The House tax plan would raise $784 million annually. While it might not be perfect (what legislation ever is after going through the political and policy gauntlet?), it is responsible. It allows budget-writers to avoid making the most harmful budget cuts, it fairly distributes the responsibility for raising additional revenue, and it would take some steps to modernize the state’s woefully outdated tax system. To put the tax package into perspective, consider the fact that $784 million:
*Is roughly $87 per state resident, or $7.25 per month per state resident (and that overstates the impact since some of the new revenue will be paid by large multi-state corporations);
*Is equivalent to 3.7% of last year’s original budget;
*Is enough to fill only 17.4% of the 2009-10 budget shortfall (leaving 53% to be filled with spending cuts, 28% to be filled with federal assistance, and 2% from additional fees).
*Still means that the House budget relies three times as heavily on spending cuts as it does on tax increases.