This is a stick up
LISTENING to the recent budget discussions in the Senate chamber was like eavesdropping on a meeting of pickpockets. Here we have government officials talking about taking more of other people’s money — whether those poor saps like it or not. Why? Because the government, “under new management,” doesn’t want to live within its means — like the “previous management.”
In any case, will lawmakers dare hold a public hearing on this and similar tax-hike proposals and invite the intended victims to testify or submit their written comments? And can someone on Capital Hill answer the following question: Why is it right to impose new or higher taxes so that — to quote the new governor — the “mismanagement of resources and misalignment of priorities” could continue?
The local economy is still trying to recover from the pandemic restrictions. Many businesses are either shutting down or downsizing and, amid a labor shortage, may soon lose a significant number of their workers. Prices have risen and/or are rising. Everyone is squeezing their pennies — except this government that has so many redundant or duplicative departments, divisions, agencies, offices and programs.
Before considering new burdens on taxpayers, elected officials should find ways to cut spending CNMI government-wide and not just the executive branch. Prioritize. Set targets. Reduce the use of office supplies, equipment, vehicles, cell phones, utilities, among other things, as much as possible. Do not fill non-critical positions that have been vacated recently. Find ways to improve tax collections.
These have been proposed time and again. Almost all elected officials and other politicians, then and now, said they support the implementation of these measures. And yet here we are, again, having the same discussion.
Balanced baloney
ONCE again, we hear elected officials talk about the need to pass a “balanced” budget, and to “avoid deficit spending.” But they should know or they ought to know that if the economy doesn’t improve significantly in the next few months, then regardless of what they claim in the budget, they will, again, end up spending more than they can collect.
They know or ought to know that the China tourism market is practically gone and the Japanese market remains sluggish due to the weak Yen while the Korean market hasn’t fully recovered yet — and even if it does, total arrivals could only equal the numbers recorded in 2011, which were the lowest since the mid-1980s when the CNMI still had a garment industry.
But once again they are discussing an annual budget that will not fully fund medical referrals, public safety/emergency response, the government’s utility bills, among other government obligations. And they will, once again, call it a “balanced” budget.
But they also know or ought to know that the annual budget authorizes the government to spend money now based on future collections that may or may not transpire.
As the Finance secretary told senators last week, the administration is assuming that raising taxes will result in additional revenue amounting to over $9 million. This is also assuming that the affected — struggling — businesses will not make the necessary adjustments to cope with yet another additional cost in doing business on a small, remote island with a dwindling population and a faltering economy.
As economist Thomas Sowell would put it, “All that the government can do in reality is change the tax rate. How much tax revenue that will produce depends on how people react.”
But see, that doesn’t matter to some politicians. What they want is to spend over $9 million in revenue they don’t have by passing a law that says they may probably collect it.
This from the same government that cannot implement its Anti-Littering Act, among other laws.
