Sun editorial:

Yet another costly veto

Gibbons passes up chance to help Nevada find more revenue for state programs

Friday, June 12, 2009 | 2:06 a.m.

Of all the complex problems that face state government, nothing is more pressing than the need to overhaul Nevada’s antiquated tax structure.

Essential government services, from education to public safety to social services, cannot function properly without a reliable stream of revenue. Yet the Nevada Legislature repeatedly has shown a lack of guts to engineer an overhaul and Gov. Jim Gibbons, with his “no new taxes” mantra, wants to return the state to the Stone Age.

The Legislature this year did manage to pass a resolution to study possible broad-based taxes in time for consideration during the 2011 legislative session, but Gibbons on Tuesday vetoed a separate bill that would have appropriated $500,000 toward the study.

In his veto message for Senate Bill 143, Gibbons said: “We don’t need an expensive study to justify maintaining unsustainable levels of spending by increasing taxes while our citizens struggle to get by. What we do need is responsible government that puts the needs of its citizens above its own wants.”

What the governor conveniently failed to mention — as he has intentionally done repeatedly — is that there are individuals and businesses in Nevada that do not pay their fair share of taxes. Yet these individuals and businesses take advantage of the schools, roads and police services paid for by everyone else.

Where is the “responsible government” in that equation?

We know that broader-based taxes are justified and would go a long way toward maintaining more sustainable levels of funding for state programs. A broader-based revenue stream would be a fairer way to incorporate everyone who lives in Nevada or does business in this state. A study would have helped with the details.

By vetoing SB143 and negating the money for the study, Gibbons demonstrated that he does not believe in fair play when it comes to taxation. Instead, he leaves the impression that he is protecting certain special interests whose leaders do not believe they should pay their fair share of taxes.

Discussion: 9 comments so far…

By SgtRock

6/12/09 at 3:20 a.m.

Suggest removal

Bottom line: Democrats are ALWAYS striving to raise taxes.

If they did a big study, implemented it then I guarantee that within 4 years the Sun and the Democrats would be screaming for higher taxes.
By jlb101

6/12/09 at 6:17 a.m.

Suggest removal

Yes. We could have a wonderful system just like California, New York, or New Jersey has. Instead, quit wasting and spending so damned much money.
By larry5

6/12/09 at 7:59 a.m.

Suggest removal

Bigger government, bigger budget, more revenue from increased taxes. Is that really what you want to hand down to your kids?
By Patrick_R_Gibbons

6/12/09 at 8:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

Why doesn't the state try and figure out ways to cut costs? Do more with less. It is possible, the private sector does it year after year after year.

If the government provided more with less revenue, we'd all be much better off.
By Nez

6/12/09 at 8:52 a.m.

Suggest removal

If you want Higher taxes You can go to California.
By truthfromreason

6/12/09 at 3:11 p.m.

Suggest removal

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QDv4sYwj...
By Joe6

6/12/09 at 3:47 p.m.

Suggest removal

Politicians want higher taxes when times are good and higher taxes when times are bad.
By mywallet700

6/12/09 at 11:12 p.m.

Suggest removal

Who writes these editorials? Everyone knows "overhauling" the tax system is Democrat code for "income tax". Does the Sun REALLY support a Nevada Internal Revenue Service. Do people losing their homes and jobs really need to pay more for government? Note to Sun editorial writer: Shut up.
By Patrick_R_Gibbons

6/14/09 at 9:35 a.m.

Suggest removal

Truth from reason, the video you show is fallacious at best and a down right stupid lie at worst. Somalia has a government, it also has warlords in other parts of the country that run and claim those parts of the country on their own.

Furthermore, do you contend that private beaches (which we have - and by the way are often safer and cleaner than public beaches) will lead to a situation of warlordism in America?