I neglected to link to Katherine Kersten's column about taxes in a previous post, so let's correct that here. Kersten specializes in the out-of-context "quote," and don't want to be guilty of the same thing.
She simply fired a knee-jerk salvo at taxes in general, so her position doesn't require keen analysis of the actual proposals. But suppose she were interested in a serious critique of the DFL bills?
What do these taxes have in common, besides Kerstenian contempt?
- Gas tax, license fees and wheelage taxes
- Metro-area sales tax
- State sales tax
- Tax on cigarettes and chewing tobacco
Very good. They are all regressive, that is, people with lower incomes pay proportionately more of their incomes under such revenue schemes. Low and moderate income households already pay more of their incomes in taxes and fees than high earners pay. And in fact, all of the DFL bills Kersten curses would increase the tax gap, unless there are credits or refunds for low earners.
Kersten could've blasted the bills for decreasing fairness — and perhaps have reached some people who don't normally agree with her.
The Pioneer Press also offers a criticism that a serious Kersten could have made.
The Legislative session has only just begun, and many of the DFL plans are in their infancy. More details may improve the picture. But based on what we have seen so far, the DFL seems to be overpromised and underfocused, with something for everyone and little interest in doing things differently.
[...]
Few hard numbers have been attached to these early proposals. DFLers seem convinced that they will reap hundreds of millions from "tax compliance,'' meaning better tax collecting. At the same time, the state surplus is not large enough to accommodate huge new permanent programs.
This argues for the DFL to focus on one or two top priorities rather than promising to deliver on everything — especially when everything requires millions more in state spending and higher taxes.
And finally, we have not heard much from Democrats that suggests a passion for accountability and measuring progress — in determining, for example, whether more money for education will result in better education. The voters who elected them want and need these assurances, and we hope to get them as the session progresses.
– "Big spending doesn't always yield big ideas," St. Paul Pioneer Press
Fairness. Focus. Accountability. Measurement. Results.
These are all legitimate concerns that should be worked out in the legislative process. If they aren't, the the anti-tax reactionaries like Kersten may be right — even if for the wrong reasons.
