In Mass., a vote for sanity

MASSACHUSETTS voters had the good sense yesterday to reject decisively the ballot question that would have repealed the state's income tax. As weakened as the state's finances have been by the drop in revenues caused by the recession, the fiscal picture would have been bleak indeed if Question 1 had passed.

The income tax provides about 40 percent of state revenues, more than $12 billion. A phalanx of business leaders, municipal officials, and both Republican and Democratic leaders mobilized against the tax repeal. As the business-backed Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation pointed out, about $13 billion of the state budget is not discretionary but required by federal law, the constitution, or court order. Finding $12 billion to cut in the rest of the budget would have had a devastating impact on human services, higher education, and the aid the state provides to towns and cities.

Communities have had a difficult enough time balancing their books with the level of state aid they are getting now. Keeping police officers, firefighters, and teachers on the job with sharply reduced state aid would have been impossible. Recent unsuccessful efforts to raise local revenues by overriding Proposition 2 1/2 have demonstrated that strapped homeowners are in no position to offset any loss of state aid.

The question's chief advocate, Carla Howell, never could explain how the state could compensate for the lost revenue. Instead, she referred to a survey showing that the public thought 41 percent of state spending is wasted. Doubtless, there is waste, and the recession-linked loss of more than $1 billion will force the governor and Legislature to reduce it. But any cuts should be done judiciously. Voters were right to reject the bludgeoning that repeal would have demanded.