The Bangor Daily News opposed the Taxpayer Bill of Rights, and that’s fair enough. However, it’s also fair that the debate about how to stop tax hemorrhaging continue.

The thing which always struck you as strange about the opposition to TABOR was the assumption that it’s OK for taxable costs of public services to go up more than the rate of inflation, without sticky reviews, and to be paid for by people whose own incomes don’t keep up with inflation and who have to do handstands to avoid payroll cuts. That it’s OK for the $7-an-hour store sales clerk, say, to smile about her 17-cent pay raise, while paying for a $110 an hour increase in public wages and costs. That if there aren’t enough tax monies to cover the $110, public services will fold their tents and our sales clerk will suffer.

What’s wrong with this picture? Where may the dissatisfied look for answers to why it’s demanded that a 17-cent raise cover a $110 increase? Two possible place to look are Field of Rationalizations and River of Motives.

In the Field is the old saw about demand. People demand these services, and that drives up costs. It all sounds reasonable, until you notice the public purse clutchers are skewing supply and demand. An example: In the debates about public school funding, enrollments (demand) are down, and yet, we must increase the budget (supply), because they’ve discovered 15 kids need their own teacher, and classmates 16 through 25 are a distraction to “learning.” Another form of skewing is certification squeeze: Friends in the legislature require “certification” for certain jobs, only a few meet the requirements, and the squeeze inflates demand.

Another, and related, reason given why the public manager gets the big bucks, while the secretary wallows in what seems to him an economic mire, is training. This is the go-to-college-and-earn-more thing. The public manager, the public prosecutor, the caseworker, the teacher all have had years of training, costing thousands of dollars, and they deserve “consideration” for that. The secretary took a couple of semesters in office management, and isn’t driving a big car. Even if a college administrator, say, has what we used to admire as the public service spirit, he’s not likely to balk at asking the struggling students and their families without health care coverage to cover his health care premiums.

However reasonable these and other explanations seem, they don’t satisfy us as to why the rate of inflation or less is the correct index for some people, while exceeding that index, without sticky review, is correct for others. More, the soil used to bury the old soul of public service has sprouted weeds. The weed which skews public supply and demand. The weed of arrogance in public service. The week of, well, this public job pays well. Weed after weed after weed.

We make further discoveries about why those getting left behind must support those getting ahead, as we come to the River of Motives. This is not a new visit. We’ve seen it in everything from Sherlock Holmes to CSI: Look for the motives. So, which parties want the public trough kept full and filling.

Even before we get to the riverbank, we see those on the public payroll and those getting major income from public sector contracts climbing. There’s never been any secret about their motives. But who’s that climbing the bank a few yards down? By golly, it’s the INCs, and LTDs and LLCs – those big corporations which everybody and nobody owns – those bottom-liners.

Why are they here? Why will they climb the bank and crawl over to the public trough? Well – in case you hadn’t noticed what they started in the last century and show every sign of continuing – they have made a practice of shifting corporate costs to the public trough. A big chunk of what we call public schooling is tax-supported preparation for the jobs corporations have, and a market for the supplies and textbooks they produce. Lately, we have been made aware of how big corporations are shifting health care and other employee benefits to the public trough. Yes, these players don’t want to see TABOR come on.

The thing which always struck you as strange about the opposition to TABOR was the assumption that it’s OK for taxable costs of public services to go up more than the rate of inflation, without sticky reviews, and to be paid for by people whose own incomes don’t keep up with inflation, and who have to do handstands to avoid payroll cuts.

What’s wrong with this picture?

Ron Cuddy lives in Calais. A former teacher and news reporter, he is nearing retirement and the time of fixed income.