Columnist Jon Ralston: Real story behind poll results

Friday, Feb. 14, 2003 | 4:02 a.m.

Nearly one month after the governor proposed the largest tax increase in history, and amid a ceaseless bludgeoning by irate letter-writers and editorialists, 44 percent of the public does not oppose Gov. Kenny Guinn's tax plan.

That was the finding of a Mason-Dixon survey conducted for the Review-Journal, which ignored that astonishing number (30 percent support and 14 percent undecided) and focused on the dog-bites-man story of a majority (56 percent) being against the Guinn tax proposals. (What's next -- a banner headline that pollsters have miraculously divined that the public hates a personal income tax? Stop the presses. Please.)

Even more astonishing is that Guinn's numbers appear unaffected by the tax plan, according to the Mason-Dixon poll, with only a paltry 16 percent of voters rating him poorly and 53 percent saying he merits excellent or good marks.

So what does this mean?

1. The public is discerning.

2. Voters are disconnected.

3. The poll is useless.

The answer may be all of the above, as Sybil-like voters often provide bizarre survey results and polls that fail to probe voters with follow-ups, especially on such a complex and volatile issue, are inherently superficial and pretty worthless.

Yes, I see the results through the prism of my predispositions, just as others will. But the facts are clear: The public may be befuddled, or even of many minds. But that poll does not show overwhelming opposition to the tax increase.

Even if the numbers are a snapshot, misleading or flat-out wrong, the prominent play and the potential to affect lawmakers cocooned in Carson City is the real story here. And as nattering nabobs of know-nothingness plan anti-tax initiatives, and the R-J, which (sorry, boss) is the most influential media outlet, continues to pound lawmakers on an almost daily basis for even considering tax increases, the potential to subvert the very nature of representative government once again is palpable.

This happens every time something inherently unpopular, especially a major tax increase, is proposed, and never more so than now, with the largest in state annals on the table. More than two centuries ago, James Madison presciently understood the dangers of direct democracy and policy-by-poll when he wrote that elected officials can "refine and enlarge the public views, by passing them through the medium of a chosen body of citizens, whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of the country ... it may well happen that the public voice, produced by the representatives of the people, will be more consonant to the public good than if pronounced by the people themselves."

Ah, but is there wisdom to be found in the Legislative Building, or has it been muffled as lawmakers are buffeted with angry e-mailers and poll numbers such as these from that Mason-Dixon blurry snapshot:

People are opposed to tripling the still-silly-after-all-these-years business license tax (76 percent), an ill-conceived amusement tax (60 percent) and boosting very low property taxes (56 percent). And yet they support sin tax increases (56 percent), the new gross receipts tax (58 percent) and, of course, raising gaming taxes (67 percent).

So why not just wire up every voter, have lawmakers ask how they feel about each tax, then query how much each one should or not be raised, and set policy that way? As Madison and Jefferson et al. shudder, why not abolish the Legislature and replace the supposed wise men and women with computers that record the poll results. And why stop at taxes? Take a poll on everything and just follow, as the lawmakers like to say in their lingua pander, the will of the people.

Well, folks, the will of the people should be filtered through people who were elected to lead, not follow. Sure, raise the gaming tax up a few points and that could cover any shortfall. But does that achieve the goal of broadening and thus stabilizing an ever-eroding tax base?

No, that would be a short-term, facile solution reflecting shortsighted, politically motivated thinking by folks elected to craft long-term answers to far-reaching, systemic problems. There must be some imperative in Carson City other than re-election, some emotion other than fear.

And for those, like the governor, who express compassion for the poor and infirm, for children who can't find full-day kindergarten in public schools, for the mentally ill who have to queue up in emergency rooms, there is only disdain, as if showing heart is showing weakness.

It's fine to come up with wasteful programs and headline-catching anecdotes of fat. But how much attention is given to Nevada being near the bottom in per capita spending on Medicaid, education and health care?

Before Session '03 adjourns, you will hear all manner of alternatives, from a payroll tax to room taxes to a real estate transfer tax to some taxes you didn't even think existed. You will hear of programs to be erased, of others to be cut. And you will hear cries to put it on the ballot to thwart any initiatives in the making.

But as Nevada sinks lower in indices of how it educates its kids, takes care of its sick and elderly and embraces the unfortunate, what you won't hear are too many people talking about how changing that should be the goal. You know why? Those things just don't poll very well.