« It sucks to be me | Main | BP = Big Pigs »

August 09, 2006

TABOR Talking Points Explored

Oregon's Measure 48 backers are complaining about the conflation of the measure with Colorado's TABOR measure, saying it curbs government spending rather than collections and has safeguards built in that mitigate the harm caused by TABOR. Knowing what I do about how governments define "cuts" (getting less money than they asked for), the only way we will really know whether Measure 48 will decimate Oregon is by backtracking several years and seeing what would have happened had it already been in place. I am working on gathering the data to conduct that analysis.

In the mean time, considering the original Colorado TABOR backers are the individuals pushing TABOR spin-offs across the country right now, it is fair to look at Colorado's experience. That state legislature's response can provide insight into how most other state legislatures are likely to respond when deciding where to apply cuts. It is easy to find economic indicators that show Colorado's economy is doing well under TABOR. On the other hand, the data shows some serious problems on the social welfare and education fronts. And not surprisingly, Colorado's government debt per capita has increased dramatically. In short, there are things to like and to dislike in Colorado's TABOR experience, and in the end it's a matter of priorities and trade-offs.

Sandlapper at Daily Kos today published a piece called, "Rich's Money, talking points verus TABOR facts, which I thought was interesting as I have been planning to look at talking points versus facts today, too.

Here's what I have found. It seems reasonable to me to look at how Colorado has fared when compared to other states from year to year. The Morgan Quitno “Most Livable State” ratings give a good indication of whether the state is gaining or losing ground in 44 different categories. I could not find data clear back to 1993 when TABOR was first implemented, but I did find data from 1997 to 2005, and it showed the state's ranking for livability was slipping a bit over time, though things improved slightly in 2005, the year Colorado decided to take a 5-year break from the limits. In 2005, Colorado ranked 16th overall; in 2004, it ranked 23rd; in 2003, 19th; in 2002, 7th, in 2001, 2nd; in 2000, 3rd; in 1999, 2nd; in 1998, it was 8th; and in 1997, 14th.

Obviously, 13 years after TABOR, the state seemed to be doing well in terms of livability. That is not particularly surprising, as Colorado is a fairly well-to-do state and extremely beautiful. But from 1997 to 2005, things began to fall apart. The areas in which the state's livability began to decline are elightening.

For example, the state's ranking in terms of pupil-teacher ratio in public elementary and secondary schools was 9th in 1998, but by 2003 it had slipped to 15th nationwide. Other school-related rankings also showed some problems. In 1998, Colorado ranked 17th for expenditures for education as a percent of all state and local government expenditures. By 2003, its ranking was 22nd. And though the percentage of population that has graduated from college has dropped from a state ranking of 47th in 1998 to 49th in 2003 (and ranked dead last – 50th – in 1999, 2000, and 2001), the state has still cut funding per resident student by one third since 2002.

The state's poverty rate has declined, and its unemployment rate has declined. Personal income and median household income are up. BUT health insurance coverage is down in comparison with other states, and the number of low birthweight babies is increasing faster than the rest of the country, pointing to poor prenatal care for some women. Moreover, the percentage of households receiving food stamps has increased. Most conservatives would focus on the economic positives and most liberals would focus on the social negatives.

But I think both conservatives and liberals would be troubled by the fact that per capita state and local government debt outstanding has increased dramatically in comparison with other states. In 1999, Colorado ranked 12th in this category. By 2003, it had fallen to 43rd. Clearly, the state is borrowing to maintain services, and at a point that bill will come due.

An editorial in a Nebraska newspaper by TABOR committee chairman Mike Groene claims Colorado's economy has been consistently ranked No. 1 by the American Enterprise institute. Because statistics offer so much room for spin and distortion, I think it is probably a good idea to understand the motivation behind this report. If you check their website, you'll see their scholars and fellows include several prominent neocons: Lynn Cheney, Newt Gingrich, Jeane Kirkpatrick, Irving Kristol, Michael Novak, Norm Orenstein, and Richard Perle. Source Watch provides some good basic information.

Furthermore, AEI is a free-market think tank that is in many ways philosophically aligned with Howard Rich, the main proponent of all these TABOR measures. AEI even shares some of the same scholars and board members as the Cato Institute, which is closely linked to Rich. For example, Sam Peltzman (who also serves on the Reason Foundation and the Heartland Institute, more Rich-linked groups) and Robert W. Hahn. It is certainly no stretch to believe AEI's report may well be biased.

Groene claims that "since 1992, Colorado's average household income has risen from 43rd to 7th in the nation." I can't say what may have occurred in Colorado in the past two years, but according the to Morgan Quinto rankings, Colorado was in 41st place as of 2003. That only adds to my skepticism about his entire editorial.

To summarize, it appears to me that Colorado's experience confirms the obvious: When legislators are forced to make cuts, they cut social services and education and find ways to borrow money to backfill where necessary. The economic advantages to lower taxes, on the other hand, are nearly indisputable - at least until that debt comes due. And, of course, there is that whole matter of having to turn a blind eye to the sick, poor, fatherless, widows, etc. that Jesus urged us all to care for.

Posted by Becky at August 9, 2006 08:51 AM