OCR Text |
Show 85TH YEAR; NUMBER SOUTHERN UTAH STATE COLLffiE 5 CEDAR CITY, UTAH MONDAY, OCTOBER 8, 1990 "1 i VS. t S u, V ' u X 4 H I V V A Si t:n s t V 1 WW-.1,C3m . rr 4 v'-- 4 ns ., ! i i Qj A x -- Contestants and dancers for tomorrow nights Homecoming queen pageant practice their production number Vogue. The winner will reign over Homecoming activities through Saturday. Other activities for the week include powder puff football today, the jubilee talent show on Wednesday, the Restless Heart concert on Thursday and the Rastafari Luau dance on Saturday. Friday. The week wraps up with the Homecoming game and J semi-form- Supporters say Initiative A will bring prosperity EDITORS NOTE: The following is the second of a two-paseries dealing with the Nov. 6 ballot item Initiative A, proposing the elimination of Utahs sales tax on food. rt BY JAMES SPAINHOWER As the father of the controversial sales tax initiative, Merrill Cook takes offense that a smear campaign of misinformation has led many to believe that its passage will be bad for Utahs economy. By initially eliminating food tax, cutting the fat from education, and shifting the tax burden more equitably between the rich and poor through tax reform, Cook is confident that these revisions will bring new prosperity to the state by attracting new business and halting the exodus of productive citizens in search of higher pay, he said. Vocal opponents of the initiative, most notably the State Board of Regents and Gov. Norman Bangerter, claim that if the initiative passes, it will thrust Utah into an economic tailspm. The state of Utah has a surplus of over $100 million, but you dont hear this in the media, Cook said. Cook said the public is hearing that schools, municipalities and social services will lose state revenues, since Bangerter has vowed to shift the tax burden and cut programs rather than raise taxes should the initiative pass. These are nothing but scare tactics, Cook said. How do you lose a surplus? asked Ed Little, executive director for the Utah Independent Party, cosponsoring the initiative. Little claims the governor is engaging in double talk. The state coffers grow $1 million a week; with surplus theres nothing to shift, Little said. Neither Little nor Cook deny that implementation of the initiative would eliminate approximately $90 million from the states yearly revenues, and what concerns opponents is that a recessed economy might leave higher education, municipalities and social services high and dry. What if we didnt have a surplus and times got tight? We propose to make cuts from the top from the bureaucrats and not from the single, working mother, Cook said. By cutting personnel from education alone, Cook said the state could save $50 million a year simply by increasing the average teaching load. They should be turning the teaching load back to what it should be. Between 1981 and 1989 there was a 20 percent decline in the yearly workload. Cook reasons that with a natural attrition of 5 to 6 percent annually, there would be no reason to fire faculty members and schools could offer the same courses currently available. As it stands, Cook said, The schools have hired more than is needed to cover attrition. Opponents point out that the initiative would negatively impact the states social service programs and municipalities. Not so, according to Steve Erickson, spokesman for Utah Issues, a statewide advocacy service for the poor. If lost revenue is the reason to oppose the initiative then theres many ways to make up for lost revenue. Erickson said that food tax accounts for less than 2 percent of the states total budget. Nevertheless, he said that if this money were not made up, the state would suffer budgetary cuts. Broadening the tax base by eliminating exemptions to businesses and taxing non-essenti- al professional services would generate an estimated $200 million annually. Additional revenue in the millions could be garnered by increasing the corporate tax burden and eliminating the tax deduction on the federal tax return of federal tax paid. What concerns Little is the morality of taxing food, he said. Currently, 33 states do not levy tax on food purchases, others, Like Idaho, give tax credits and rebates to taxpayers over 65 years of age, Little said. The claim that the truly poor in the state will not benefit from the initiative because they are receiving food stamps is a specious argument. Only 34 percent of those legally eligible for food stamps get them in the state; nationally, the figure is 60 percent, Little said. Utah is one of the few states in the nation with a regressive sales tax individuals earning less pay a higher percentage of their budget for food purchases than higher-incom- e families, Little said. Compounding this problem is that Utah, as a right to work state, has a pay scale comparatively low in the nation, according to Little. Sales and income tax are inherently regressive by nature and you cant make it progressive because its What you try to do is minimize the regressivity by eliminating tax on food and medicine, Erickson said. families paying the highest With percentage of their income on food and 14 percent of the Utah living below the federal poverty level, Steve Johnson, Director of Utahns Against Hunger and initiative supporter wants to see a tax system in the state based on a persons ability to pay. I think when Utahns understand the issues and get past the myth these changes will be made, Johnson said. across-the-boar- d. low-inco- |