January 8, 2009
Union Leader
As a new legislative sessions starts, it is time for New Hampshire’s representatives to realize the consequences of their actions. Reading Rep. Roger Wells’ Tuesday op-ed (“State has little choice but to find new revenue”) leads me to believe that our legislators haven’t realized the root cause of their problems.
Since 2007, our Legislature has been spending itself into the current enormous deficit. And now both Republicans, such as Rep. Wells, and Democrats are coming back to the people for more money. As a constituent of Rep. Wells and a member of the New Hampshire Advantage Coalition, I believe he should heed the message that the problem is not a “revenue deficit” but is the direct result of overspending.
New Hampshire families are being faced with difficult choices in this economy. They do not have the luxury of finding “new revenue sources.” Our working families are tapped out and cannot be looked to by lawmakers to fund their excessive spending habits. These big spenders need to do what our citizens are doing: tightening their belts and making do with less.
It is ironic that Rep. Wells talks about addiction when discussing the need for new revenue streams. The current budget deficit is similar to addiction in that the state has spent its way into what is estimated to be a $500 million shortfall in the next budget. Now legislators want more hardworking people to fund their habit through new taxes on their income and purchases. This is like trying to rehabilitate a heroin addict by giving him cocaine.
The current budget deficit cannot be solved until lawmakers admit to themselves that it is caused by excessive spending. The conversation regarding the budget deficit must be cleared of threats of diminished services and should follow the same course many New Hampshire families are taking when managing their own household budgets. They are asking what can they do without and where can they reduce expenses.
Working with the New Hampshire Advantage Coalition, I have been meeting with taxpayers from across the state. From Rindge to Rumney, I hear the same thing: Taxpayers want government to spend less to reduce their tax burden, not come back to them for more money taken from their family’s budget.
Now is not the time for New Hampshire taxpayers to make a choice about which new “revenue stream” they want. Rather, it is the time for New Hampshire lawmakers and Gov. John Lynch to spend less of the taxpayers’ money and reduce the burden felt by citizens and the business community in a weakened economy.
For too long the state’s finances have been presented as a revenue problem, but the same budget deficit is being felt in states with additional “revenue streams.”
California, Massachusetts, Vermont and several other states that have income and sales taxes also face falling state revenues and budget deficits. The suggestion that new revenue from a sales or income tax or even expanded gambling will reduce property taxes is misleading.
The need to keep spending under control is not a criticism of Rep. Wells’ ideas for allowing video slot machines in New Hampshire. Had he recommended using the revenue from such expanded gambling to reduce or eliminate the business enterprise or business profits taxes, it would certainly be a worthwhile policy discussion. However, using these proceeds to grow government will simply increase the insatiable appetite of an ever-expanding state bureaucracy.
Any government — local, county or state — that spends its constituents’ money as the Legislature has done and fails to grasp that low taxes are a direct result of low spending is condemned to find itself in a budget deficit. To correct this problem, legislators should look at limiting spending, not seeking more money from the people they serve and who are having hard times themselves.
Matthew Murphy, a Hampstead resident, is director of the New Hampshire Advantage Coalition, online at www.theNHadvantage.com