
                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: FRIDAY, June 18, 1993                   TAG: 9308260263
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: A10   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: 
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium

BEWARE EASY TALK ABOUT STATE TAXES

NEVER MIND the irony in Gov. Wilder's recent warning to beware of candidates making bold promises not to raise taxes. Wilder wears his own avoidance of tax increases like a badge of honor.

But now he's saying more. ``Put simply, programs and commissions intended to `cut the fat out of the budget' or `streamline government' are not sufficient and can be counterproductive if they deflect attention from making tough budget choices,'' says Wilder. In other words, you have to decide what government will do and what it won't.

Never mind that Wilder himself may have avoided some ``tough budget choices'' by standing pat against tax increases while ``streamlining'' and cutting ``fat'' - which in practice often meant deferring needed initiatives (such as fighting disparities in school funding) and leaving some state programs and services (state-supported higher education, to name one) noticeably weaker.

Never mind that, by managing state finances in this way, Wilder has made it that much harder for the next governor to avoid tax increases. Precisely for this reason, Wilder is right: The next governor won't be able to sustain this game.

At a budget symposium in Richmond this week, Wilder confirmed earlier reports (from Senate Finance Chairman Hunter Andrews of Hampton, among others) that the state is again facing a big revenue shortfall. Maybe as much as $700 million for the 1994-96 biennium. Maybe even more.

The cause is fast-growth spending in programs such as Medicaid (state costs up 98 percent, 1990-1994) and corrections (up 24 percent, same period).

Wilder, who is preparing the '94-'96 spending plan - to be released shortly before he leaves office in January - said he will continue to oppose tax increases.

George Allen, the GOP nominee for governor, promises to veto any tax increase. Mary Sue Terry, the Democrats' nominee, doesn't flatly rule out a tax increase but promises to ``hold the line'' on taxes. And both Allen and Terry, by various (and, you guessed it, unexplained) means, pledge to track down and eliminate ``waste'' in government spending.

But if Wilder is right - that campaign promises to cut fat are inadequate, that a lot of state spending is driven by forces outside Virginia's control, that future funding cuts will require cuts in services - then voters ought to insist that Allen and Terry get serious.

Seriously now, how do they intend to deal with these projected deficits? What about costs, not included in the projections, of a couple of potentially adverse court decisions (involving school disparity and refunds for federal retirees) that could come about on their watch?

And, seriously, why should tax increases remain beyond discussion for those aspiring to leadership of the commonwealth?

by CNB