder producers. They’ll be back in the big-time fodder-manufacturing business in about, hmmmm, ten weeks. Personal experience has led to the observation that selective self-righteousness always produces fodder. The quality of the fodder sometimes can be measured by a Latin phrase.
Latin does not often spring to the mind of the journalist, but we recall that the introduction of a couple of proposals during the 2015 legislature sent us scurrying to our source for Latin expressions. It was the first session in which we were not present to subtly suggest some ideas were bereft of intelligence.
One proposal could have eliminated the sales tax that provides the bulk of funds for the Missouri Department of Conservation. The department wanted to know where the state would find the $110 million dollars to pay many department’s bills if voters kill the tax. The representative didn’t have an answer to that question.
On the other side of the rotunda, a senator wanted to eliminate hunting and fishing permits because, he said, Missourians already pay the conservation sales tax and charging a fee to hunt the critters the conservation sales tax provides habitat for is double taxation. That’s another $40 million dollars the department would not have so it can pay for all of the stuff it does.
Neither of these fellows suggested how the department could continue to function if it lost $150 million dollars a year, about 85% of its funding. And if you think the legislature would look very hard for a new funding source, you don’t have a clue about the ideology of the legislative majority.
For example, the legislature started fiscal year 2014-2015 more than $400 million short of the amount it promised public schools they’d be getting by then under the school funding formula. Do you really think a legislature that lacks interest in meeting its responsibility to pay for the education of Missouri’s children would show any great interest in finding new money to take care of deer, turkeys, otters, elk, prairie chickens, trout, bats, hellbenders, glades, and what little prairie there is left in Missouri?
The legislature solved the problem of funding shortages for education. It rewrote the formula to reduce its responsibility.
We think the Latin phrase that tops our discussion today means “reduction to absurdity,” a concept that goes back to the great Greek seekers of logical thought who tested the truth of an argument by seeing if it remained valid when extended to the point of absurdity.
The representative who wanted an end to the conservation sales tax said it’s not “good politics” to have a funding source “that never has an end to it.” He wanted a statewide vote on whether to continue it.
Hmmmm. Let’s extend his argument. Had he thought of a proposal for a statewide vote on the income tax? The state sales tax? The cigarette tax? The alcoholic beverage tax? Since the Farm Bureau jumped to support his bill back then, we wondered if the same standard should apply to the soil conservation and state parks sales tax. Those taxes don’t seem to have any ends either.
There were all kinds of opportunities for “good politics” then. And if we listen to our legislators who continue to argue that lower taxes will mean more businesses will come to Missouri and create all kinds of new jobs, the expansion of the “good politics” plan could create a business development expansion that would make the Oklahoma Land Rush look like a small-town homecoming parade.
Now, let’s look at the senator’s double taxation argument. There are all kinds of double taxation that also should be eliminated under his reasoning. We pay a sales tax for the opportunity to own our cars and our trucks and our snowmobiles and our wave runners. But then we pay a second tax so we can stick a license plate on the front and the rear of the things, or put decals on the side. And then we have to pay a third tax if we want to put fuel in them. And property taxes, don’t forget them. Forget double taxation. We’re talking about QUADRUPLE taxation!!!
We pay property taxes that help finance our public schools and universities. But then we have to pay laboratory fees, sports fees, band fees—and we have to pay to buy or rent textbooks so our children can learn something in the schools we’ve already paid taxes to support, sometimes higher taxes because the legislature continues to refuse to meet its self-imposed obligations. Clearly, those who use our schools are being taxed every bit as unfairly as the people with guns and bows and arrows are being taxed (don’t forget the sales taxes they paid to buy those things) to use the woods where the deer and the turkey play.
We pay taxes to finance our court systems at the county level. And then we pay additional tax after tax after tax hidden behind the phrase “court fees” for various and sundry parts of the judicial system. People who make mistakes that put them in court are being double-taxed. In fact, they’re being taxed in multiples, not just as a double tax.
There are astonishing possibilities for even more “good government” in other categories we haven’t touched on here.
The Representative withdrew his proposal fairly soon after introducing it after publicity about it raised big questions about the devastation it would cause. The Senator’s bill underwent major modification and was reduced to something that applied only to people living outside Missouri but who owned at least 75 acres here, which doesn’t exactly peg the logic meter.
We realize it’s never fair to criticize the efforts of others if the critic has no alternatives to offer. In that spirit is a suggestion that lawmakers should avoid such pennyy-ante tax and fee proposals and focus on a broader “good government” system that lets taxpayers decide how to spend their money—because as we have often heard some legislators say, the taxpayers know how to spend their money better than government does. For example:
—-A law that designates each month as “pledge month” for certain government programs and services. Let Missourians phone in amounts they would pledge for those services. January could be Department of Natural Resources and Department of Public Safety Pledge Month. February could be Department of Transportation and Department of Agriculture Pledge Month. And so it would go. We could eliminate an entire large state agency under this plan and that would make advocates of smaller government ecstatic. We wouldn’t need a Department of Revenue any more. We could set up a smaller Office of Pledge Compliance and save a bundle.
We wonder how things would go for Legislature and Elected Statewide Officials Pledge Month.
Or perhaps we could have a statewide car wash for the Highway Patrol weekend. A Statewide Social Services Bake Sale weekend. A statewide garage sale for Mental Health.
Take a Conservation Agent to Lunch Day at the venison chili parish picnic.
See, folks, all the great thinking is not exclusive to legislative chambers when it comes to tax policy. Any of us can think of things those people think about.