Much criticism is thrown John Kasich’s way for decrying high taxes as an obstacle to keeping and generating jobs and attracting and retaining Ohioans. Those who disagree with him tend to think taxes could and should be higher to pay for government now and more in the future.
These critics often also point out another factor: weather, i.e., Ohio ain’t Florida. It’s the one thing everybody talks about but can’t do anything about, so, they conclude, vote for Ted Strickland.
But let’s look at the story in the Dispatch Monday talking about Ohio’s tax burden and how the gubernatorial candidates differ in their perspectives of that burden. One of the points made about why they have different views is the information sources they use.
This is a legitimate point of debate. But when you get beyond the politics, a look at the graphic accompanying the story sums up the case, I think, in favor of Kasich’s position.
Ohio ranks 35th relative to state tax “revenue” in 2009. But state and local tax revenue in 2008 put Ohio at 29th, still in the bottom half but quite a bit worse than it seems in the first statistic.
Worse, the combined 2008 total state/local tax take amounted to almost 17 percent of Ohioans’ personal income. In what should be a universally recognized high-tax state, New York, the combined take the same year was just under 20 percent of residents’ personal income.
(Wherever the tax money comes from, individuals, businesses, or even the federal government, the individual taxpayer is on the hook for the costs, one way or another, directly or indirectly.)
And those numbers are from a source Strickland prefers.
The Tax Foundation marked Ohio seventh worst in state/local tax burden in 2008, not far from ol’ New York and another high tax-state, New Jersey.
In 2010, it was ranked 47th in state business tax climate, above only California (sunny, star-studded, losing population) and, well, you know the other two by now.
If only these numbers, from all the sources, were examined without the shadow of a gubernatorial race clouding the picture, would Ohio be a less likely or more likely candidate for a new or expanding business? Would current or future potential residents be more likely or less likely to call Ohio home?
The kinds and rates of taxes are not all of the factors determining whether Ohioans will be better off in the future.
And Kasich would do well to let voters know more about what he plans beyond taxes to aid Ohio. After all, we do need a well-functioning, effective government.
But good government is easier to build when we are well on the road to a vibrant economy.
And when it comes to taxes, Kasich should do the driving.
