The focus of the 2010 election five days from now has been on Congress, but Virginians will also be faced with voting on three proposed amendments to Virginia’s constitution (click here for details from the Virginia Board of Elections). The Richmond Tea Party leadership recommends you vote NO on questions #1 and #2. Both delve into the dangerous territory of picking winners and losers in the tax system—the very approach that has ultimately given America tens of thousands of pages of an indecipherable tax code at the federal level, a major headache on April 15th (and just about every other day in trying to comply with the code), and countless citizens who feel disenfranchised by their government. At the state level, we should reject this same game politicians play to win political favor (and grow their power) by purchasing support from one group of citizens at the expense of another.
Radio host and Tea Party supporter Rob Schilling said this on his blog:
Questions 1 and 2 deal with real estate taxation. Helping veterans, disabled, and elderly people is a noble goal, as is tax reduction; the means by which the assistance will be granted, however, is insidious.
America’s founders recognized inherent peril in progressive taxation: a citizen exempt from paying taxes that his neighbor must pay, has no incentive in keeping the tax low because he, himself, does not pay the tax.
…
The disastrous results of nearly a century of progressive income taxation can be seen in present day America where 47% of U.S. households paid no federal income tax in 2009. Those paying no tax actually have a vested interest in seeing rates raised for federal income-taxpayers, in order to maintain their own tax-free status.
And friend of RTP, Jim Trautz, offers this from his perspective as a veteran:
As a retired naval officer, nobody supports our vets more, nor believes stronger than I, that they should be honored in every way possible. That said, it’s important to review the position that virtually every conservative candidate, at the local, state, and national level has taken – the idea of fiscal responsibility and limited government.
First, the federal government has already made provisions for our disabled veterans in the form of disability pay and benefits, not to mention the benefits received through the Department of Veteran Affairs. Additionally, there are also a myriad of PRIVATE groups, who offer additional benefits – groups like the VFW, American Legion, Fleet Reserve Association, AMVETS, Wounded Warriors, etc. All of these groups are willing and able to help. In fact, the genesis for many of these groups was care for our disabled vets. The same holds true for other groups that would be affected by this amendment.
Secondly, it is not now, nor should it ever be the responsibility of government – at any level, whether at the state or national level to use taxpayer money to benefit a segregated group. As a matter of fiscal responsibility, I find it hard to swallow that certain groups (no matter how honorable they are) should be given tax breaks that others aren’t afforded – especially in light of these days of out of control spending and deficits. Though supportive of our veterans, it’s hardly fiscally responsible to reduce revenues at the expense of taxpayers – especially in light of the benefits already available through both the federal government and private groups. In short, I’m not in favor of rewarding certain groups for votes. That may be okay for liberals and progressives, but I’m a firm believer that to some extent, that type of thinking is exactly what has led to the problems we face today.
Third, I am curious as to where we draw the line? Today we give tax breaks to the disabled vets; why not give tax breaks to disabled police officers, firemen, government service workers, or even government contractors? They all serve our communities and/or our country, and one could argue that all of them serve the public in one fashion or another. If you really want to stretch the spirit and intent of the amendment, one could argue that disabled construction workers, plumbers, electricians, and a host of other occupations serve the public, and as such, they too should be entitled. I know that this sounds ridiculous, but under equal protection, should this amendment pass, it sets the precedence for others to follow suit. The truth is, if/when this amendment is passed, it’s only a matter of time before the law is tested (and most assuredly it WILL be tested).
In closing, please understand that I’ve given this a great deal of thought. This proposed amendment is not only contrary to the ideals of fiscal responsibility, limited government, and equal protection, but it stands in direct opposition to everything conservatives have been professing. My position is not in opposition to honoring our disabled veterans, or of any of the groups that would benefit, but rather, in favor of conservative values and common sense.
What position has RTP taken on Ballot Question 3? No, I hope.
Ballot Question 3 fundamentally enlarges state government at the expense of ordinary citizens and the overall state economy.
Question 3 reads:
Shall Section 8 of Article X of the Constitution of Virginia be amended to increase the permissible size of the Revenue Stabilization Fund (also known as the “rainy day fund”) from 10 percent to 15 percent of the Commonwealth’s average annual tax revenues derived from income and retail sales taxes for the preceding three fiscal years?
Increasing the allowable size of Virginia’s “rainy day fund” by 50% is a colossally bad idea. The state is not a bank, an investment, or a savings account; it should hold as little of the people’s money as is practical.
Funds retained by government are unavailable to the state’s economy and thus stifle economic activity both of businesses and individuals.
In addition, fattening the state’s “slush” fund encourages growth in the size and scope of state government, and it is a disincentive to vital cost cutting and budget reform/reduction measures.
Disappointingly, many known “conservatives” publicly are supporting some or all of these constitutional amendments— each of which was passed unanimously in both houses of the Virginia General Assembly. In reality, legislators will reap political gain and political power from the passage of the measures: this is another opportunity to buy votes and to curry favor from large constituencies, all in the name of providing assistance.
As an entire class, property owners are deserving of relief from crushing real estate taxation in Virginia, but such reprieve granted piecemeal is detrimental to property rights and to America’s common interest in limited government. There are better and more American-centric ways to assist veterans, disabled, and elderly people. And, growing the ability of the state to confiscate—and ultimately spend—greater sums will further saddle taxpaying Virginians and encumber Virginia’s struggling economy.
Don’t be fooled by seemingly sympathetic subjects. Progressive taxation and government largesse have not benefited America in the preceding century. The 2010 ballot questions are bad news for liberty loving Virginians, and if passed, they will result in greater state control over our everyday lives.
There are ONLY 7500 permanently and total disabled Vets in the entire Commonwealth. That field narrows with only 4000 owning homes. That has VERY VERY little impact on county budgets. Remember, Veterans fought and died for country and our liberty. This minor concession is the right thing to do. VOTE YES on Amendment 2!
vote NO on all 3 questions !!!
If I understand it correctly you are comparing an electrician, that was an electrician because he wanted to make money, to a VETERAN that wanted to make it possible for the electrician to choose to be an electrician.
HUMMMMMM
Vote no on all 3 amendments. 1 and 2 create a special class of citizen, like our current congressional members, with their own set of rules. 3 expands government, yet again.