Mayor's Race '99
Front Page
About Citizen Voices
Talk to others
Citizen Voices forum
Meeting Reports
All meeting reports
Video clips from the CV debate
On the Inquirer Opinion Page
Recent essays, columns and editorials
Community Voices Essays
Learn More
The Candidates
Neighborhood Stats and Facts
Government Web Guide
Research Web sites
Related Sites
Student Voices
Today's Inquirer Opinion page



Government: A Citizen Voices Issue Framework

CHOICE THREE: SHRINK AND CUT

 

The main reason Philadelphians are unhappy with the return on their tax dollar, this view argues, is that the city government charges high taxes to perform services that government, by its very nature, does not do well. This combination of high taxes for poor service drives people and jobs out of the city.

In this view, city government should stick to a few very basic priorities that only it can fulfill. The most clear-cut of these is public safety, that is, running police and fire departments, a court system and prisons. Another is maintaining a road system.

Even in some other areas where government traditionally plays a role - such as schools and prisons – proponents of this choice would have the city contract out services to profit or nonprofit firms that would do the job more efficiently.

For many other services, this choice would just as soon that government stop playing tax-collecting middleman. Let citizens shop and buy services such as trash removal, using the money they save on taxes. This form of privatization goes beyond mere contracting out, where government still collects taxes for a service, but then hires private companies to do or manage the work.

The city, according to proponents of this choice, should stop trying to make policy or intervene in areas where private markets are always wiser than government, such as job training and economic development. This will save more tax money.

Government regulation of business and individuals should be kept to the minimum consistent with public safety.

In this view, this strategy is the best hope the city has of attacking the high cost of living and doing business that has crippled Philadelphia for decades.

What specific steps should be taken?

  • Close down many city departments and offices, and shrink the rest.
  • Get the city out of the housing business. End its counterproductive interventions in the real estate market.
  • End the ineffective practice of offering targeted tax incentives and "corporate welfare" to specific employers; just reduce business and wage taxes across the board.
  • Sharply reduce business red tape.
  • End all nonessential city functions. Privatize essential functions that market forces will handle more efficiently e.g. trash pickup, water service. Contract out other functions that are legitimate recipients of tax support: but need not be carried out by public workers: prisons, schools, mass transit.
  • Cut all city taxes as sharply as possible.
  • Mobilize citizen volunteers, charities and nonprofits to meet social needs.

What are the arguments for this choice?

  • High taxes are strangling the city.
  • Government is by its nature wasteful and corrupt; free markets are by their nature efficient. People can buy services more effectively than government can do it for them.
  • Politicians don’t create jobs; businesses create jobs. Having politicians take money away from business people can never lead to more efficient job creation.
  • Cumbersome and corrupt government regulation poisons the small-business environment in Philadelphia.
  • Once government stops its expensive pretense of addressing social ills, citizen energy and resources will be freed to flow to the private charities that do the job more effectively.
  • Government bureaucracies serve their own interests, not the public’s.

 

What are the key arguments against this choice?

 

  • This approach would radically widen the gap between the haves and have nots.
  • Government is not a business. Public service and the profit motive are incompatible. To the profit motive, serving the needs of the poor or disabled is a losing proposition; to government, it’s a core responsibility.
  • Pooling tax money to buy services in bulk on behalf of citizens is what’s efficient; invididuals could never buy many vital services as cheaply as government.
  • It’s wrong to turn core governmental functions _ such as schools or prisons _ over to private entities not accountable to the voters.
  • The city can’t afford to unilaterally give up on business incentives, when other

cities and states are using them aggressively to court employers.

  • City taxes are too high not because it does too much, but because it gets too little help doing what it must from the region, state and federal government.

What values underlie this choice?

Free enterprise. The "invisible hand." Individualism. Volunteerism. Self-reliance.





© 1998, Philadelphia Newspapers Inc. All rights reserved. Any copying, redistribution, or retransmission of any of the contents of this service without the express written consent of Philadelphia Newspapers Inc. is expressly prohibited.