Politicians face a conundrum. Their constituents want more government services without paying higher taxes. How should a candidate for office respond? Political strategists have a one word answer: pander. Too often, we voters buy it.
Consider these findings from a private survey I recently had the chance to review. Fifty-three percent of survey participants agree with this statement: “Cutting vital public services during a recession hurts our families and economy.” Sixty-one percent of respondents favor an increase in state funding for public schools.
But, here is the kicker. More than half of those surveyed agree that “middle class families” pay more than their fair share of taxes. Nearly that many agree that “small businesses” pay more than their fair share, too.
How are “middle class families” defined? As those making less than $250,000 a year. That means just about all of us pay more than our fair share. Who is not pulling their weight? Big business and the super rich.
How should a politician deal with a public that wants its cake and eat it, too? It depends on who your constituents are. Those on the right tap people’s anger toward government. Those on the left try to exploit people’s animosity toward big business.
Let’s start with the left. Liberal politicians know people oppose new taxes but they aren’t willing to take the lead on offering up permanent cuts to government services. So, they try to build political support to raise taxes on large corporations and the rich.
According to political consultants, building political will is a matter of packaging. Frame the issue in the right way, use the right language and you can get people on board. For instance, liberal strategists advise clients to say things such as,“While taxes keep going up for all of us, corporations use loopholes to avoid paying taxes. That’s not fair.”
The idea behind this type of phrase is that voters will be supportive when legislators jack up tax rates on big business.
It may or may not be true that corporations use loopholes to avoid paying taxes. But, it is disingenuous to say, “Taxes keep going up for all of us.” According to the Congressional Budget Office, the federal tax burden is near a three decade low.
Data compiled by the Tax Foundation shows that state and local tax burdens are relatively low, too. The state and local tax burden in seventeen states is at or near a thirty year low. The burden is approaching a thirty year high in only nine states. Thirty-one states are on the low end of the thirty year scale.
This is not an argument that taxes are too low or too high. The point is that to say, “taxes keep going up for all of us,” simply isn’t true. Liberal politicians, unwilling to call for permanent reductions in government services, are convinced it’s bad politics to ask for broad based taxes we all pay. So, they make corporations the boogeyman that should pay more.
Conservative politicians take a different tact but are just as disingenuous as their liberal counterparts. Let’s take the Colorado GOPs “Platform for Prosperity” as an example. The platform states that Republicans will oppose taxes and fees, cap state spending and invest in roads, higher education, and workforce development.
How will the GOP pay for these investments while, at the same time, place a cap on state spending? They plan to review state government to eliminate waste, fraud, excess and abuse. They offer no specifics on what types of government services are wasteful and what they would eliminate.
I am sure fraud and abuse exists in government. But, it is a bigger fraud to suggest that eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse can close the substantial budget shortfalls that plague state and federal budgets while at the same time pay for new services voters say they want. Indeed, conservative politicians, unwilling to ask for tax increases to pay for government services, seldom get specific about cutting government programs. That's not good politics. Conservatives know that voters like government services. So, rather than squaring with people, it’s easier talk about that magic pot of money we call waste, fraud and abuse.
The Colorado GOP may be basing its strategy on survey data that shows people believe fifty cents of every government dollar is wasted. But, here is the thing. One person’s waste is another person’s priority. Many liberals believe money spent to fight the Afghanistan and Iraq Wars are wasted. Many conservatives are equally convinced government spending to prop up the economy is wasteful.
Liberal politicians know voters oppose higher taxes. Conservative politicians know voters want government services. Both pretend, in their own unique way, that voters can have their cake and eat it, too. Both refuse to take on the mantle of leadership.
The survey data I have been looking at over the past few weeks and years has one consistent theme. There is no consensus on government priorities. Rather than candidates who pander to voters’ delusions that government services are free, we need leaders who will help our states, and our nation, reach agreement on priorities. Then, we need leaders who will cut those things that don’t make the top of the list and call on people to pay for those priorities that do. That’s what leaders do.
We voters need to use our power to choose leaders to represent us in legislatures and Congress rather than people who just tell us what we want to hear. If we don’t, then we’ve learned nothing from the Great Recession.
* * *
John Creighton writes on community life and public leadership at johncr8on.com. He can be found on Twitter @johncr8on and on Facebook.
This article is the copywritten property of the writer and Communities @ WashingtonTimes.com. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media.
REPRINTING TWTC CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.
