Bill Moyers Journal: A National Taxpayers' Bill of Rights?

This week, the JOURNAL returned to the distressingly familiar topic of government waste – in this story through the perspective of Rep. Henry Waxman, chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

Waxman said:

“People work hard for their money. And whether you're a liberal or a conservative or whatever you call yourself, you shouldn't want to see it wasted.”

Various measures have been enacted on the state and local levels to limit government spending. Some hope they'll help reduce the waste that often accompanies earmarks and non-competitive government contracts.

The most prominent of these is the Taxpayers' Bill of Rights (TABOR), a voter-enacted 1992 amendment to Colorado’s constitution that strictly ties government revenues to previous years’ spending levels adjusted for population growth and inflation.

TABOR's advocates point to Colorado's low taxes and strong economic growth and assert that, since the policy was directly enacted by voters rather than legislators, it is more democratic than a legislature influenced by special interests and prone to pork. Opponents say that Colorado's infrastructure is being neglected, that legislators' hands are tied regarding necessary programs, and that TABOR is too complex a topic for most of the voters who supported it to fully understand.

Controversial from the beginning, TABOR has been loosened on a number of occasions to increase educational funding and to compensate for periods of economic recession.

What do you think?

Should federal spending be frozen and tied to inflation and population growth, as with TABOR? Should there be some other system of strict spending limits? Why or why not?

Is the sort of oversight practiced by Rep. Waxman’s committee a better strategy than a strict limitation on spending? Why or why not? If so, who oversees the overseers?

Tag(s): government
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal on March 14, 2008 12:14 PM | Permalink

Comments

Billy-Don Moyers: Journalists are supposed to "follow the money", not chase it.

Posted by: Mouvinon | December 1, 2008 4:13 AM

Due to the Victory party of Barrack Obama, we had this so called over expectation that might other’s expected due to the President Obama winner’s. We have now discovered who our next head commander is. Congratulations, Mr. Obama on becoming America’s 44th President of the United States of America. Your endurance through the 22-month campaign is highly admirable. However, your journey has just begun. You have been chosen to become the decision maker for all Americans to resolve the major issues in our economy. First and foremost, the financial system and the faltering economy must be stabilized and we understand that you have proposed a number of different stimulus packages in recent weeks regarding this matter. Your plans to temporarily exempt seniors from having to make annual withdrawals from their IRAs and 401 (k)s after the age of 70 ½ and to temporarily exempt the unemployed from having to pay tax on their unemployment benefits will most likely have you score on both sides. Nevertheless, the biggest focus should be on keeping the bank bailout/credit repair that started on track, reduce real estate foreclosures and change the position of financial regulation. To sum up, you have all your objectives laid...

Posted by: Lisa P | November 11, 2008 5:55 AM

Tax payment designation: I'm not sure where it came from, but I am confident this idea could save the American democracy. I will advocate it as part of a larger reform program as long as we retain any semblance of representative government. Now who would oppose this idea? Who has something to lose? The Supreme Court has determined that campaign money is the equivalent of free speech under the Constitution and current law. It has recently been suggested that corporations have suprahuman free speech rights under the same precedents. The definition of intellectual property, copyright and patent are falling under corporate hegemony and expropriation. These are unjust and dangerous ideas to be overcome, and barring that, bent to the will of the people. That is why no one other than eligible voters should be given the right to designate. The Jeremiah Wright controversy harkens me back to ante-Bellum days of slavery, when George Fitzhugh argued that slaves were the capital of the Southern landowner, just as the mills and railroad tracks were the capital of the Northern industrialist. How could a Constitution of due process abruptly deprive a man of his accumulated capital on the force of unlegislated moral law...

Posted by: Jack Martin | April 29, 2008 3:19 PM

John Barbee: Exactly what "below" do you consider socialist? Here you are in enormous debt, and you are willing to take the entire blame upon yourself. Maybe you can work the rest of your days as a motel maid to pay "Massa" back. The sacredness of each human individual and the individualistic ethic that blames the victim are two distinct (and irreconcilable)concepts. Didn't anyone ever explain "structural dysfunction" or "engineered injustice" to you. (Even cavemen buy Geico insurance from Warren Buffet!) Look brother, declare bankruptcy now, and let Citibank eat the note. Think of your loved ones and seek a just world.

