Alan Lupo: No-tax pledge a nonstarter

Opinion

Discussion

The Salem News has a real-name policy for commenting. Users may sign in using the Facebook Connect tool above the comments field. Once your first comment is posted by a moderator, all future comments will post automatically. If you prefer not to use Facebook, send an e-mail with your comments user name (which must be the same as your real name), city or town, street address and daytime phone number to comments@salemnews.com. A staff member will contact you directly to confirm your identity. It may take a day or two before you can post comments. Only your user name will be public. All users are required to follow our rules for commenting, which can be found here.

comments powered by Disqus

February 28, 2008

By Alan Lupo The Salem News Thu Feb 28, 2008, 07:21 AM EST

"No new taxes," the Republican presidential candidate promised. It wasn't George H. W. Bush this time, but the guy he'd endorsed, Sen. John McCain.

No doubt the elder Bush meant it when he made his promise to the Republican National Convention in 1988. But the realities of governing forced him to recant that pledge, just like Democrat Mike Dukakis did during his first term as Massachusetts governor in the 1970s. Maybe McCain thinks he means it, too.

No politician of any stripe wants to hike taxes any more than we lust to pay them. But at some point American citizens, and those who want our votes, must dispense with the myth that all we need do is excise a little corruption here and a little inefficiency there, and we'll have all the money we need to do all that must be done.

McCain, an honored veteran, knows more than most how many billions of dollars the Pentagon will need to fix a military broken in both equipment and manpower, especially when he says he's willing to keep troops in Iraq for a century if need be.

Yes, few bureaucracies can waste money like the Pentagon, but our armed forces really do need replenishing. Our obligations in Afghanistan, Iraq and countless other places do not come at bargain-basement rates. There are no Presidents Week sales on armored vehicles. Recruitment and training are costly. Also, the art of war is not static; it evolves. Witness our attempts to stay ahead of improvements in improvised explosive devices. Factor in whatever the future holds for us with an angry Russia and a muscle-flexing China, and military costs figure to keep increasing.

Beyond the military, America must address other matters that have been neglected for decades, if not centuries. It will cost billions to repair roads, bridges and mass transit; cut public-school class sizes and extend the school day or year; fund medical research; improve the inspection of everything from meat companies to imported fish; create regional rail; kick-start green industries; hire and train foreign language specialists and others for our national security efforts; protect everything from ports to reservoirs; subsidize escalating college costs; retrain fired or outsourced American workers; and help lift 35 million people out of poverty and make sure millions of working poor don't fall further behind.

For too long we have been passing the buck on what must be addressed and how much it will cost.

The feds, claiming a lack of funds or the will to commit them, would rather let the states figure out how to provide necessary services. The states, in turn, pass the buck to local government, which then cut programs and/or increase local taxes and fees, are forced to welcome sprawling new developments to increase the tax base, and still have to plead for more state aid.

Good luck on that state aid. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities reports that at least 24 states are looking at budget shortfalls for the upcoming fiscal year. In Massachusetts, we are talking $1.3 billion; in California, $14.5 billion; in New Jersey, possibly up to $3.5 billion; and in Virginia, $1.2 billion.

"In states facing budget gaps," the Center warns, "the consequences could be severe — for residents as well as the economy."

Given what appears to be a looming recession, the federal government must belly up to the bar with fiscal relief. If Bush fails to do this, the problem will appear on the plate of whoever succeeds him. Should that be McCain, he will rue his no-tax pledge just as the elder Bush did in 1990 when he had to face up to a federal budget deficit left by the Reagan administration.

How much longer do we pass the buck without the bucks to back it up?

nnn

Alan Lupo, a veteran Boston columnist who appears regularly on these pages, can be reached at alupo@comcast.net