Gov. Mark Parkinson won praise for his bold State of the State speech and courage in proposing a sales-tax hike to help close a budget hole. “But that proposal was dead the second he uttered it. The Republican Legislature simply isn’t going there,” wrote Kansas City Star columnist Steve Kraske, who argued that Parkinson’s “unrealistic proposal leaves Republicans on their own to deal with the mess. They might wind up jeopardizing some of the very programs Parkinson wants most to protect.”
Parkinson’s prescription also would take time to work. That prompted one Statehouse insider to complain to The Eagle editorial board that Parkinson, by declining to run for his job in November, is undermining his plea to lawmakers to protect what Kansas has built over 150 years and to prepare the state for the future. Parkinson said that “it’s our turn to fight,” but he’s willing to leave much of the fighting to others.
Gov. Mark Parkinson isn’t finding much support for his proposal to raise the state’s sales tax rate for three years as a way to avoid devastating funding cuts to education and social services. As an alternative, perhaps he should revive an idea proposed by former Gov. Joan Finney: Lower the sales-tax rate by eliminating all sales-tax exemptions. If it eliminated all these exemptions, the state could reduce its statewide sales-tax rate from the current 5.3 percent to 3.3 percent and still collect the same amount of revenue next year, according to the Kansas Department of Revenue. If the state eliminated the exemptions but lowered the tax rate to 4.2 percent — still a significant drop — it could collect an additional $590 million in revenue to help with its budget problems. The idea ought to have some appeal to free-market groups, as it lowers and levels the tax playing field by eliminating exemptions to the politically favored.
“I am more convinced than ever that when historians look back at the end of the first decade of the 21st century, they will say that the most important thing to happen was not the Great Recession, but China’s Green Leap Forward,” wrote columnist Thomas Friedman. “The Beijing leadership clearly understands that the E.T. — Energy Technology — revolution is both a necessity and an opportunity, and they do not intend to miss it. We, by contrast, intend to fix Afghanistan. Have a nice day.”