Thursday, February 23, 2006

Accounting 101

Here's a pretty good reason that the state legislature should stop trying to run local government from their offices in the capitol. They don't know how local government works. Or even basic accounting for that matter.

The Wisconsin State Journal has an article today that outlines one way the Bride of TABOR is going to keep local governments from keeping their economies going well. The proposal would treat loans like income. Republicans say government should run more like a business. Apparently the business they had in mind was Enron.

Jason Stein, the reporter for this story, puts the issue into perspective. He asks:

If you received a $200,000 mortgage to buy a house, would you consider that loan to be income?
Of course you wouldn't but Republicans that took months to put this together did and it seems like they might not have even realized it:

But the proposal's treatment of bonds is already causing some disagreement among supporters of the amendment. Co- author Rep. Jeff Wood, R- Chippewa Falls, said this week that changes are needed.

"I think there's going to be a debate on this and I think there are people on different sides of this issue in our own (Republican) caucus," Wood said, adding, "You don't pay cash for a house or a road. You never pay cash for a school, either."

Co-author Sen. Glenn Grothman, R-West Bend, said there was value in the limits, but agreed they might need to be changed to push the so-called Taxpayer Protection Amendment through the Legislature.

How could this not have been debated before they released it? They worked on this thing for months. Chances are they didn't realize the impact this would have on local governments. The folks at the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance were even surprised at the lack of thought that went into something as serious as a constitutional amendment.

Todd Berry, president of the nonpartisan Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance, said some aspects of the constitutional amendment unveiled by Republican lawmakers this month show "some pretty careful thinking."

But, "I'm surprised that they included this bonding proposition," said Berry, whose group hasn't taken a position on the amendment. "It doesn't seem to be in keeping with basic accounting and economics."

But clearly, some aspects of this did not show any thinking at all.

If they were applying for the job of running local government, they wouldn't even get an interview.

1 Comments:

At 1:53 PM, Blogger Seth Zlotocha said...

I think it's becoming pretty clear who was invited to the discussions on creating this amendment (WMC and economists like Barry Poulson) and who was completely left out (local governments and reason).

"Co-author Sen. Glenn Grothman, R-West Bend, said there was value in the limits, but agreed they might need to be changed to push the so-called Taxpayer Protection Amendment through the Legislature."

Changes JUST to pass it through the legislature? So if it was up to him, Wood, Gard, Lasee, & Co. they would just pass it as is, knowing that it would likely make it more difficult for governments to build roads, schools, and other infrastructure, along with make necessary repairs?

That's scary.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home