Menu
Missouri state ballot issues, part 2
Tuesday's edition of the Daily Mail examined the proposed Missouri Constitutional Amendment numbers, 1, 2 and 3, along with Proposition A. Today we examine Missouri Constitutional Amendment numbers four and six.
"Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to prohibit a new state or local sales/use or other similar tax on any service or transaction that was not subjected to a sales/use or similar tax as of January 1, 2015."
Proponents cite the recent actions of the North Carolina and Washington State legislatures.
On March 1, 2016, an expansion of North Carolina's sales tax took effect, extending the tax to many services like auto repair, installing modular homes, sign painting, some heating and plumbing work and even installation of tombstones -- giving another meaning to the phrase "death and taxes."
As sales tax collections slow, as the nation has moved from a manufacturing to a service-based economy and as a way to replace revenues lost by decreases in income and corporate taxes, many states are considering expanding the universe of goods and, especially, services that are subject to the sales tax.
In states from Arizona to Oklahoma and West Virginia, lawmakers are considering bills that would impose the sales tax on services ranging from beauty salons to funeral homes; from telephone landlines to cellphones. In Pennsylvania, the governor's budget called for an expansion of the state's sales tax -- to include movie tickets, cable service and digital downloads -- that he expects to raise about $415 million.
The sales tax has long been a staple of state and local finances. Sales taxes accounted for 34 percent of state and local revenue in 2010, according to the Tax Foundation, a nonprofit group that analyzes state taxes. Revenue from personal income taxes, meanwhile, accounted for 20 percent and corporate taxes accounted for 3 percent. Other taxes and fees made up the balance.
The Missouri Department of Revenue website already lists well over 200 exemptions to states sales and use taxes.
On June 1, 1937, President Franklin Roosevelt gave a speech on the topic of tax evasion in which he invoked a quotation made 10 years earlier by the then Associate Justice, Oliver Wendell Holmes. Said Roosevelt, "Mr. Justice Holmes said 'Taxes are what we pay for civilized society.' Too many individuals, however, want the civilization at a discount."
Precisely because many state legislatures want to lower income taxes yet feel pressure to maintain revenues, Amendment No. 4's fair ballot language states, "Potential costs to state and local governmental entities are unknown but could be significant. The proposal's passage would impact governmental entity's ability to revise their tax structures."
A "yes" vote supports this proposal to prohibit any new state sales or use tax on any service or activity that was not subject to such a tax as of Jan. 1, 2015.
A "no" vote opposes this prohibition on new sales or use taxes.
Amendment No. 6
This amendment is the second of two pieces of legislation concerning what is commonly known as voter ID. If adopted, Amendment 6 makes voter ID requirements legal according to Missouri's Constitution while another piece of legislation, known as Senate Substitute No. 2 for House Bill 1631, provides the details of how this would work.
A person seeking to vote in Missouri, according to Amendment 6 would have to verify his or her qualifications as a citizen of this country and a resident of Missouri.
The wording of the amendment says such verification "may" include the showing of a valid government-issued photo identification. The proposed amendment also states, "Exceptions to the identification requirement may also be provided for by general law." That general law is House Bill 1631.
Nationally, voter ID laws became possible when the United States Supreme Court overturned Section 5 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act on July 25, 2013. Up till then, federal pre-approval was required for changes in voting rights. As a result, there are now a total of 36 states, which have adopted voter ID laws.
A federal appeals court struck down North Carolina's voter identification law in July and the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against reinstating it the following month.
A U.S. district judge threw out part of Wisconsin's 2011 voter ID law, ruling that "a preoccupation with mostly phantom election fraud leads to real incidents of disenfranchisement which undermine rather than enhance confidence in elections."
On similar grounds, a federal appeals court tossed Texas' voter ID law on July 20 of this year.
In a July interview at the Daily Mail, state Sen. Will Kraus, R-Lee's Summit, the sponsor of the legislation fleshing out the rules on voter ID stated, "Missouri's law is more palatable."
Kraus says this is because of a provision permitting voters without a photo ID to sign a statement at the polls, swearing that they are who they say they are under penalty of perjury. Their vote then still counts so long as their signature matches the one on file. There is also the possibility of the state paying for the necessary photo-ID.
"Signing the statement makes sure no one is disenfranchised at all," Kraus said. "And if funding is provided for the identification, I think these provisions will make sure our law passes court muster."
Still, many on both sides of this issue are bracing themselves for a fight in court.
A "yes" vote supports allowing the state government to require the presentation of voter IDs at public elections in order to prove national and state citizenship.
A "no" vote opposes this proposal.