NYT: Voters Showed Less Appetite for Tax Cuts (rejected in 3 states)

[DeepModem Mom]

Voters Showed Less Appetite for Tax Cuts
By JOHN M. BRODER
Published: November 15, 2005


LOS ANGELES, Nov. 14 - Has the American voter's ardor for cutting taxes and shrinking government cooled?

Voters in California, Colorado and Washington State rejected ballot measures this month that would have rolled back tax increases or limited state spending. Some say the votes could mark a turning point in a decades-old revolt against high taxes that got its symbolic start in California in 1978 with Proposition 13, which sharply limited property tax increases for homeowners and cut deeply into state services.

It may be, some analysts suggested, that after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and this year's Gulf Coast hurricanes, Americans saw the value of government investment in infrastructure, public safety and other services and are now more willing to pay for it.

"It looks like that to me," said John G. Matsusaka, president of the Initiative and Referendum Institute at the University of Southern California Law School. "The public sector did a lot of belt-tightening during the last recession, and the public now appears to be letting it out a few notches. I think we saw that in Washington State and Colorado."...

***

"I don't see it," said Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform and one of the nation's most vocal tax opponents. "I would be very sensitive to it and sweating over it if it were happening."...


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/15/national/15ballot.html?hp&ex=1132030800&en=4637414f33359404&ei=5094&partner=homepage

[rocktivity]

1. A government small enough to drown in a tub was THEIR idea, not ours

and if Katrina and Iraq have taught Americans anything, it's that small governments KILL.

:headbang:
rocknation

[aquart]

2. Which has never been a problem for Grover Norquist.

Shouldn't he be sweating indictments about now?

[WhiteTara]

3. Oh to watch his ugly ass frog marched off

the political stage.

[Carolab]

4. But it's NOT a smaller government.

It's a MISMANAGED government that has led to a wildly out of control deficit. More taxes aren't the answer. Better management is. The problem with FEMA wasn't lack of $; it was a complete disregard for the victims at the expense of contractors.

[aquart]

5. Another lie.

There are so many, it's impossible to keep track.

[Carolab]

6. Right.

;-)
The real problem is FEMA was subsumed under Homeland Security and its mitigation functions downgraded. There seems to be contention over what FEMA's budget really is/was because of it.

So: A crony with no relevant experience was installed as head of FEMA. Mitigation budgets for New Orleans were slashed even though it was known to be one of the top three risks in the country. FEMA was deliberately downsized as part of the Bush administration's conservative agenda to reduce the role of government. After DHS was created, FEMA's preparation and planning functions were taken away.

Actions have consequences. No one could predict that a hurricane the size of Katrina would hit this year, but the slow federal response when it did happen was no accident. It was the result of four years of deliberate Republican policy and budget choices that favor ideology and partisan loyalty at the expense of operational competence. It's the Bush administration in a nutshell.