New Hampshire Matters
Consistency & Predictions
by Ray Chadwick
Previous columns have explored several themes as follows.
- Political parties and candidates should state their intentions and the values that they would implement if elected, and should work together to deliver what they promise.
- How candidates and parties voted in the past, the values and principles they acted upon or tried to implement, and the clarity of their ideas, are important predictors of what we can expect in the future.
- Insanity consists of doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Let’s now consider what to expect if New Hampshire voters return the Democrats to a majority in Concord in the next election.
Presently, Democrats represent about 60% of the members in each house of the Legislature and also 60% of the Executive Councilors.
As a consequence, the Democrats can implement whatever legislation fits their agenda.
We’ve previously observed that the Democratic Party Platform (www.nh-democrats.org) clearly identifies the initiatives that the Party proposes to implement, including the following:
“We recognize the value of early learning and believe the State must extend the benefit of kindergarten to all communities.”
“The State should meet its Constitutional requirements to adequately fund our schools considering all sources of revenue.”
“We believe that access to affordable and quality healthcare is a right that should be available to all citizens. We believe that this right should include, but not be limited to, preventive care, mental health services, and dental care. We further believe that universal access to healthcare in our country cannot be adequately achieved through market forces alone.”
Democrats, with the power of the majority, have been quite effective in working to implement the values and programs presented in their Platform. Establishing civil unions was one example where the Democrats gave the citizens of New Hampshire exactly what was promised in their Party Platform.
What can we expect from a new Democratic legislature regarding spending and taxes, assuming that it would be consistent with performance in the current session and also with the promises made on the NH Democrat Party website?
The current legislature has adopted a budget that increases spending by 17.5% (for the general revenue fund) over the prior budget. Revenue increases were forecast to balance the spending.
The revenue sources (fees and taxes on business profits, interest and dividends, rooms and meals, liquor, etc.) actually are coming in ahead of prior years, but unfortunately not high enough to meet the budget revenue projections.
The Governor is slowly acknowledging that the budget will be in deficit, even though revenues are running at record levels, and blaming the “revenue shortfall” on “the economy”.
The economy is good enough in New Hampshire to produce revenue to the State that is higher than ever. Budget deficits (in spite of record high revenue) are also found at the Federal government.
The Federal government also enjoys majorities of Democrats in each house of Congress.
Coincidence? You be the judge.
When revenue increases, and a deficit results, then spending is the problem.
Seriously, is there any doubt that a government (or group or business or family or person) that decides to spend 17.5% more than they did in the prior period MUST be counting on additional revenue?
Not just additional revenue (the current sources are already providing additional revenue) but additional sources of revenue. More cynically, they may be assuming that the deficit crisis will influence the voters to be more amenable to raising new taxes so as to reduce it.
Along that line of thought, there are some major expenses that aren’t fully included in the current State budget, particularly the impact of funding an adequate education.
The Democrats are clear in what they propose to solve that issue.
“The State should meet its Constitutional requirements to adequately fund our schools considering all sources of revenue.”
What would “all sources of revenue” include? Perhaps income and sales taxes?
We’ve seen in the last elections a coordinated initiative advocating that we drop “the Pledge”, asked of candidates, that they commit to not raise taxes. The Pledge was formulated by former Governor Meldrim Thompson, who also said “Low Taxes are the result of Low Spending.”
When asked in early April whether the budget deficit had changed his mind about tax increases or new taxes, Governor Lynch responded “Well, I’m going to be looking at everything.” Two days later, observing that critics are misinterpreting his remarks, he stated that he would veto a sales or income tax
With their current majority, the Democrats could easily implement an income or sales tax.
One of the few things constraining them is the concern that voters might punish them at the polls if they pass a broad-based tax (even presuming that the Governor vetoes it).
That constraint will disappear if Democrats return with a majority after the next election.