| |
From the Executive Director
|
The first installment of the Beacon Hill Institute's State of the Household survey shows a "disconnect" between the Commonwealth's reputation as a tax-and-spend bellwether state and the electorate's preference for market-oriented, tax-cutting solutions.
On the issues of tax cuts, state budget surpluses, charitable giving tax credits and subsidizing a football stadium, the public comes down on the side of less government.
The political history of the Commonwealth is replete with voters bucking the mainstream. Massachusetts voted twice for Ronald Reagan and, in 1980, implemented Proposition 2 1/2. Ten years later it propelled onto the national stage a governor who for six years kept to his no-new-taxes pledge. At the same time, the electorate chose a treasurer who has earned a reputation for increasing efficiency in state government. Massachusetts has also turned back five attempts to install a graduated income tax.
Consider our finding that Massachusetts residents strongly favor a tax credit for contributions to charities that help the poor. More than 80% of the respondents voiced support for a $200 state tax credit. This suggests sympathy on the part of Massachusetts residents for an approach to welfare that puts them, rather than government, in charge of how their welfare dollars are spent.
At press time, there are indications that proponents of an initiative to remove tolls from Massachusetts roads and tunnels and from the Tobin bridge are well on their way to obtaining the signatures necessary to put the initiative on the November 1998 ballot. Our survey found that Massachusetts residents support this initiative by a slim margin. How they will vote, if the initiative reaches the ballot, appears to depend on what they learn in the course of the forthcoming debate over tolls. We will be watching and contributing to this debate in the months to come.
Our poll concerning improvements at Foxboro Stadium shows that voters oppose, by a 63% to 30% margin, the idea of issuing state-backed bonds in order to pay for these improvements. These results reflect the extensive economic literature showing tax-supported expenditures on professional sports stadiums to be a poor investment. As taxpayers, sports fans can get a better return on their own saving than they can on moneys handed over to elected officials and, ultimately to the players, in the form of higher salaries. Taxpayers shouldn't, to paraphrase one critic, become Major League losers.
The conventional wisdom says that, while the people want tax cuts, those "in the know" know better. Well, the people of Massachusetts certainly do want tax cuts. When we asked if they wanted the tax on earned income cut from 5.95% to 5.00%, the response was 78% in favor and 17% opposed.
The question whether a given dollar of family income should be applied to the needs of society requires attention also to the needs of the family.
Siding with the minority, one opinion editorial writer in the Boston Heraldsaid, "There's a simple argument that it's always better for people to spend their own money than to have the government spend it for them. This assumes the government does nothing of value.... We shouldn't rush into these large-scale tax cuts under the false assumption that we can have big tax cuts with no impact on state services."
Here is a splendid example of standard Massachusetts wisdom as dispensed by "those in the know"Ð the cogniscenti whose job it is to disabuse the uninitiated of their inclination to maintain control over their own money.
Observe, however, the dilemma of families with young children in which both parents work. It is not uncommon for one parent to work, in effect, mainly to pay the family's taxes. Would the dilemma of these families be lessened if they didn't have to pay for quite so many "state services"? Would they, in effect, have more control over their lives?While the cogniscenti might prefer to ignore questions like these, legislators cannot. The question whether a given dollar of family income should be applied to the needs of society requires attention also to the needs of the family. Future research and poll results will shed more light on the state of the Massachusetts household. Stay tuned for the latest results.
NewsLink is the quarterly newsletter of the Beacon Hill Institute for Public Policy Research at Suffolk University. © 1996-2002. All rights reserved.
HTML format revised on 9/10/02 4:19 PM