JACQUELINE KENNEDY ONASSIS, 1929-1994: HANCOCK II FAILS IN CLARITY TEST

Mel Hancock preserves a spot in Missouri's history not only as a congressman but as the man who led the charge 14 years ago to limit taxation in the state. In the years since the Hancock Amendment became an attachment to the Missouri Constitution and a bane for any office holder looking for more money to spend, the Springfield resident has seen his defining work weakened by court decisions, dodged by savvy lawmakers and sometimes ignored with an in-your-face defiance. We sympathize. However, we also feel the Hancock II measure the congressman promotes is long, confusing and potentially harmful to government in Missouri. We urge Rep. Hancock to step back, reorganize his efforts and put a more cogent plan before Missouri citizens.

Hancock II supporters have until July 8 to gather about 130,000 signatures on petitions. Signatures are needed from registered voters equal to 8 percent of the total votes cast in the last gubernatorial election in six of the state's nine congressional districts. In an accounting a couple of weeks ago, organizers said they had about half of the signatures needed to get the measure on the November ballot. It is not a modest undertaking and the success of the petition drive is no sure thing. However, with the proper push, and a message that serves up governmental arrogance as its prevailing theme, Missourians might yet embrace the petition drive in the 45 days remaining.

We hope that doesn't happen. For voters to get a shot at a puzzling amendment when a more clearly crafted measure -- albeit less ambitious -- might stand a better chance in some future election would ultimately set back goals the Hancock II proponents aspire to. The original Hancock instrument aimed at preserving the people's right to vote on all significant new state and local tax increases. Hancock II, if placed on the ballot and approved by voters, would roll back tax increases approved since the amendment's passage in 1980 and force a refund to taxpayers that could only be effected by reduced government services. James R. Moody, who directed Gov. John Ashcroft's budget operations and hardly a spendthrift, opposes Hancock II in the belief the refund could top $1 billion. That money will come from enterprises such as Southeast Missouri State University, public school districts, Trail of Tears State Park and so on. The impact will be considerable.

We support Rep. Hancock and his desires to put people -- not government -- in the driver's seat of taxation and revenue issues. We don't believe Hancock II does the trick, and we would like to see the issue stalled before it gets to the November ballot. A more desirable and restrained effort might be advanced for next year.