Thoughts on the TPA
Lasee’s Notes
When Senator Grothman introduced the Taxpayer Protection Amendment (TPA), I supported it. I want to be clear that I still do support it, and will continue to support it as long as it protects the taxpayers.
As with any first try, we can make improvements. Time and study of the TPA as it’s currently written have brought out a few details – things that need to be fixed before it comes to a vote.
First, the Rob Peter to Pay Paul scheme:
As it’s currently written, the TPA lets the state rob local government revenue streams to spend on other state priorities. It then leaves local governments to backfill with property tax increases – increases they can enact without asking their voters. And all the while, the state can brag about living within a limit, when in fact spending is growing twice that fast.
Here’s how it works. About half of the state’s General Fund (almost $13 billion) is used to pay for K-12 school aids, shared revenue and other aid to local governments.
The TPA allows state revenues to grow at population plus inflation – let’s call it 4% a year. That 4% is applied to the entire budget, but this doesn’t mean every expenditure grows at 4%. The state can still set priorities – spend less on one area, in order to spend more somewhere else.
If the state doesn’t increase the half of its budget that goes to local aids (about half the general fund), the other half will grow at about 8% (twice the growth limit).
So: the state can reduce local aids in order to give more money to schools and spend more money elsewhere, and can still claim to have lived within the TPA. Local governments will have the tough decision – raise taxes, or settle for very little increase, and the property-rich districts get bigger increases than property-poor districts forever.
This is one thing that must be fixed before the TPA comes to a vote. There are others, which I’ll cover in greater detail in the future.
The next couple of Wednesdays, I’m arranging open meetings about the TPA in which we can discuss these and other issues, and hopefully remove the loopholes, because Wisconsin’s taxpayers deserve a strong Taxpayer Protection Amendment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lasee’s Notes is a weekly column by Representative Frank Lasee, 2nd Assembly District, covering events in the Legislature and statewide.
When Senator Grothman introduced the Taxpayer Protection Amendment (TPA), I supported it. I want to be clear that I still do support it, and will continue to support it as long as it protects the taxpayers.
As with any first try, we can make improvements. Time and study of the TPA as it’s currently written have brought out a few details – things that need to be fixed before it comes to a vote.
First, the Rob Peter to Pay Paul scheme:
As it’s currently written, the TPA lets the state rob local government revenue streams to spend on other state priorities. It then leaves local governments to backfill with property tax increases – increases they can enact without asking their voters. And all the while, the state can brag about living within a limit, when in fact spending is growing twice that fast.
Here’s how it works. About half of the state’s General Fund (almost $13 billion) is used to pay for K-12 school aids, shared revenue and other aid to local governments.
The TPA allows state revenues to grow at population plus inflation – let’s call it 4% a year. That 4% is applied to the entire budget, but this doesn’t mean every expenditure grows at 4%. The state can still set priorities – spend less on one area, in order to spend more somewhere else.
If the state doesn’t increase the half of its budget that goes to local aids (about half the general fund), the other half will grow at about 8% (twice the growth limit).
So: the state can reduce local aids in order to give more money to schools and spend more money elsewhere, and can still claim to have lived within the TPA. Local governments will have the tough decision – raise taxes, or settle for very little increase, and the property-rich districts get bigger increases than property-poor districts forever.
This is one thing that must be fixed before the TPA comes to a vote. There are others, which I’ll cover in greater detail in the future.
The next couple of Wednesdays, I’m arranging open meetings about the TPA in which we can discuss these and other issues, and hopefully remove the loopholes, because Wisconsin’s taxpayers deserve a strong Taxpayer Protection Amendment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lasee’s Notes is a weekly column by Representative Frank Lasee, 2nd Assembly District, covering events in the Legislature and statewide.
posted by John Q Cheesehead | 2:22 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home