Business Columnist Should Leave Big Taxes/Big Government Bias at Home
Editorial content should be on the editorial page. Even though all columnists have opinions (all people have opinions, after all), their analytical writing should be kept objective.
Steve Bousquet, Tallahassee Bureau Chief of the St. Petersburg (Florida) Times newspaper, writes columns regarding business and economic issues. One of the current hot topics in Florida is the effort by the Legislature to reduce property taxes and make them more equitable among the various categories of taxpayers (homeowners, 2nd-home owners, small businesses such as motels, and other commercial interests). The Florida Senate is inclined to make moderate changes to reduce overall tax revenues modestly. The House prefers more radical changes that would dramatically cut the tax burden. The House approaches the issues from the point of view of the taxpayer (reduce the burden), where the Senate sees the problem as one of costing the Government its needed revenue.
Steve Bousquet appears to come down on the side of Government, although he would educate his readers better were he to provide them with unbiased analysis. Some quotes from two of his recent columns demonstrate his (perhaps unconscious) filter.
In a recent column, Mr. Bousquet wrote, "...the House has a much bigger appetite for tax cuts than Senate leaders. Senators have adopted a more nuanced approach to tax relief that tries to help homeowners without hurting public education and local government." (All italics are mine.)
"Nuanced" sounds like code for "sophisticated," meaning the politicians know better what is good for us than we do. Hence the caring Senators who want to help homeowners and not hurt the sacrosanct public education and local government. This “helping” involves reducing the amount of taxes the Government collects from taxpayers. Taxpayers wouldn’t need this kind of help from the Government if it didn’t take the money away in the first place. As far as hurting public services by reducing tax revenues, why doesn’t Mr. Bousquet talk about the enormous effective tax increases Floridians have suffered in the last five years? Politicians have not had to pass legislation to increase taxes (a difficult row to hoe) because the recent soaring property assessments have handed them a free bonanza of revenue. The library, public education, police services etc. functioned just fine five years ago. Why does the government now need 140% more revenue to accomplish the same services?
In today's paper (October 27, 2007), Mr. Bousquet wrote, "Men run both chambers, and boys will be boys...competitive types who hate to lose." So they are just overgrown children, I guess. How patronizing, particularly because it impugns their motives by implying they make decisions based on emotion, not rational analysis.
Also, "House Speaker Marco Rubio...he's an ideologue. Given free rein, he would wipe out property taxes altogether and jack up the sales tax. …Senate President Ken Pruitt is a pragmatist … also is not viscerally opposed to the size and scope of government." So Mr. Bousquet denigrates anyone who wants to rethink and reduce taxes or shrink government as an ideologue and admires someone willing to negotiate against the interests of taxpayers.
Provide us with a chart of revenue and spending for the last five years and let us arrive at our own conclusions.
Steve Bousquet, Tallahassee Bureau Chief of the St. Petersburg (Florida) Times newspaper, writes columns regarding business and economic issues. One of the current hot topics in Florida is the effort by the Legislature to reduce property taxes and make them more equitable among the various categories of taxpayers (homeowners, 2nd-home owners, small businesses such as motels, and other commercial interests). The Florida Senate is inclined to make moderate changes to reduce overall tax revenues modestly. The House prefers more radical changes that would dramatically cut the tax burden. The House approaches the issues from the point of view of the taxpayer (reduce the burden), where the Senate sees the problem as one of costing the Government its needed revenue.
Steve Bousquet appears to come down on the side of Government, although he would educate his readers better were he to provide them with unbiased analysis. Some quotes from two of his recent columns demonstrate his (perhaps unconscious) filter.
In a recent column, Mr. Bousquet wrote, "...the House has a much bigger appetite for tax cuts than Senate leaders. Senators have adopted a more nuanced approach to tax relief that tries to help homeowners without hurting public education and local government." (All italics are mine.)
"Nuanced" sounds like code for "sophisticated," meaning the politicians know better what is good for us than we do. Hence the caring Senators who want to help homeowners and not hurt the sacrosanct public education and local government. This “helping” involves reducing the amount of taxes the Government collects from taxpayers. Taxpayers wouldn’t need this kind of help from the Government if it didn’t take the money away in the first place. As far as hurting public services by reducing tax revenues, why doesn’t Mr. Bousquet talk about the enormous effective tax increases Floridians have suffered in the last five years? Politicians have not had to pass legislation to increase taxes (a difficult row to hoe) because the recent soaring property assessments have handed them a free bonanza of revenue. The library, public education, police services etc. functioned just fine five years ago. Why does the government now need 140% more revenue to accomplish the same services?
In today's paper (October 27, 2007), Mr. Bousquet wrote, "Men run both chambers, and boys will be boys...competitive types who hate to lose." So they are just overgrown children, I guess. How patronizing, particularly because it impugns their motives by implying they make decisions based on emotion, not rational analysis.
Also, "House Speaker Marco Rubio...he's an ideologue. Given free rein, he would wipe out property taxes altogether and jack up the sales tax. …Senate President Ken Pruitt is a pragmatist … also is not viscerally opposed to the size and scope of government." So Mr. Bousquet denigrates anyone who wants to rethink and reduce taxes or shrink government as an ideologue and admires someone willing to negotiate against the interests of taxpayers.
Provide us with a chart of revenue and spending for the last five years and let us arrive at our own conclusions.
posted by alison @ 1:55 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home