Why Earmarks Are Always Bad

On Nov. 4, Colorado voters will decide on a few ballot initiatives that include earmarks, Refs. 50 and 51. These amendments to the State Constitution are an ideal study in how leftists hide their agenda behind feel good measures and why earmarks are inherently lies on a grand scale.

Each of these referendums has a sweet and hopeful outer shell to mask its less appealing inner reality:

Ref. 50 would expand gambling to allow higher stakes and more entertaining games. Since gambling is essentially a tax on stupidity, and since taxing something always makes for less of that something, Ref. 50 should reduce the amount of stupidity in Colorado. Also, the lack of gambling options in Colorado simply drives customers of this business to Nevada. Still, to many people, gambling is a vice, an ugly indulgence that scars the character of great historical mountain towns.

In order to sell Ref. 50, its promoters knew just what button to press: ‘education.’ Even though Colorado passed a $6bln+ tax increase to fund ‘education,’ nothing has improved. Indeed, the US spends more per student on basic education than any other country, yet the results are middling at best. Still, politicians could sell forced amputations if they could tie them to ‘education.’

Ref. 51 would raise the state sales tax by 7%. Even though Colorado voters passed a $6bln tax increase just a few years ago, leftists always want more. Gov. Ritter illegally passed a huge property tax increase just last year, and supports a $300bln tax increase on energy production. Politicians will always want higher taxes to dole out favors to their friends and supporters.

Again, to sell Ref. 51, politicians sugar coated a big tax increase. The funds will go to provide health services for the disabled. There is a broad consensus in the US that the government should help people incapable of independence, so why has the Colorado government failed to provide this support before? The Colorado treasury is awash in tax revenues, yet can’t afford for popular social services. Gov. Ritter has wasted hundreds of millions on impractical environmental projects and other political giveaways. Rather than fund yet another tax increase voters should demand that Gov. Ritter set more realistic spending priorities.

Adding to the evils of these referendums is the fact that they will most likely not increase funding for their intended beneficiaries. Just as Ref. C was sold as an education tax increase, yet no new money went to those programs, Refs. 50 and 51 will not help education of the disabled.

Money is portable, or fungible, meaning it is hard to say where any particular dollar actually came from. While the new revenues from Refs. 50 and 51 will certainly go to education and the disabled, the general fund spending that used to support these causes is free to migrate to Gov. Ritter’s many far left causes. Indeed, the new flush of money to these popular programs will ease the transition of general funds money away from them, because most voters will assume that the programs are well funded thanks to the new tax increases.

Any tax increase, no matter how beautifully earmarked and packaged, will only support the pet projects of politicians. Only a restriction on overall spending and taxing, like TABOR, can keep the government in check.

Must voters who favor good education and services for the disabled also favor tax increases? No. The government has plenty of money, more than it deserves, yet it always wants more. The only solution is for voters to oppose tax increases. Goverment sob stories are always lies, and voters should say no to more earmarks and taxation.