You know how sometimes you invite over people you really want to impress but then somehow you forget they’re coming so when your spouse lets them in the kitchen’s a mess, the laundry’s in piles and you’re conked on the couch? Me neither. Still, I could sympathize with state government officials when nine Iraqis, as part of a State Department tour, visited Maine this week to observe the workings of democracy via representative government before we had a chance to decide what to make of it ourselves.

The Iraqis, thankfully, were not here to learn how to run a democracy, only to hear how one communicates with the public. And while I’m sure the visitors were polite about it, they couldn’t have helped noticing the state’s governmental house is not quite in order. I suppose we’ll know our visitors were taking notes if in a couple of years their country begins cursing itself for having the second highest tax burden in the Middle East.

For their sake, I hope the Arabic translation of “Palesky” is something like “Paul Wolfowitz is wrong about this too.”

Palesky, the 1 percent property tax cap, is failing, according to polls, and I hope it does (but not by such a large amount that it justifies inertia) because it is fiscal policy the way Shock and Awe is foreign policy: Lots of bang without as much benefit as one would hope.

Whether this revenue cap succeeds or fails, however, the next referendum question is already on its way. This one is a spending cap, for which petitions will be circulating Tuesday. It is a statutory, not a constitutional, change that would allow public spending to rise based on the state’s population growth and an inflation increase measured by the Consumer Price Index. To exceed the spending cap would require approval from two-thirds of the Legislature and the consent of voters at the next election.

I am drawn to a spending cap for the state because, like you, I already live under one. You and I base ours on the amount in our checking accounts – although a whole bunch of us, if the bankruptcy numbers are correct, don’t have our caps on straight. But as much as I like the spending-cap idea and prefer it to the Palesky proposal, I am uncertain about passing it in a referendum, where its rough spots can’t be worn smooth.

For instance, there is this business about using the Consumer Price Index. Most people are familiar with the CPI, which is produced by the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics, but for those who aren’t, here’s how the bureau describes it: “The CPI reflects spending patterns for each of two population groups: All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) and Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W). … Not included in the CPI are the spending patterns of persons living in rural non-metropolitan areas, farm families, persons in the Armed Forces, and those in institutions, such as prisons and mental hospitals.” There’s Maine for you – an urban haven of clerical workers.

And what about having voters decide whether a tax can be increased? I don’t know yet whether that’s a good idea, but I’m pretty sure Article IX, Section 9 of the state’s constitution says, “The Legislature shall never, in any manner, suspend or surrender the power of taxation.” Doesn’t giving voters the authority to decide whether to increase a tax sort of, um, surrender the power of taxation and wouldn’t that make the question unconstitutional?

But the main reason to be simultaneously supportive and suspect of this question is that all over Maine there are legislative candidates right now committing themselves to lead in a strong and far-sighted way. About half of them will charge into the Legislature and, chances are excellent, fail to pass long-term tax relief. I hope this year will be different, but the multitude of forces against reform are the same now as before, so a different outcome is unlikely unless the legislators are themselves reformed. Maine will continue to get citizen tax initiatives as long as that reform is wanting, and it will eventually get what it deserves.

I have two suggestions for those about to get elected to the State House. For Democrats: The public is thoroughly convinced it wants a tax cut, not just a tax shift. You can argue why voters don’t really know what they want, but a major cut is coming, if not with Palesky then with spending caps or with the tax plan the Chamber of Commerce announced in September, the Uber Homestead plan of the Maine Citizen Leadership Fund or, who knows, a plan to tax only elected officials. If you want to influence this process, lead it by speaking with a single voice in favor of a substantial cut.

For Republicans, whether you win the Senate or not, you’ll be in the minority in Augusta; you need Democratic support, which means you must include in your reform something that – yuck! – Democrats will support. The greatest political opportunity in Augusta this winter is for the Republican who can write a tax-reform plan that attracts a dozen or more Democrats, circumventing the governor’s office and showing that the GOP is the party of results. Lead and glory will follow.

The Iraqi delegation, however, likely will not. After their brief visit here, they moved on to New York City and Philadelphia. Perhaps they could let us know how the CPI is doing among the urban clerical workers.

Todd Benoit is the editorial page editor of the Bangor Daily News.