Posted by: Jack Martin | April 22, 2008 1:13 PM

Rather than withholding taxes from our paychecks, wouldn't it be great if we were forced each payday to send a check to the IRS and State for the grand total? We might actually have another Boston Tea Party, something that is long overdue. And my god, some of the socialistic writing below scares me to death. I'm facing some pretty big financial problems. And I would rather go through financial disaster than allow the government to take another step in the direction they propose. Does "give me liberty or give me death" and "live free or die" mean nothing to them? How sad.

Posted by: John Barbee | April 22, 2008 11:45 AM

The Wessel and Borosage articles below are accurate, correct in their analysis, but incomplete and very short. Please Moyeristas see also Terry Gross's Fresh Air (WHYY archive ) of Feb.3 in which Professor David Greenberger (a former commodoties regulator and law professor) explains the instruments and procedures at fault and how they came about. He agrees with my friend Professor Ravi Batra that another Great Depression is probably on the way. If Bill Moyers continues in his failure to fairly address these issues we will know he is part of the lobbying and media propaganda keeping people ignorant of the theft of their slim chances for prosperity or even comfort. If this goes down like 9/11 Truth did on the Journal, we'll know who to blame. Another bull hockey session like the one about the demise of entitlements will have even progressives and populists clamoring to cancel Our sacred BMJ. Maybe Donohue or Rick Karr will tackle it. They're still selling household insulation over at PBS NOW. What in Hell are informed viewers supposed to think? Don't you-all want any membership money next pledge week? Bill Moyers has now been a hostage 61 days. beretco.op@gmail.com

Posted by: Jack Martin | April 3, 2008 9:47 PM

Ten Days That Changed Capitalism Officials Improvised To Rescue Markets; Will It Be Enough? March 27, 2008; Page A1 David Wessel Ten Days That Changed Capitalism http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120657397294066915.html By Rob Johnson and Robert Borosage 10 days That Changed Capitalism http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/10-days-changed-capitalism

Posted by: David Wessel | April 3, 2008 3:27 PM

PRESS RELEASE (link, see Irene's post below) Ben Bernanke, former FED chairman, on a survey of Decider's Yellowstone oilfield, suggested that the "Smart Money" would acquire at least 20 shares of Congress, take a modest position in Final Supreme News (Newscorp+Supreme Court), but concentrate their portfolio in Decider, "where the real action is." Quiryed by a reporter as to whether his suggestion constituted a conflict of interest, he shot back that," assets are presently so concentrated that conflict of interest is an impossibility." He went on to recommend more deregulation "just for the Hell of it" he laughed. "There have been insufficient incentives for insider trading in the past , to the detriment of well-deserved returns on risk." Asked by another reporter what he predicted for the next quarter he replied, "More risky behavior on the part of prominent persons." (Glorious AFD from me too, comrades.)

Posted by: Griffin Jones | April 1, 2008 11:30 AM

It came as no real surprise this morning when Sec. of Treasury Paulsen announced that the FED would absorb the SEC and the Treasury, take on a number of new regulatory powers, merge with Homeland Security, FEMA, TSA, the FBI, CIA, NSA and other unnamed covert branches, buy the New York and Chicago Exchanges and thus become a unitary self-regulating entity responsible only to itself and investor profits. He proceeded to introduce Sec. of State Rice who announced that the Executive Branch and the Presidency, because the government is "way-bankrupt," accept a complete takeover and merger with Exxon-Mobil. Each former stockholder (ne citizen) will receive one dollar per share making the takeover worth three hundred million dollars.She cautioned anyone objecting to this move that the new entity (Decider Inc.) has purchased Blackwater, CACI and Wackenhut in order to insure security and a smooth transition. Five minues later, Chief Justice John Roberts appeared on the Supreme Court steps with Rupert Murdoch to celebrate Newscorps option to purchase the courts, lock-stock-and barrel,for a fire sale price of 90 million dollars, exercising an option arranged on Sept.12, 2001. The only surprise of the day came when Nancy Pelosi disclosed a prospectus under which...

Posted by: Irene | April 1, 2008 10:43 AM

Why should you care that I'm housesitting in Cumberland , Maryland this week? On the ride up I saw what are supposed to be the Giant antenna dishes of the NSA in Virginia, though I was not able to find any of FEMA's purported internment camps on my route. They say the scenic steam train to Frostburg, where coal is still mined (and sometimes exported overseas) may begin its spring runs this coming weekend. (Oh, for those bygone days of carefree carbon emissions, exquisite nostalgia.) I will use the excuse of my internment camp search to guiltily ride it. The C&O Canal (terminus here) produced much lower emissions and now is a superb walking trail all the way to Washington, D.C. A guidebook suggests it connects to railway trails and many other pedestrian by-ways. With my electric scooter I'd be below NSA radar, cruising the gravel. Two Yankees, Ethan Allen and Douglas Kinan, are having a discussion over on the Race-Inner City-Cory Booker page. Champerties is the subject. Seems certain powerful interests in our country like to frame problems in a particular way so they can make money solving them. The prison industrial complex and terrorism are two big examples...

Posted by: Grady Lee Howard | April 1, 2008 7:59 AM

When the TABOR amendment came up for significant changes via Referenda C and D on the Colorado ballot for November 2005, a remarkable coalition of leaders from every spectrum came together (democrats and republicans, business and labor) to work for changes to this mindless law. The author of TABOR, and the voters who passed it, forgot that in a representative democracy, We are the government and We own the roads, schools, prisons, and public educational enterprises -- all those things that require the combined effort of all citizens. We pay for all these things out of our own money by a process called taxes. If that word is too freighted with negativity, then pick another one. At the end of the day, the highway you drive on is maintained by your money, not by little green men dropping coins out of the sky. All those who decry wasteful spendiing are correct. But if the representatives you elected can't do the job to your satisfaction, then elect someone who will -- or run for office yourself. Most 'non-wasteful' spending goes for the maintenance of roads, or funding of schools, or the health of the aged and the poor among us. The...

Posted by: Dr. Curt Schmidt | March 29, 2008 2:42 AM

I also really like the tax designation idea below, although it didn't originate with Beret Co-op, but at Union Theological Seminary of New York in the late 1920s. Anyway, let's do it! I can see the tax forms now,with categories for defense,infrastructure, environmental protection, social services, border security, education and financial oversight and regulation.(and a blank category to write things in.) Being a distinct deduction category, entitlement funds could no longer be robbed for war and corporate welfare but would be set aside for safe investment until needed. Regulations would have to be put in place to prevent campaigning and coercion by interest groups in the media to distort taxpayer's common sense. A new kind of representative would be called upon to design efficient and targeted programs to limit waste. One's tax form would be a second partially secret ballot (choices inaccessible to prying) where personal assessments could be expressed. If something wasn't funded at first people would see the need and include it the next year. Why not let commercial interests have a menu vote too? Since people already have individual choices, and the same individuals own companies or stocks, to allow them double voting would be unfair. One...

Posted by: Irene | March 26, 2008 11:02 AM

Grif J. 3-20 11:40AM U sure got to the essence of my intention. Actually we were talking trillions & U mentioned taxes-that thorn in the side of us Big Boys-can't something be done there? By the way-did U preceive that Obama's white grandmother was afraid of passing black men on the streets of Hawaii when the demographics were more non-whites than whites? That his father was from Kenya & Obama was not from relatives that were brought to Am. as slaves. Yeh. that slipped my the media I watch too. Respectfully, Billy Bob, Florida where votes don't count unlike Chi-town where even the dead have votes that count.

Posted by: Billy Bob | March 21, 2008 10:34 AM

Always, it's the Constitution, as if God wrote it! The flexibility of this document is the main thing that has kept it in use. The Founding Fathers were not especially religious, but were professionals, farmers, slave owners seeking a world in which they could operate. Even they paired it with the Declaration of Independence after the Articles of Confederation broke down. The idea was periodic revolution and workable reorganization for the present times. Again the people of this continent are oppressed, because our government is run by and for special interests. If it were not so, geriatric cases like Nader and McCain would not be running. We don't need a leader anyway, because elections are a sham. No matter who's elected they fall into the same nasty habits. Nowadays the FED can manipulate the whole economy without Congress saying anything. Billy Bob, say I loan you 30 billion at 2% and you invest it in Treasury Bonds at 4% and the people pay your dividend through taxes. You're just gonna wanta borrow more and more, you big ol' banker, and suck the life out of the country. I ask you, doesn't the sacredness of private property as written in the...

