Full Text:

TALKIN' THE DOUBLE-TALK

Pay no heed,

To what I say;

It'll change

By end of day.

The two top Republican state senators recently took pen in hand to beat up on

the Democratic tax-cut plan. Not a bad idea. It's a dork. But the

across-the-board plan that Adela Eads and James Fleming set forth in its place

make the Democrats look positively Solomonic.

The Dems, you'll recall, would give us an income tax credit if our local

property tax exceeds 5 percent of our income. Not what you'd call a

sparklingly lucid proposal, but it would surely favor central-city,

lower-income homeowners.

Not fair, say Eads and Fleming. It leaves out non-homeowners. Good point, and

one which has been corrected in later versions. Most renters are poorer and

could surely use some help. But not to worry, dear Republican reader. Those

senatorial tears were only crocodile. Eads and Fleming have not suddenly been

transformed into protectors of the poor. Their tax cut, like all previous

ones, would shower its benefits largely upon the rich. They term this result

"the fairest and most honest way of providing tax relief..." Right.

The senators also swell with pride in reflecting on the tax cut that they

passed themselves during their recent moment in power. It gives each of us a

$100 property-tax exemption on our income tax. This means that in order to

collect, we have to be prosperous enough both to pay the state income tax and

to own our own home or car. But wait! Isn't that the very same argument Eads

and Fleming just raised against the Democratic plan? You bet. Which merely

highlights the double-talk and double-race that characterizes so much

political discourse about taxes.

Or take another reason that the senators oppose the circuit-breaker. It's not

fair, they say, because it only helps 15 percent of Connecticut households.

God bless them, Eads and Fleming may have just come up with a whole new

definition of "fairness." It would delete considerations such as need, worth,

and equity, replacing them all with maximization of beneficiaries. Of course

maximizing beneficiaries, or voters, is nothing new in politics. It's just the

sudden elevation of that practical need to the level of moral imperative that

is new.

But the Republicans are at least on firm political ground with this

double-talk. Very few voters truly care about fairness. They just like to hear

"income-tax cut" and forget the rest. That's the whole Rowland philosophy, and

other Republican governors too. Cut whatever spending you have to, preferably

for non-voters (the poor), and finesse the rest with rosy revenue estimates.

Nationwide, it's been a winning combination. Democrats risk annihilation by

clinging to some tired old measures of real fairness. If only 15 percent of

voters benefit from their "circuit-breaker," those Democrats are accepting a

mighty big handicap.

The Republicans are also carving themselves a pleasant niche among the rich.

An across-the-board tax cut usually benefits the wealthy most. Moneyed

citizens are prone to remember little gifts like that, especially when it

comes time to write campaign checks. And these days, money is even more

important than votes.

But perhaps most shocking in the Eads-Fleming statement is their outright

rejection of any state duty to provide relief from local property taxes. Every

state, including Connecticut, so far recognizes its duty to help impoverished

central cities pay their bills. In fact, Connecticut just took over the whole

cost of local welfare from the cities. And the Connecticut Supreme Court,

years ago in Horton v. Meskill, forced the state to give big school bucks to

poor towns, and small school bucks to rich towns. Other states have created

counties and special districts to share the uneven costs of police, education

and highways.

What Senators Eads and Fleming have actually done with their manifesto is to

inch their party one more step along the path to a full

devil-take-the-hindmost philosophy. And as Connecticut becomes more and more

segregated between the voting middle-class and the non-voting poor, the

Democrats have little choice but to follow along.

(Bill Collins, a former Mayor of Norwalk, is a syndicated columnist.)