OCR Text |
Show Arguments For The 1987 tax hike was passed with little public discussion, and the people were arrogantly denied an opportunity to vote on it. It was so poorly planned it raised $110 million more than it was supposed to. The July special session corrected the mistake by only $60 million and left taxpayers with a "secret" $50 million tax increase on top of the authorized tax increase. Approval would: (1) Roll back the 1987 tax increases on income, sales, cigarettes, and gasoline. (2) Eliminate the "secret" $50 million dollar tax increase imposed by mistake. Costs would be: (1) The State Tax Commission estimates that approval of this act would cost $141 million dollars. This would be a 5 cut in the state budget of $2.8 billion dollars or a 2.5 cut from total government spending (state and local) of $5.5 billion (1985-86)- . (2) Tax Commission estimates did not consider that putting money in the hands of taxpayers would boost the economy and generate revenues, thus making the rollback significantly less than predicted. (3) This initiative combined with Initiative A would cut total state and local spending by 6 using Tax Commission figures, or by less than 4 using figures developed by the Utah Taxpayers Association. Discussion: Utah, based on the ability of its citizens to pay, has some of the highest taxes in the nation. We were 9th highest BEFORE the largest tax hike in the history of the state. We have the highest state and local taxes per household of any of the 10 western states. We rank 48th in per capita income. Relief now will free resources for economic growth. Opponents claim that passage of Initiatives A, B, & C will cause "catastrophic damage to all government services." If a cut will do this, what is the remaining 94-9- of the budgets spent on? Opponents say if we cut taxes we must cut services Not necessarily so. The rollback would force improved more efficiency e ways of providing services or revised priorities. Last December the State Auditor General could not complete an audit of the State Office of Education because he could not determine what was being spent on the hundreds of programs. Yet, we are told our children are short of textbooks and supplies although these essentials represent only 1 of the state budget. Why aren't these critical items purchased first? Despite claims of efficiency, Utah ranks 6th in the nation in the number of government employees per 1 ,000 households-ha- s numerous organizations not being audited (Timp Mental Health was being audited, but not effectively) and 60 of state agencies contracting for services do so on a basis. Every homemaker knows the savings achieved from comparison shopping. Opponents to Initiatives A, B, & C, have used every stare tactic in the book. The same things were said in Californiaand yet in June of this year Californians, after 10 years under ? Proposition 13, voted to retain tax limitation. j Vote FOR Initiative B. J. Bracken Lee, Former Governor Tax Limitation Coalition P.O. Box 26246 Salt Lake City, Utah 84126 Rebuttal to Arguments For Initiative B Proponents claim these tax cuts won't cut basic services. They claim our education system, roads, and economy will improve. If these claims were really true, wouldn't the people who would supposedly receive these benefits support the initiatives? HERE IS WHAT PEOPLE AND ORGANIZATIONS THAT HAVE TAKEN THE TIME TO UNDERSTAND THE INITIATIVES SAY: PTA "The children are hit the hardest by the initiatives. We nw spend less than any state per pupil. We dare not risk their future by passing these initiatives. " American Association of Retired Persons "For many retired persons, any modest tax savings art more than offset in Medicaid losses, service losses, andftt increases. " Police ChiefsSheriffs AssociationFire Chiefs "We want to provide a safe and healthy community!0' Utah. The passage of these initiatives would seriously jeopardize our ability to do so. " Utah Chamber of Commerce Farm Bureau Cattlemen's Association "Our organizations have always supported efficMt government and low taxes, but we oppose these iniwM' because they go so far in cutting education and basic seri'K tliat they threaten our economic future. " AFL-CI- "Working men and women and their families u"11, real losers. Ultimately, these in itiatives will result in thetos jobs. " These people realize that supporters' claims are too good to be true. The Initiatives GO TOO FAR! Please join with me and the people of Utah in ens""nga bright and prosperous future for our children and ourselv VOTE AGAINST INITIATIVE B. For O AgaiMSt ScottM.Matheson Taxpayers for Salt Lake City. W Page 24 |