The title of the Herald's editorial is "Faux Populism" and it is a wonder to behold. To begin with, it raises the question -- do the editors know what Populism, faux or otherwise, really is? Jim Douglas is not, and never has been, a Populist. He is a shrewd politician who manages to get himself elected, and re-elected, while the party to which he belongs gets waxed at the polls. But a Huey Long, William Jennings Bryan, or George Wallace he ain't. And whatever his response to the JFO report, establishing that Vermonters aren't taxed all that heavily, we suspect that "fierce" isn't the word that describes it. Douglas's idea of an expletive is "darn." An obscenity would be "double darn."
The point of the editorial is to convince readers that Vermonters are not as onerously taxed as some people -- such as those at the Tax Foundation -- say they are. This is supposed to be good news. There is not a voice in the state -- not the Herald's and not Peter Shumlin's -- claiming that Vermont is a low tax state. Which, when you are trying to bring in outsiders to start up new businesses is a nice thing to be. It is also a good thing to be when you are trying to keep such businesses as you have from fleeing for jurisdictions where the taxes are lower. If taxes are not especially high, one wonders, then why was the state's majority party unwilling in the last session to raise them a little to finance its pet energy conservation bill and, instead, came up with a sort of taxing version of a bill of attainder aimed at Vermont Yankee? If there is untaxed money lying around and crying needs of the people are not being attended to ... well, if you are a real populist, or just a proponent of activist government, then it is a no-brainer. You need to raise taxes. But nobody is promising to do that and there is a reason why ... Vermonters think taxes are not merely high, but too high.
But, perhaps this is the fault of that frothing-at-the-mouth Populist, Jim Douglas going around the state making people believe things that just aren't true and promising to sock it the big boys so the little guy can catch a break.
Among the other points of interest in this editorial (and there are many for such a short piece) there are these:
Vermont has one of the most progressive tax systems in the nation and among the 12 states that were part of the study.
To which one responds, "Okay, does that mean we won't hear any more talk about how the rich are not paying their fair share?" In which case, it would almost be worth it.
And then:
... the straitjacket Douglas deploys has the effect of preventing the state from initiating programs that would actually help those who are struggling, such as universal health care and improved education.
Education? We thought that ship was steaming ahead hot, straight, and normal. Isn't that what boosters of Vermont's education system are claiming (contra this) those latest test scores proved? And anyway, does anyone deny that Vermont's per-pupil spending is among the very highest in the nation.
Yet, the Herald seems to imply, were in not for Jim Douglas, stirring up the natives, Vermont would be raising its not very high taxes in order to spend more.
That darned Douglas. The man could have taught the Kingfish a thing or two.
Comments