The New York Times takes note of the brewing tax revolt in Massachusetts, where a grassroots group has put an initiative on the ballot to repeal the state income tax. The Times headline (on paper) reads, "On Massachusetts Ballot, a Tax Repeal That Worries Leaders." Why does a newspaper that purports to be a check on government so often present questions from the government's point of view? Did they once publish headlines like "On Washington Mall, a Peace March That Worries Leaders" or "In Massachusetts, a Civil Rights Crusade That Worries Leaders"? I doubt it.
And I should in fact congratulate reporter Pam Belluck for writing
It would save the average taxpayer about $3,600 a year. Annual revenue from the tax is about $12.5 billion, roughly 45 percent of the state’s budget of about $28 billion.
Too often, as we've noted before here on Cato@Liberty, the mainstream media use the formulation "the proposed cut would cost the government millions of dollars." At least this time Belluck started with the taxpayer.
In 2002 a ballot measure to repeal the income tax got very little attention and still won 45 percent of the vote. This year, with a perception of hard economic times, it might do better. But this time the Establishment is on the alert. The advocates of repeal have raised some $270,000, and after their signature-gathering have only $25,000 left to spend. The special interest groups that thrive on taxpayer money have raised $1.3 million to oppose the initiative.
Let's hear it for Carla Howell and the Committee for Small Government, who are at least forcing the government--and its beneficiaries--to explain why they need more than the $16 billion of citizens' money that they would still have after repeal of the income tax. And let's hear it for pizza shop owner Lakis Theoharis, who tells the Times, “I’m for the repeal of the tax. To me, the smaller the government, the better for the citizens.”