Lawyer’s take on TABOR: not in our state

When I first heard about the Taxpayer Bill of Rights, I thought it was a bad idea. So, as I lawyer, I did what I do for a profession. I researched, listened to the pros and cons, and pulled a copy of the proposed legislation off the Internet. Now that I have read it and analyzed its implications, I think it is a horrible idea.

I see two major problems with TABOR. One is that it tricks the public into thinking that state spending rather than federal waste is the problem. The second is that the law essentially eliminates the state or local government’s ability to address the complex needs of communities, especially in times of crisis.

At the outset, people are being tricked into thinking that state spending is the problem. Is it really the investments that are paid for with state budgets that make us upset? Quality schools, safe roads and bridges, clean water and air, investments in higher education and research and development, social services for the needy, safety net programs for our elders? Really, are we upset about these? Do we want these services cut? I would imagine that most people would say no.

I agree, however, that we should be upset when our money is being wasted. But, we need to blame the right culprit. Let us look at how our federal taxes are being spent.

First, the war in Iraq, which was initiated based upon lies and distortions, is costing around $4.5 billion a month in military operating costs, not including procurement of new weapons and equipment. The war has cost more than $200 billion to date and there are estimates that its costs will top $2 trillion. These figures go hand-in-hand with the staggering increase in profits made by Halliburton, the defense contractor with no-bid contracts in Iraq and close ties to Vice President Dick Cheney.

The waste and inequities in federal spending and taxation go on and on. The millions of dollars of waste in a federal loan program for companies allegedly affected by Sept. 11 is another example. The American public has also been bilked by no-bid contracts for companies involved in the Katrina clean-up.

The federal government is facing more than $8 trillion in debt that has been caused by reckless fiscal policy, an expensive war and tax cuts for large corporations and the very wealthy. As a result, Maine and other states have lost millions of dollars in federal assistance to fund schools, higher education, low-income fuel assistance, environmental initiatives, the homeless and uninsured, among other programs.

Yes, I am angry about taxes. But it is disrespect of the middle class, disregard of the states, and the wastefulness and cronyism by the Bush administration and the Republican Congress that anger me, not the money that I invest in taxes in Maine.

The next step is to take a hard look at the TABOR formula and its real-life implications. Under TABOR, budget increases are based upon a complicated formula of inflation and population increase. What the law fails to explain is how the population of a municipality or state is going to be determined from year to year. Further, the formula does not take into account areas in which populations might decrease, but might become more costly (with an aging population, some communities might find a decrease in population but an increase in costs). Additionally, the calculation of inflation seems arbitrary as it is based upon a federal standard that might have no bearing on Maine.

The override process is draconian. It requires a two-thirds vote of the legislative body (whether it’s the Legislature in Maine or local governments) to begin the process to amend the budget. This means that if the proponents of an override don’t reach a super majority, the minority wins. Does that sound democratic?

But that is not the worst of it. If, by chance, there is a two-thirds vote by the legislative body to increase the budget on a certain item, the next step is to take it to a public vote. Imagine the cost of that?

Here are two real examples why TABOR is a horrible idea. In the past year, the federal government passed the Medicare D law, which was touted as a drug plan for the elderly population, but in fact was a gift to the large pharmaceuticals. Not only is the plan extremely confusing, but the federal government failed in its administration of the program and thousands of Maine seniors went without needed medications. Gov. John Baldacci stepped in with an emergency plan that infused close to $6 million to literally save these seniors’ lives. If TABOR had been in effect, this swift action would have been impossible.

Another similar story concerns Low Income Home Energy Assistance from which the federal government cut more than $2 million in funds earmarked for Maine in 2006. Again, the state had to step in and infuse money into that program to keep Mainers warm. This would not have been possible under TABOR.

I suggest the people of this state look closely at Colorado, the only state that passed a TABOR resolution. TABOR so choked Colorado of needed services that the public (Republicans and Democrats) voted to suspend it after its fifth year. Why in the world would we want to import a law that has failed dismally elsewhere?

Beth George is a lawyer in Portland.