Monday, February 19, 2007

Locals Paying the Price for Gibbons' No-Tax Pledge?

For better or for worse, the tone of this year's legislative debate over Nevada taxes has been dominated by Governor Jim Gibbons' pledge not to hike state taxes. The Reno Gazette Journal cites one frustrated local official:
"We see the needs. We need more police on the street for public safety. The school district needs money to build schools. But both will have a tough road because this is a no-new-taxes session."
Gov. Gibbons has staked out a clear (arguably too clear) position on this issue:
The first-term Republican governor has vowed to veto any tax increases, although
he took time to meet with delegations from the school district and the cities to hear their cases.
He also said he would not stand in the way of new taxes if Nevadans show that they supported new taxes to pay for better roads and highways. City officials can only hope Gibbons takes the same approach if Reno and Sparks citizens approve the sales tax increase with a vote.
"As I explained to both parties, I am opposed to any fee or tax increases on a state
level," Gibbons said. "I told them that I would work with them to assist in other ways to find a means by which they can meet those needs, but I cannot support increasing taxes on homeowners from a state level."
This isn't, of course, the most politically difficult position in the world to take. At least some voters around the nation are still suckered in by candidates who pledge to conduct fiscal policy with one hand tied behind their back. And Gibbons knows full well that locals governments' hand will be forced. They'll have to come up with the money somehow, and however they do it, he'll be able to brag that he had no part in that tax hike.

But when voters are confronted with the choice to either hike taxes on sales or real estate transactions, as Washoe County is currently considering, or cut essential services, they should remember that they've been given this lovely choice as a direct consequence of state leaders' unwillingness to look tax issues squarely in the face.

No comments: