I am Robert R. Jones of Bethesda, Maryland, and secretary of the Board of the Maryland Taxpayers Association. Maryland is a high tax state. It is not a good place to live, financially, for retirees like me. Actually, financially, it is not good for you, for me, our children, or our grandchildren. It is particularly unfortunate that our children and grandchildren will have to pay for our lavish spending.
The Operating Budget for Maryland FY 2001, consists of three volumes constituting 3000 pages, plus a 96 page publication of Budget Priorities -- the Governor’s priorities.. This impressive product results from the effort of 68 listed persons from the Office of the Secretary of Budget and Management.
Obviously, no one of you could be familiar with, let alone knowledgeable of, even a very small part of the budget. Perhaps not more that a few programs that affect your constituents. Yet you have to listen to paid lobbyists promoting their clients’ interests and to individuals like me who have no more time than you to think and act in the best interests of Maryland citizens, and more specifically Maryland Taxpayers.
House Joint Resolution 16 and House Joint Resolution 17 come to this Committee well sponsored. The Maryland Taxpayers Association is pleased that Delegate Klima and others see fit to propose positive reductions in Spending Affordability and Debt Affordability.
However, we believe that the Committee should consider even greater reduction in both Spending and Debt, and now, thanks to your courtesy in hearing me, I can bring to you information that will justify our request for even greater reduction and perhaps make you uncomfortable if you do not decide to support the reduction. Perhaps you can be made so uncomfortable that you will question the process that developed the initial numbers on Spending and Debt Affordability.
I offer only four numbers for your consideration, each based on tabulated data obtained from the Department of Budget and Management: --
- The Increase from 1990 to 1998 in Household Mean Income was 3.37%.
- The Increase from 1990 to 1998 in Estimated Population for Maryland was 6.93%.
ยท The Increase from 1991 to 1999 in Individual Income Taxes Collected was 46.66%.
- The Increase from 1991 to 1999 in Other Revenues Collected was 31.62%.
I am only the messenger – the numbers are those of the State. These numbers contradict those of the Governor which were presented to and readily accepted by the Spending Affordability Committee.
One may quibble over decimal points and even over the many anomalies contained in the tabulations from which these numbers were developed. But one cannot help but conclude that in a time of alleged surplus, it is time to make some adjustments to benefit our taxpayers.
May I respectfully suggest:
I. Limit spending affordability to increases in CPI, inflation, and population.
II. Dedicate the alleged surplus to significant tax relief.
Already the Rainy Day Fund has been fully subscribed and now we are going ahead with another fund -- the Joseph Fund -- to hoard more money rather than returning the surplus to taxpayers.
Robert R. Jones, 1 Bay Tree Lane, Bethesda Md 20816. Volunteer, Maryland Taxpayers Association
Return to Publications & Testimony
-2-