North Dakota Ballot Measures Put State's Future At Risk
By: State: North Dakota | Source: aarp.org
North Dakota's future would be at risk if voters approve Constitutional Amendment No. 1 and Initiated Measure No. 2 on the November ballot. Individually, each measure is flawed. Together, they offer little or no benefit to average North Dakotans and eliminate any chance for long-term property tax relief.
Measure 1
The measure creates a permanent oil trust fund as part of the state constitution. AARP is not opposed to saving money for a rainy day; however, Measure 1 is badly flawed.
Even in an emergency, most of the trust fund revenue would be off limits because the legislation locks the money away by requiring a super-majority 75 percent vote of both houses of the Legislature before allocations can be made. The result will be a reduced ability to respond to state emergencies and an even greater financial burden being placed on local governments.
Gov. John Hoeven has expressed his view that North Dakotans will not experience meaningful property tax relief if Measure 1 passes and that his joint funding proposal for education and property tax relief could also be affected.
Proponents dangle carrots before voters, like elimination of the state income tax or potential dividend checks, but the measure does not stipulate that trust fund interest and revenue be used for anything specific. Other states with oil trust funds specifically allocate money to education, infrastructure and public services.
Measure 1 would take away resources to improve education, roads, safety and human services by locking the money away. Instead of tying up government, these are decisions that legislators should make when they meet.
Measure 2
This ballot measure to cut income taxes would be distributed very unevenly among the state's families. Under this measure, 30 percent of North Dakota households would get no tax cut at all. The tax cuts would go mainly to a relatively small number of very high-income North Dakotans, according to a report from the nonpartisan Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP).
By devoting such large resources to people at the top of the income scale, the proposal would impair the state's ability to address sales and property taxes—which affect lower- and middle-income families much more than the income tax does – or make other tax changes that would benefit more working families, senior citizens, and small businesses.
CBPP says the measure is among the most radical such proposals in any state in recent decades.
Measure 2 would prevent North Dakota from using at least part of its new revenues to make the kinds of investments that can extend the current boom into sustained growth, such as:
- Better roads and bridges: North Dakota could address transportation problems, such as the fact that nearly 1,000 of the state's bridges are considered structurally deficient or functionally obsolete.
- A more skilled work force: North Dakota could help meet the increasing demand for skilled workers by making its public colleges and universities more affordable.
- Improved education: Businesses and skilled workers are drawn to states with strong K-12 education systems. North Dakota could increase its per-pupil spending, currently below the national average, to fund improvements such as increased teacher training and expanded student assessments.
Other possible uses for new revenues could include better health care services or other quality-of-life improvements. Measure 2 would deprive North Dakota of the opportunity to even consider such approaches.
For the latest information on measures 1 and 2, go to ndmeasures2008.com.
Other Resources
Partners to Protect North Dakota's Future: ndmeasures2008.com
Share
preview