Columnist Jon Ralston: Already sidetracked by silliness

Friday, Feb. 7, 2003 | 4:59 a.m.

If the first week of Session '03 is any harbinger, The Great Tax Debate will be neither great nor will it be a debate. Any hopes that the rhetoric might soar to new heights as the Gang of 63 began to deliberate the state's fiscal future were dashed with Assemblyman Bob Beers' egregious e-mail assault on casino workers and Sen. Ann O'Connell's let-them-shop-at-thrift-stores comment in the Sun.

And these are the GOP leaders in their respective houses of the Not So Fast Caucus, legislators who have the bona fides to do the proctological exam of the state budget many believe is needed, if even just for political cover. Imagine what we can expect from the Just Say No Caucus (the no-tax, no-how closed minds) or the Scared Sixteen Caucus (the Assembly freshmen).

An auspicious beginning this is not. Are lawmakers already, as Gov. Kenny Guinn warned in his State of the State speech three weeks ago, choosing cowardice over leadership?

Long forgotten is Assembly Concurrent Resolution 1 from last session, when the Legislature set the stage for The Great Tax Debate by tasking a group of experts (including my boss, Brian Greenspun) to "develop one or more definitive proposals to carry out the state's need to provide additional revenue for state programs, to stabilize the tax base and to reduce the long-term structural deficit of the state budget."

No one (yes, that includes you, governor) should expect lawmakers simply to rubber-stamp the tax panel's recommendations, most of which are included in Guinn's billion-dollar tax increase. But the epidemic of capital amnesia, a strange strain where lawmakers can't seem to remember ACR 1 but clearly recall e-mails they have received from angry constituents, is astonishing to witness.

What's more, most seem unfamiliar with the task force's report and the rationale for tax increases. That report compellingly quantifies the immediate $700 million problem outlined by the governor in his State of the State -- a deficit the report points out does "not include consideration of the addition of any new programs or the elimination of any existing programs."

And in that report, the task force perfectly encapsulated the argument that should be an elevated, erudite discussion, not a name-calling, partisan slugfest: "If one feels that the state is currently spending more money than necessary, either in whole or in particular area, then he/she may believe that the projections are an overstatement of need. Conversely, if one believes that the state is not currently providing for acceptable services, in whole or in part, then he/she may believe that the projections are an understatement of need."

Instead of deliberating the need, if the first week presages anything, lawmakers seem likely to get sidetracked by silliness. Nowhere is this more evident than the bricks being thrown at the Gross Receipts Tax, the most controversial quarter-cent since that sales tax to build water facilities, and one that is misunderstood, misconstrued and misrepresented.

If you want to argue that allowing government's nose under the business tent will only ensure that the tax-and-spend class will continue sniffing around because of its insatiable appetite for new money, that's fine. But the arguments being presented against the GRT are nonsense.

I'll say it again: Any business that cannot afford a quarter-cent on its gross (and at least $450,000 of that will be exempted) should not be in business. Yes, there should be debate about subtracting the costs of goods and ensuring fairness in how it is applied. But the facile notion that this is simply a Gaming Relief Tax pushed by an industry trying to escape a more onerous increase in the Gross Gaming Tax misses the fundamental point of the debate: to find another source of revenue to stabilize the tax base, which is the purpose behind ACR 1.

Sure, the gamers could afford to pay a little more on their gross. But as figures are released showing that gaming lost $33.5 million last year, more money must be found from somewhere other than casinos. The company executives have exacerbated the reality and the perception by their shareholder-driven quest outside Nevada for more money. But is the apt punishment to jack up their taxes? That's a diversionary tactic and a pathetic one by people who are afraid to argue the facts and want to exploit the politics.

There's still plenty of time to remember the governor's admonition to take the hard road walked by leaders rather than the easier path trekked by political cowards. And plenty of people are lining up at that proverbial fork.

If Guinn doesn't stick to his plan and try to push it through, he is a coward. If the gaming industry doesn't stand up for itself amid the populist blathering, the Strip folks are cowards. If the business community doesn't keep its promise to pay a "giant share" of the tax burden, the chamber types are cowards.

And if the Gang of 63 doesn't stand up for principles (whatever those may be) over politics (whatever threats may be out there), they are cowards, too.