Posted by: Griffin Jones | March 20, 2008 11:40 AM

Seems there are views that The Constitution should be worked around, with the differences depending on whether the view comes from the "left wing" or the "right wing". The system (Constitution) is in place that will allow for majority rule, with minority rights. However, when the voters let the national political parties make "rules" that eliminate candidates the big money,power brokers have not approved, before the majority of citizens have a chance to vote, then I get the impression the same voters will have trouble spending EastCcoast money on West Coast fires--or what ever. The Founding Fathers put their money and blood where their beliefs were. Today the trend seems to be not my blood & someone else's money. Vote the right people to office and things will work OK. Put the John Dalleys, Hughey Longs, & Tom Delays in office and maybe what we get is deserved. Compare Nader's long held views to the other candidates' stances, then ask what chance the Am. people have in even hearing a discussion on the differencies and you may get a feeling for the scope of hope. Can we go back to "We the People..."? Respectfully, Billy Bob, Florida

Posted by: Billy Bob | March 20, 2008 11:19 AM

Hear Here I agree with Grady Lee Howard's comment: The best way to keep taxpayers interested is to let them designate the purpose of the revenue they pay in and legislators deal with the implementation. Corporate and commercial taxpayers should be denied this constitutional perk. Though I do not yet understand why corporations and commercial taxpayers should be denied the right to determine where their taxes are spent... And I would like to know why Jack Higenbotham says: that budgeting by ballot box doesn't work... for that would seem to be one way to discover where taxpayers would spend their taxes.

Posted by: JGray | March 19, 2008 11:01 AM

Bill Moyers, It is ironic that on a segment about holding government officials accountable you did not hold Henry Waxman accountable for his vote in the Iraq war. You let him pass the buck to George Bush. He said something like "If I'd known Bush was lying I wouldn't have voted for the war". And you let that go. Anyone who was paying attention would have been skeptical about the claims of the Bush administration. The relevant question is: “If Colin Powell, in Washington DC, claims to know where the weapons of mass destruction are, then why didn’t the UN inspectors in Iraq find them?” Why didn’t Waxman ask this question? The truth of politics is more complex than lying vs. not lying. The political cost to Waxman of voting AGAINST a war is high if the war goes “well” (such as the first gulf war). But the political cost of voting FOR a war is low if the war goes poorly but everyone else was on the band wagon. Your viewers are intelligent enough to understand this. You should have pressed Waxman about it.

Posted by: Doug Merrill | March 19, 2008 8:42 AM

Dear Mr. Moyers, My family and I appreciate your reports. My teenagers never miss a show and voice their "informed" opinions readily at school and in discussions with other adults. You are a constant reference in their political papers. My teenagers are wondering what it will take for this president and his administration to be impeached. "Nixon was not half this bad and they threatened him with impeachment," is one of my son's mantras. My children are very disillusioned with todays government and its lack of ability to see proper justice served "for the people." The teenagers of today are certain they will inherit a legacy of total corruption. It is a sad thing to see, but we appreciate your honesty to "tell it like it is," as another famous journalist once said. The corruption is so blatant, truly we are a giant about to take a great fall. Many in the global community will be glad to see the US ego cut down to size. Keep us informed. Sincerely, A.I.R.

Posted by: A.I.R. | March 17, 2008 7:29 PM

How can we account for our present situation unless we believe that men high in this government are concerting to deliver us to disaster? This must be the product of a great conspiracy on a scale so immense as to dwarf any previous such venture in the history of man. A conspiracy of infamy so black that, when it is finally exposed, its principles shall be forever deserving of the maledictions of all honest men.

