By Denise Ross

You’ve got to hand it to Gov. Mike Rounds. He knows how to play everybody, not just like a fiddle but like an entire symphony orchestra.

The governor says, “OMG, the money is sooooo bad that I will be forced to cut funding that helps disabled babies.” (You think I exaggerate for effect; not so.)

The chorus cries, “No! That would be wrong!”

The governor says, “OMG, it’s soo much worse than I thought, and I will have to cut funding for special education, deaf schoolchildren, the state fair, the arts, and on and on. Oh, and raise property taxes.”

The chorus cries, “No! We couldn’t stand it if that happened.”

All the while, a temporary sales tax hike - on the Second Floor table since before the official budget address in early December - waits in the wings to save the day. He’s already got us more than half-way to begging him to raise our taxes.

Politically smart and expedient? Absolutely. Intellectually honest? Ha. Leadership? Not by a country mile.

Consider the budget mantra of governor’s of recent memory:

The state’s core mission is to take care of those unable to care for themselves.

Apparently poor sick children, nursing home patients, those too poor to pay tax on groceries, 4-H clubs, the aforementioned disabled babies, special ed and deaf students are perfectly able to fend for themselves. At the same time, the tourism industry and those businesses that would tap the REDI and Future funds, they require the state’s assistance. They are unable to help themselves.

But, as with the financial crisis gripping the nation, we all share in the blame. The structural deficit spending has been going on for years, and it just so happens that South Dakota hit the bottom of the cash stashed in its cookie jar at the same time the recession hit. So it’s easy to point to that as the culprit. No doubt it has made the pinch more pinchy.

Meanwhile, every penny of sales tax levied in South Dakota brings in $177 million per year. Hey, that’s even more than we need to cover the budget shortfall this year AND next. So much better than cutting money off to disabled babies. We could even put some green back into that cookie jar.

So far, all we’re getting are vague references to a search for “additional revenue sources.” After a few more weeks, they’ll put a finer point on it and offer up the salve, the relief of just a teeny half-penny or penny for a few months. Our collective burden will be lifted. And, as a bonus, they’ll levy this during the summertime, so that tourists will pay the tax. We will all be thankful in the face of a tax increase. Brils.

As an added bonus - and this part just KILLS me - the income-tax advocates swallowed the bait, too, barely pausing to take in its aroma. They went from 0 to 60 in 1.3 seconds in reaching into their drawer of Ideas Sure to Kill Any SD Political Career. They dusted off the talking points and haven’t stopped to read the road signs along their lonely highway. All they will get is out of gas, in a sudden way that will leave them startled.

Whether South Dakota ought to have an income tax is a great academic discussion. It also will be great fodder for the 2010 governor’s race. Evil-genius-level of brils.

So, we’re in for higher sales taxes on a short-term basis. And I’m totally OK with that. I like a soothing salve as much as the next blogger. We’re not in so much for a straightforward and honest discussion of the options. That part bugs me more than a little.

Meanwhile, South Dakota is one of a handful of states that has any cash on hand (in the equivalent of bank accounts, not the easily accessible cookie jar) and the feds are about to send a dump truck full of money our way. Of course, the Legislature will have adjourned by then, that temporary sales tax increase loaded into the chamber.

How many years do you think it will take us to burn through the extra cash before we find ourselves right back in this structural deficit cage?

Beuhler?

Spread the word

Hide Sites