News Sentinel says Income Tax Ban a Bad Idea

This from the Feb. 9 News Sentinel:

TAX BAN WOULD ALSO HAMPER OPENNESS

A constitutional amendment definitively barring a state income tax has been introduced once again into the Tennessee General Assembly.

The joint resolution contains a provision that should send a chill up the spine of everyone who cherishes open government, regardless of their position on an income tax.

The resolution would be a step toward amending the state constitution to prohibit the state and all local governments from levying income or payroll taxes. Other than a tax on interest and dividends, the constitution doesn't authorize the General Assembly to levy an income tax, but it doesn't explicitly bar such a tax either.

The most troubling aspect of the resolution, however, is an addition that would close the windows on government activities in Tennessee by allowing the only public notice of the amendment to be postings on the Secretary of State and General Assembly websites. That's unacceptable.

The joint resolution is sponsored by state Sen. Brian Kelsey, R-Germantown and state Rep. Glen Casada, R-Franklin. Local lawmakers like state Sens. Jamie Hagood and Stacey Campfield, as well as state Reps. Steve Hall and Frank Nicely, have signed on as co-sponsors.

A similar measure was allowed to die last year, but the measure might have a better chance this year with Republicans firmly in control of both legislative houses.

Regardless of the amendment's content, the fiscal note accompanying the resolution should give everyone pause.

If the resolution is adopted by both houses, it then would have to be approved by the next General Assembly, which convenes in 2013, before heading to the voters in 2014.

Article XI, Section 3 of the state constitution requires the publication of the amendment in between the legislative votes. That's traditionally meant publication in the state's newspapers. The fiscal note attached to this bill, however, "assumes" that electronic publication alone complies with the constitution.

While the constitution was adopted before the Internet was an option and its use is open to interpretation, we don't think that posting a notice on a government website is sufficient. Too many Tennesseans - about one in four - don't have computers or access to the Internet. The government in such cases should be proactive in pushing information out to the people rather than forcing citizens to go digging through government websites to find it.

If government websites are considered adequate as the only venue for public notice, then all public notices - announcements of public meetings, invitations to bid on government contracts, foreclosures and others - could become harder to find as well.

One might even argue that confining public notices to government websites is like letting foxes guard the henhouses. Just wait and see what sort of slip-ups start happening in public notices then.

The point of the publication requirement is to inform more, not fewer, people, and changing it in this manner should be viewed as an affront to every Tennessee resident.

The question is this: if Kelsey and Casada believe this amendment is right for Tennessee, why won't they use the tried-and-true method of telling Tennesseans about it? What are they afraid of?

© 2011, Knoxville News Sentinel Co.