LETTERS: AMENDMENT 7: PRO AND CON; PRO: VOTERS CAN REGAIN CONTROL OF SPENDING OF THEIR TAX DOLLARS

To the editor:

On Nov. 8 Missouri voters have a chance to approve an amendment that will enact a guideline for tax and expenditure limitation. Supporters of Amendment 7 have worked long and hard to put the measure out to the voters for approval. Now, through the hyperbole and hysteria of opponents, the real significance of the amendment is being lost. The amendment, which allows taxpayers to vote on significant new state and local taxes, is not a radical new idea. Efforts to require state governments to submit tax increases to a vote of the people has been under way in 12 of 24 states that allow such changes to their state constitution. Tax and expenditure limits are a result of a grass-root taxpayer movement and is a form of direct democracy.

Since 1980 total state spending has increased by 60 percent (after adjusting for inflation). With over 40 percent of our tax dollars going to local, state and federal taxes, many hard-working Americans are looking to limits to put the brakes on large, nonvoter-approved expenditures.

Many in Missouri are a strongly fighting against Amendment 7 primarily due to the amendment's origins. Limits that originate with the votes are basically more effective than tax and expenditure limitations that originate with legislatures. Heavy-handed special-interest groups can encourage legislators to make the language vague and less restrictive in order to keep pet programs funded. Real teeth comes from grass-roots taxpayers who must continuously foot the bill.

This November a majority of Missouri grass-roots taxpayers may say not to higher state taxes without their vote.

They may say no to increased government spending without accountability and without their approval. Many may say yes to Missouri's Amendment 7.

JULIA A. KRIDELBAUGH

Cape Girardeau