Getting to the root of the problem

As a social worker, I strongly support funding for programs that help children and families. These programs tend to pay dividends down the road. It would be a mistake for our state to cut them as a consequence of our current budget mess, knowing full well that we will be paying for it later.

Yet, the lobbying event that took place yesterday in Olympia (Story: "At “Homesick for Spokane” gathering, local childrens’ advocates urge budget cutters to look elsewhere," Eye on Olympia) is a perfect example of my least favorite way to address these potential cuts to services.

I get emails from social service groups saying, "Don't let them cut this vital program..." I get emails from education groups saying, "Don't let them cut our funding..." I get lots of emails from worthy areas all asking that I call my legislator and ask them to spare their program. The reality is, however, that there simply is not enough money to spare all of these programs and services. The way things stand now, something must be cut.

What I never, ever get (though I really ought to) are emails calling for tax increases or, even better, a change in our state's tax structure as a means of helping these programs.

Currently collecting dust somewhere in Olympia is a 2002 report on Washington's tax structure, commissioned by the legislature and chaired by Bill Gates, Sr. (Full document available here).

The report mentions the inequity of the current tax system (something that should be of interest to social workers):

"Washington's tax structure is regressive. The lowest income households pay 15.7 percent of income for total excise and property taxes, while the highest income households pay 4.4 percent of income for the same taxes. Sales tax is the main cause of regressivity."

(Chapter 4)

Also noted is the instability of the current system (which should be of interest to those lobbyists):

"The main finding is that Washington's mix of taxes, primarily its heavy dependence on the retail sales tax, causes revenues to increase on average more than personal income during good economic times and less than personal income in economic downturns. This causes revenue shortfalls in economic downturns, precipitating destabilizing fiscal crises, while in good economic times, excess revenues may result in permanent tax cuts or the adoption of new spending programs. These, in turn, exacerbate the problems in subsequent economic downturns.

[...]

Analysis of the elasticity for Washington shows an overall elasticity of 1.2. This means that tax revenues are considerably more volatile than the economy, that is, tax revenues grow faster than the economy in good economic times and contract more than the economy in poor economic times."

(Chapter 4)

More than most others, social workers and teachers know the value of addressing issue proactively. The value of early intervention is apparent in our practice, so why should we not apply this same value to our lobbying? We should be dealing with the root of the problem here rather than fighting with each other over scraps.

It is painfully apparent that our current tax structure is at the root of this problem. This is the issue social service and education lobbyists should be taking up with Olympia. Let's find a way to stabilize our state budget (and thereby stabilize funding for education and social services) and provide a more progressive tax environment for Washington.