Owning The Future We Seek
By: Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President
I just finished a book about the election of President Obama and one of the take home messages that came through regarding the vision he got his supporters to buy-in on was..."We are the change we seek."
This idea of self-responsibility and accountability has a great deal of merit, especially as we prepare to launch the 75th Nevada Legislative Session, described by many as needing to be a time for Nevada to figure out what it wants to be when it grows up.
As discussions focus on the state's budget and attempts are made to identify solutions to apparent shortcomings in the resources available to pay for the spending that is desired -- we need to determine not only the structure of how state revenue is generated, but more importantly who's doing the paying. Those who pay are those in the end who own. In looking at how to make our tax structure less dependent on cycles of good times and hardships, we might do well to figure out direct ways to involve citizens in doing the paying.
When times were booming and the population growth of Nevada was setting records for the flood of new people moving here the arguments were that we needed to increase state spending because of the growth. Growth didn't pay for itself because there wasn't any way to collect on the in-flow beyond the state's sales tax.
During the 2003 Nevada Legisaltive Session, when lawmakers and interest like gaming and mining were trying to establish a tax based on the revenue that business received (a gross receipts tax) we were lead to believe that doing business in Nevada was a privilege. One that should cause those doing business in the Silver State to pay up on.
After raising taxes and spending to their highest levels ever, legislators went home from the 2003 session disappointed that they really hadn't gotten the complete job done in the context of there being a new tax system in place, except for sticking it to banks.
Following sessions had to deal with the problem of having too much money, even going to the extreme of one session needing to figure out how to give some of it back to Nevada citizens (even though they weren't the ones who directly paid into the surplus).
Now here we are just a few years later, thinking the world is teetering on the brink of disaster because the state's revenue stream is only coming in at the same rate it was the last biennium. Without significant increases in tax income -- you can't pay for significant increases in state spending...that's the dilemma that faces Nevada lawmakers this session.
Even though the state's constitution doesn't allow for an income tax, we might want to figure out a creative way for Nevada's individual citizens to be part of the solution, either making a bigger contribution in some fashion or learning to accept the level of state spending that current revenues provide.
Whatever choices our elected leaders decide, in the end "We" need to be a much bigger part of the future we seek.
I just finished a book about the election of President Obama and one of the take home messages that came through regarding the vision he got his supporters to buy-in on was..."We are the change we seek."
This idea of self-responsibility and accountability has a great deal of merit, especially as we prepare to launch the 75th Nevada Legislative Session, described by many as needing to be a time for Nevada to figure out what it wants to be when it grows up.
As discussions focus on the state's budget and attempts are made to identify solutions to apparent shortcomings in the resources available to pay for the spending that is desired -- we need to determine not only the structure of how state revenue is generated, but more importantly who's doing the paying. Those who pay are those in the end who own. In looking at how to make our tax structure less dependent on cycles of good times and hardships, we might do well to figure out direct ways to involve citizens in doing the paying.
When times were booming and the population growth of Nevada was setting records for the flood of new people moving here the arguments were that we needed to increase state spending because of the growth. Growth didn't pay for itself because there wasn't any way to collect on the in-flow beyond the state's sales tax.
During the 2003 Nevada Legisaltive Session, when lawmakers and interest like gaming and mining were trying to establish a tax based on the revenue that business received (a gross receipts tax) we were lead to believe that doing business in Nevada was a privilege. One that should cause those doing business in the Silver State to pay up on.
After raising taxes and spending to their highest levels ever, legislators went home from the 2003 session disappointed that they really hadn't gotten the complete job done in the context of there being a new tax system in place, except for sticking it to banks.
Following sessions had to deal with the problem of having too much money, even going to the extreme of one session needing to figure out how to give some of it back to Nevada citizens (even though they weren't the ones who directly paid into the surplus).
Now here we are just a few years later, thinking the world is teetering on the brink of disaster because the state's revenue stream is only coming in at the same rate it was the last biennium. Without significant increases in tax income -- you can't pay for significant increases in state spending...that's the dilemma that faces Nevada lawmakers this session.
Even though the state's constitution doesn't allow for an income tax, we might want to figure out a creative way for Nevada's individual citizens to be part of the solution, either making a bigger contribution in some fashion or learning to accept the level of state spending that current revenues provide.
Whatever choices our elected leaders decide, in the end "We" need to be a much bigger part of the future we seek.
Comments