Among the controversial referendum questions Maine voters will consider on Nov. 3 is Question 4: “An Act to Provide Tax Relief.” The bill, also known as TABOR II, or the Tax Payer’s Bill of Rights, is a tax-cap that would limit state and local spending.
Supporters of TABOR say it puts the power of appropriation back into the hands of taxpayers. Opponents say it would decimate public funding of schools and other critical programs.
If enacted, TABOR would lock in the growth of tax revenues to growth of population and inflation. If more tax money were needed for a specific project or program, Mainers would vote to fund it in a referendum. Opponents of TABOR say this is a costly, inefficient procedure that strips elected officials of their power. The average taxpayer would have to be much more involved to make informed choices, they say.
TABOR was rejected in Maine in 2006, which David Crocker, state chair of TABOR Now, says was due to the influence of entrenched political interests and out of state money. There was also “a good deal of voter education necessary,” during the last crusade, he said.
“The Maine State Employees Union, all of the unions, the Maine People’s Alliance, the AARP, all of the people who you see at the State House year in and year out,” lobbied against the initiative, he said. “You see the same cast of characters ganging up on us this time.”
Crocker says the financial crash of 2008 and its aftermath revived the TABOR cause. This year will be different, he says.
“What’s different is that people know they’ve been lied to pretty much continuously since 2006. They’ve seen our financial state go from bad to worse. They’ve seen the wild spending nationally and they’ve seen what it’s done to Maine and I think they’re ready to put their foot down.”
“Maine’s economy is collapsed and [has been] collapsing for a while,” he added. “The only way to reverse that trend and to reverse the negative demographic trend that’s underway is to build a private sector economy where people actually have jobs and income and can stay.”
Among TABOR’s opponents is Charlie Colgan, professor of public policy and management at the Muskie School and former Maine state economist. Colgan says TABOR would freeze state funding at recession levels, which makes little economic sense.
“In the Maine TABOR system, you can’t spend anymore, it doesn’t matter what your revenues are,” he said. The argument that state spending and taxation has gotten out of control isn’t accurate he says, because the rise in taxation between 2000 and 2007 was a result of an economic boom that only recently ended.
“Actually, if you look at the data, state spending has been going up because until 2008, the economy was expanding,” he said. “The TABOR people object to the idea that spending goes up as the economy expands. They fundamentally object to that.”
“It makes economic sense only if you believe you shouldn’t have to pay taxes that you don’t vote for,” he added. “Will that make Maine a better place? I kind of doubt it.
The classic example that TABOR’s opponents give is the effect the bill’s passage had on Colorado’s education system. After TABOR was enacted there in 1992, state funding for schools dropped, along with K-12 test scores. Colorado went from 35th in the nation for education to 49th, which TABOR II opponents say was the direct result of diminished funding.
But Crocker says it’s not the amount of money spent, but what it buys that’s important. “The argument is made that TABOR is going to devastate education. It’s really not the case,” he said. “It doesn’t affect budgeting priorities. In Colorado, [after TABOR passed] K-12 funding went up every single year. Maine throws an extraordinary amount of money at education. The question is: what are we getting for our money? With all the extra money that Maine spends, at best they can get a tie with Colorado.”
But Colgan, and many other civic groups and local politicians maintain TABOR was the wrong choice for Colorado.
“There was some truth in that, but that’s cutting butter with a chain saw,” he said. “The way to fix that problem was to get the sprawl under control, not to constitutionally limit spending or revenues.”
To read the ballot questions in full, go to http://maine.gov/sos/cec/elec/upcoming.html.
To learn more about TABOR Now’s position, go to http://www.tabornow.com/.
To learn more about the Maine Center for Economic Policy’s, a group that opposes TABOR, go to http://www.mecep.org/tabor.asp.