Jay Evensen
  • Front Page
  • Opinions
  • Second Thoughts
  • Portfolio
  • Awards
  • About

Should Utah's income tax earmark be taken away?

12/10/2019

0 Comments

 
As Utah lawmakers race to pass part of a mammoth tax reform effort, an almost forgotten conservative principle is becoming an underlying theme: Earmarked spending is bad.
Utah’s constitution currently requires that all income tax collections go exclusively to public and higher education. And while that may give educators a sense of security, it also ties lawmakers’ hands in ways that keep them from truly doing what they were elected to do, which is to study all the state’s needs and set funding priorities.
The problem is that income tax receipts are growing faster than sales tax receipts (which also are growing, by the way). This puts the state in a long-term projection of perhaps having to stem the growth of basic state services in times of plenty.
Problems like these always accompany earmarks over time. It’s why Washington is struggling with the runaway growth of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and military spending as a share of the total federal budget.
Utah is at a disadvantage in that comparison because it must balance its budget. That’s also a good thing, by the way.
At a policy summit late last summer, House Majority Leader Francis Gibson, R-Mapleton, said he had asked legislative staff to look at what would happen if the state earmarked every last penny of tax collections of every kind only to public education. The answer was that Utah would rise from last place nationally in per pupil spending to 22nd, or roughly the middle of the pack. But, of course, the state has other needs to fund, as well.
In other words, if spending alone is the only answer to educating Utah’s large population of children relative to adults, the state doesn’t have the resources to get much beyond average. Even so, shouldn’t lawmakers look deeply at the state’s education needs each year and allocate funds accordingly?
As part of tax reform, lawmakers are considering whether to ask Utah voters to remove this restriction on income taxes. That might be on ballots next fall. 
But before you begin applauding lawmakers for embracing conservative principles, it’s clear they come to this out of necessity, not principle. Removing earmarks from the income tax is the only way to begin evening out how tax money is distributed.
If principles were the driving force, they would get rid of other state earmarks, as well, most notably those for transportation. About a third of the $1.7 billion Utah spends on transportation is on autopilot, thanks to a sales tax earmark. 
If the income tax is making it hard to fund state programs, doesn’t this earmark on a chunk of sales tax receipts make it harder, as well? Why shouldn’t transportation also come under yearly scrutiny by budgeters?
The main problem with changing the state income tax earmark is that it precipitates a collision between principle and trust, which is something many Utahns, particularly teachers and school administrators, would rather avoid.
Without the security blanket of the income tax, Utahns must trust their representatives to fund schools adequately. They are promising to do so, but will they?
Questions such as these are always difficult to answer in a state dominated by one political party. If two parties fought equally and vigorously over appropriations, and if lawmakers felt they might be punished by voters for making wrong decisions, political forces would lead to greater accountability.
But the other side of the equation also can be uncomfortable. It is to consider whether education’s funding wishes should always be accepted at face value.  
Meanwhile, we are being told that a special session may be necessary this week because, among other things, it includes a 0.29% income tax cut that Utahns should start enjoying in January, and because the state has studied this long enough and waiting for next month’s regular session would bog it down amid a host of other legislative concerns.
This might be true if the entire reform plan were on the table. Instead, Utahns may be getting a cut in the income tax now, which certainly would hurt education, while getting only a promise that the special session will include some other funding source for schools, most likely through property taxes.
That, plus a hope voters will agree to open up the income tax to other state programs next fall  — a principled approach about which it’s unclear Utahns will agree.
0 Comments

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    RSS Feed

    Search this site


    Like what you read here?

      Please subscribe below, and we'll let you know when there is a new opinion.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    Picture

    The author

    Jay Evensen is the Senior Editorial Columnist of the Deseret News. He has nearly 40 years experience as a reporter, editor and editorial writer in Oklahoma, New York City, Las Vegas and Salt Lake City. He also has been an adjunct journalism professor at Brigham Young and Weber State universities.

    Archives

    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012

    Categories

    All
    Campaign 2012
    Congress
    Crime
    Culture
    Iran
    Oil And Gas
    Poverty
    Steroids
    Taxes
    Utah
    Washington
    World Events
    World Events

    Links

    Deseret News
    Newslink
    Marianne Evensen's blog

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.