America is a democratic nation for a reason.

One of the many freedoms given to U.S. citizens is the ability to vote for another citizen to represent the majority. Once this representative is elected, she holds the power to make decisions for the people who voted for her. This is why we have a government in the first place.

When representatives ask citizens for their opinions, citizens should take the opportunity to give them. It should not be a "vote once and it's all over with" type of deal. This is just one of the many reasons that TABOR was introduced by the state representative for the 2nd Assembly District, Frank Lasee.

TABOR, also known as the Lasee-Wood Taxpayer Bill of Rights, seeks to limit the annual growth in government. Despite the opposition's constant jabber defaming it, it is a very reasonable proposal.

TABOR would empower taxpayers by not allowing state spending and debt to increase faster than the rate of population growth plus inflation. Then, the remaining money would be left to stabilize the budget, use for emergency purposes and even be returned to taxpayers. Taxes could not be raised and money could not be spent above the amount that TABOR would allow without voter approval.

In order to understand TABOR, one must reflect on its performance in Colorado, the only state that has enacted it. Colorado introduced this amendment in 1992 to limit taxes and stimulate economic growth. The recent dilemma with TABOR in Colorado occurred mostly because of Amendment 23, which requires annual increases in spending on state education programs. This problem would not arise in Wisconsin, since this state does not mandate such an amendment.

Overall it has been extremely successful and has granted taxpayers with more than $3 billion in tax rebates and refunds. Although this program is not perfect, it allows for Wisconsin legislators to visualize how to utilize and improve TABOR to fit Wisconsin's needs.

One of the improvements would involve adding emergency funds that tax spillovers would be deposited into. Once the cap was reached on those funds, surplus revenue would then be offset by tax cuts or tax rebates so the money would be readily available should Wisconsin experience a period of recession. This system of saving for "Rainy Days" leaves room to compensate for budget increases.

Another improvement would be the elimination of the "ratchet-down" effect, so that when revenues are down in the case of a recession, the emergency funds would allow TABOR spending and revenue limit to remain at the pre-recession status. By passing this amendment to mandate caps and only allowing the caps to change after an approved vote, TABOR would force legislators to make use of available resources instead of constantly asking taxpayers for more money.

Dr. Barry Poulson, a Professor of Economics at the University of Colorado and Americans for Prosperity Foundation's Distinguished Scholar, recently published a study showing how Wisconsin would have benefited had it had enacted the modified TABOR in 1992. It illustrates that Wisconsin taxpayers would have received more than $8 billion in tax relief thus far and also collected more than $2 billion in Rainy Day funds to help deal with economic struggles. This study and the results come from one of the nation's foremost experts on the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights and promise success.

The Tax Foundation recently released a study that concluded that Wisconsin taxes were the fifth heaviest in the nation for 2004, at $4,141 per person. Many other states, Ohio and Pennsylvania for example, are also considering proposing TABOR in order to assist citizens with high taxes.

These unnecessarily high tax burdens exceed the average person's ability to pay these taxes, but TABOR would benefit all Wisconsin citizens and businesses, consequently creating a better life for all Wisconsinites. So let's be honest, who wouldn't like to have more money?

Joelle Parks ([email protected]) is a sophomore intending to major in journalism.