Posted by: Joseph McCarthy | March 17, 2008 4:34 PM

Byron: Thanks for hearing our recommendations (Beret Co-op Folk School of Dallas, N.C.). Jack Martin and the school have adopted the following axiom:"It is difficult or impossible for anyone to become or remain extremely wealthy in a fair and just society." We advocate economic democracy as outlined by SMU economist Ravi Batra and other academics, with a sizeable part of capitalist enterprise being owned by workers within each enterprise. We go farther in recommending the devolution of corporate personhood as mistakenly protected under the 14th Amendment. While we see money as only a convention based upon a social contract, we believe that monetary reforms would follow the above changes. (The FED would shrivel and have to be replaced by better means.) The entire world could then follow our advantageous example, unlike now where they are forced to follow a downspiral of debt and extraction at the point of our guns or through the exclusion and starvation of restricted commerce. We are not free traders and believe tariffs also have their place in keeping regions and countries self-sufficient. Tariff revenues have proven the best way to finance government over centuries. Without the need to use threat and force in developing and...

Posted by: Grady Lee Howard | March 17, 2008 10:26 AM

The best way to keep taxpayers interested is to let them designate the purpose of the revenue they pay in and legislators deal with the implementation. Corporate and commercial taxpayers should be denied this constitutional perk. Absolutely fantastic recommendation! I doubt any working taxpayer feels they have any say in how their taxes are spent, at least at the federal level. The entire tax system and code must be redesigned to allow working taxpayer much more say in how their taxes are spent. If they had this ability, then taxes themselves would not be so "demonized" as they are today by the republican party. The fact is, taxes are necessary but it's how much you tax and Republicans have done more damage to the dialogue of taxation by bastardizing taxes so much that we cannot have a civil debate about the role of taxation in a capitalist state.

Posted by: Byron | March 17, 2008 12:21 AM

Not being one to throw myself in front of a speeding bullet to save a book author or political ideologue (but be my guest, Jack H. ,Jr. Mar. 16-1:09pm)I think neither budget by the ballot or oversight can be effective. The best way to keep taxpayers interested is to let them designate the purpose of the revenue they pay in and legislators deal with the implementation. Corporate and commercial taxpayers should be denied this constitutional perk. I see the present economy and social structure as a tight puzzle with few moves left. The only viable actions are forbidden. If we can't overcome the suicidal taboo of "the sanctity of private property" beyond a reasonable limit, we are destined to become a doomed culture of slaves and masters. Considering how the tax burden has consistently been shifted downward (since 1983) while productivity has risen phenomenally we have a society now of at least 60% wage slaves (slavocracy?). How can their judgment not be affected when they are under a heavy debt load and generating fear is one of the main purposes of media? An upward shift of taxes (progressive structure), mandatory segregation of entitlement deduction funds, and some say so in...

Posted by: Jack Martin | March 16, 2008 4:51 PM

For every law that wealthy, corrupt politicians create to prevent fraud by future wealthy, corrupt politicians, there exist 10 ways for the current law writers to circumvent the 'anti-fraud' law they enacted ...with voters none the wiser... I think that is what Max Kaehn meant by 'budgeting by the ballot box'? How quickly we all forgot "LoopHole Boy" Tom Delay ... to the end his lawyers kept insisting he broke no laws. And if a 'law' was not broken then ethics were not an issue. And if the shoes were switched, a man like him could just as easily have been a Democrat. Both major parties and 80% of the media are corrupt. Within our government, transparency cannot occur without a free media and a free media cannot exist without competition among individual journalists. That is the beauty of combining free speech with a free market. Easily, 1,000,000 people in this nation would throw themselves in front of a speeding bullet headed for Ron Paul, Richard Gage or Dr. David Ray Griffin but all we hear about on the media are people who sell 1,000,000 music albums, books or videos? How can we as a nation claim to support free...

Posted by: Jack Heginbotham Jr | March 16, 2008 1:09 PM

As a resident of California, I can tell you that budgeting by ballot box doesn't work. What works is oversight by Congress, and transparency so citizens can check their work, and diligent reporting by the Fourth Estate to inform the voters.

Posted by: Max Kaehn | March 16, 2008 12:42 AM

A National Taxpayers' Bill of Rights?

TrackBack

Comments

Post a comment

Our Posts

Your Comments

Moyers Beats

Subscribe

Podcasts

Frappr!

Archives