Question No. 6: Gregg Underheim Response

I support a Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights.

Passing a Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights would create a direct link between the growth of the private sector and the growth of government. The version of the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights that I support would restrict government growth to a percentage of the growth of personal income. I do not support a Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights that restricts government growth to the rate of inflation.

First, by restricting government growth to a percentage of personal income you guarantee that the public sector does not grow larger that the private sector. Second, when the economy is good government can grow more rapidly and those who work for it can receive larger pay increases—just like people in the private sector. When the economy is weak government will grow less rapidly, or even shrink. Those who work for government may see pay decreases or lay offs—just like those in the private sector.

The opponents of the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights will argue that legislators just need to have the discipline to vote no. That is certainly what others who seek the 54th Assembly seat have said. However, those are the same people who have promised the teacher’s union (WEAC) that they will eliminate the revenue controls and the QEO. You cannot have it both ways. You cannot argue in favor of controlling spending and then promise WEAC you will spend whatever they want. Mr. Hintz falls into that category.

Last, it is appropriate to include the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights in the constitution. Constitutions deal in part with the size, scope, and taxing abilities of government. The Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights would be a restriction on the growth of government. That is entirely consistent with what constitutions do.