OCR Text |
Show Rebuttal to 1 Arguments Againat Initiative A J The scare tactics used by opponents are the same ones used in numerous states where tax limitation has been adopted. The ridiculous claims of cuts in essential services and the overused exclamation marks insult the intelligence of Utah I voters. Opponents make absurd claims instead of proposing to cut administration, consolidate services, eliminate duplication, and privatize government agencies. This initiative does not encourage debt; voters must approve future debt. Bonding will not be used for day-to-day operations; this is unconstitutional. It does not give Employment Security budgetary powers; they merely provide the economic figures to activate the spending limitation. p Initiative A is only a statutory change; it is not a change to & the constitution. If horror stories happen, the Legislature can 1 amend the limitation by a simple majority vote at any time. f Proposition 13 cut California property taxes by 56. 3 Utah's initiative cuts property taxes only 11 and cuts total state and local spending only 1.5. The ideas in this initiative have been supported by reasonable people for years, including Nobel laureate Milton Friedman and noted economist Arthur Laffer. Even Governor Matheson proposed a 1 property tax limitation. Most of the wording of this initiative was actually enacted by the Utah ! Legislature ten years ago but was never activated. ! Opponents say high taxes are for our own good. These are j the people who got us into our present economic and tax mess. ( Why should we trust them to get us out of it? VOTE FOR YOUR FUTURE VOTE FOR INITIATIVE A 9 Jack A. Olson Utah Taxpayers Association 3 1578 West 1700 South Salt Lake City, Utah 84104 g |