In an attempt to encourage growth within Ohio, Gov. Bob Taft is aggressively pushing an agenda of tax reform, which he hopes would encourage businesses to flock to the state and turn around the stagnant economy. Taft's plan calls for cutting income taxes by 21 percent, phasing out the tax on equipment and machinery, eliminating the state's corporate franchise tax and adding a new commercial-activity tax. Although the motives behind the proposed plan are pure and the theory the plan is based on is potentially sound, given Ohio's current state, Taft's plans are unrealistic and could likely not be implemented efficiently.
Although the outcome of the plan -the establishment of more business -would be ideal, the state can ill-afford to place its priority on a plan for the future, especially when the state's short-term problems are more pressing. If the tax plan would be implemented, the state would theoretically lose millions of dollars a year in revenue, which, given the state's current condition, is not logical.
Further, the current budget problems also make the proposed tax plan impractical. The state government must balance the budget every two years -as outlined in the state constitution -and losing millions of dollars because of a reduction in taxes is just not feasible at this juncture.
If the plan were to be implemented, the only way to balance the budget and compensate for the predicted lost revenue would be to cut funding from social services, education, child health care, Medicaid or a number of other state-funded programs. Institutions in Ohio, such as education, are already constrained by the current budget woes and cannot be expected to perform adequately if faced with repeated and growing cuts. In addition to the previous reasons, the largest problem is with the unpredictable nature of the plan's goals. Even if the plan is implemented, there is no guarantee that business and industry would flock to the state and help Ohio pull itself from the depths of its economic woes. The best course of action for the state is to stay on its course and try to develop more realistic ways to improve the economy.
Hed: The roughnecks Late last week, a troubling situation began developing along the Arizona-Mexico border regarding illegal immigration and the enforcement of the U.S.'s border policy. An organization calling itself the Minutemen Project has recruited hundreds of volunteers to help patrol the border and notify authorities of any suspicious or illegal attempt to cross into the United States. Although the enforcement of U.S. border regulations is extremely difficult -and often flawed by shortcomings of manpower and funds -the patrol of the border by private citizens is foolish, unnecessary and potentially dangerous to not only the volunteers but also any person attempting to cross into the United States.
Some law enforcement agencies have raised concerns that the involvement of the Minutemen -a label that attempts to draw comparison to a historic patriotic group -could result in a climate of vigilante justice. Violence is almost assured when putting individuals with opposing goals in an area that has historically been known to be dangerous and often lawless.
Both those patrolling the border and those attempting to cross it have too much at stake to behave rationally. It can be assumed that any individual encountered while attempting to cross the border illegally could be capable of committing a crime, in addition to illegal immigration, to ensure that they could achieve their goal of gaining admittance to the United States. In such a heated exchange, it is unwise to charge private citizens with administering justice and potentially have them or their opposition injured. The involvement of these individuals constitutes the worst kind of civic action, a development of organization that has not taken an oath to uphold the law, has not considered the possible ramifications of its actions and one that could have virtually unchecked ability to dispense on the spot justice.
Although there is potential for misuse of justice along the border, the existence of those questions alone is enough to remove the group from performing its self-charged duties. Further, the existence of such groups necessitates the need for the government to reorganize the U.S. Border Patrol and find a way to better staff the organization, which would allow for a more secure border. Only law enforcement professionals have the proper training and authority to patrol the border, and a responsibility of that magnitude cannot be left in the hands of private citizens, whose motives for the formation of the Minutemen are suspect but whose fears of an uncontrolled border are somewhat justified. Maintaining the U.S. border must be left to the government to ensure the safety of the nation, its citizens and even an individual bent on circumventing immigration laws.
17 Archives
The Post Editorial Board
