KANSAS CITY STAR
Thursday, Oct. 14, 2004Amendment 3 would hurt schools
The deceptive advertising for constitutional Amendment No. 3 on Missouri's Nov. 2 ballot is troubling.
The promotions don't tell voters that the amendment will take at least $187 million annually out of education, social services and other programs once it is phased in over four years.
Voters should reject Amendment No. 3 next month.
Backed by the road-building industry, the proposal would transfer all sales taxes on new or used vehicles from the state's general fund to a fund for highway construction. But only five states allocate these sales taxes to roads, according to federal statistics.
Missouri's schools already are underfunded by $600 million. In addition, the state has cut health and mental health services and driven up tuition at state universities. This is the wrong time to take more money from these areas.
Although Missouri's tax collections are expected to increase this fiscal year, the growth won't be nearly enough to repair the damage to the state budget in the last three years.
In 1979, Missouri voters approved moving half of all sales taxes on vehicle purchases out of the general fund and into road-building. Now, Amendment No. 3's supporters want the second half, too. Yet they have no plan for how to replace the money that would be taken from other state programs. The growth in mandatory programs such as Medicaid would add more demands on the state budget, with less to cover those expenses.
Certainly, Missouri needs to improve its roads. Some transportation supporters think that voters will not approve higher fuel taxes - the best solution - until the credibility of the state Transportation Department is improved. Amendment No. 3's supporters want to show progress on road construction.
But their solution is to take someone else's money to do that. In effect, Missourians are being asked to approve shifting money away from schools and social services to enhance the Transportation Department's credibility.
That's wrong.
The proposal would reduce legislative oversight of spending by the department, further insulating it from representatives of the public that pays the bills. Amendment 3 also carries no sunset, so voters would not get another chance in, say, 10 years to require transportation officials to justify their
spending.Another part of the amendment would stop the state legislature from spending at least $30 million in fuel taxes for nonhighway needs. In the past, this newspaper has endorsed the use of fuel tax money only for roads and highways.
However, Amendment No. 3 goes too far, taking essential sales tax money away from the schools and social services. Voters should defeat this misleading proposal.
###