In income tax debate, 41% figure is 100% iffy

Foes cite poll about perception of waste

Forty-one percent of government spending is wasted. That's the statistic state income tax opponents splash atop their website, proclaim on yard signs, and begin with in their 150-word argument in the official state voter guide.

But that figure doesn't come from a line-by-line review of the state budget or an audit of government practices. It's merely perception, the result of an April poll that asked 500 voters to speculate on the share of every tax dollar that state government wastes.

That tally was part of a wider survey by a Republican pollster and might have remained obscure had the Committee for Small Government - the group behind a Nov. 4 ballot question to repeal the income tax - not picked up on it.

Now it is roiling those who worry that wiping out the income tax, and the roughly $12.5 billion annually it generates, would also wipe out public education, public safety, and public infrastruc ture, not to mention the state's credit rating or its overall economy.

"It's an absurd number," said Michael Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, a business-backed budget research group. "That's pulled out of the air. The public may think there's 41 percent waste, but that has nothing to do with the facts."

But supporters of repealing the income tax say the figure is meaningful whether or not voters know its origins - and whether or not it's precise.

"We put it in quotes," said Carla Howell, chairwoman of the Committee for Small Government, which petitioned to put the question on the ballot. She was referring to yard signs that declare "41% in Mass. Government" and are accompanied by a message to cut waste, cut taxes, and "Vote YES on 1." The committee also put the phrase in quotes in 3.35 million copies of the official Massachusetts voter guide, which is printed by the secretary of the Commonwealth's office and includes proponent and opponent arguments for each ballot question.

Howell, a former Libertarian gubernatorial candidate, said she found it useful to be able to cite a number; the survey of 500 likely Massachusetts voters - conducted by the Republican pollster Fabrizio, McLaughlin & Associates - provided her with a tangible figure. But the actual percentage, 41, is not essential, she said.

"It could be low. It could well be that the state government is wasting 70 percent of our dollars, or more," Howell said. "It's the nature of government to be wasteful."

Charles Ormsby, who gave $65 to the committee and put its yellow-and-black campaign sign in his North Andover yard, said he has no qualms about displaying the figure, although he thinks the exact percentage is unknowable.

"If I had to guess, I'd say it's even greater," said Ormsby, who is retired from the defense and computing industries and serves on his town's School Committee, as a fiscal conservative and opponent of overrides.

Ormsby said he wants government to be able to operate more like the private sector, without things like union contracts, lifetime pensions for employees, and prevailing-wage laws for contractors. He sees cutting the income tax - and the revenue it generates - as a start. "Government tremendously overspends for what it gets," he said.

On the other side, opponents of the ballot question acknowledge that there are inefficiencies in state and local government but call this a blunt and destructive way to address it. In ads, phone banks, and door-to-door campaigns, they note that wiping out $12.5 billion - roughly 60 percent of total tax revenues and 40 percent of state spending - would likely eliminate or reduce all manner of public services, trigger thousands of layoffs, and harm the state's most vulnerable.

The 41-percent figure followed an indirect route from polling data to the Committee for Small Government's literature and signs.

Howell's committee received it from Citizens for Limited Taxation, which organized the 1980 effort to pass Proposition 2 1/2 and restrict property taxes. Fabrizio, based in Alexandria, Va., coordinated the question with Citizens for Limited Taxation while conducting a wider election poll in Massachusetts for another client, said Barbara Anderson, executive director of Citizens for Limited Taxation.

"He said, 'Would you like us to ask that?' and I said sure," said Anderson, who started a campaign called "Hell Yes! Question 1," to assist Howell's group.

Howell may not have been wild about that name, but she loved the shared statistic, Anderson said. And, she said, "It does show people's instinct that an awful lot of what state government does is waste."

Eric Moskowitz can be reached at emoskowitz@globe.com.