Two weeks ago, shifting estimates and forecasts and untimely delays by analysts forced the taxpayer-sensitive Georgia House to forego consideration of the important tax reform and job creation bill.
The absence of information or, worse, rapidly changing information, breeds suspicion. In this case, it prevented closure on a large and necessary reform for Georgia.
The complicated and important plan was essentially in place, but problems with analysis caused the House to hold back the vote.
At least at the state level, problems getting reliable and timely analysis may be understandable. We are a frugal state and can’t fund a large, resource-heavy state research department.
But we shouldn’t be held hostage by a single source with privileged access to key data sets. We need serious and informed engagement of citizens and groups in both the private and public sector.
What we need, especially in Georgia, is much greater transparency.
To promote an active and critical exchange, good data must be available in a form that allows access and protects privacy. Many citizens and most journalists have access to the analytical tools and expertise that would allow debate of alternative policies and comparison of alternative estimates.
In the case of tax reform, it’s fair to ask how a change in rates or coverage will affect different types of taxpayers. Interested groups should be able to make and report calculations and the public should be able to compare and debate the assessments.
Tax reform at all levels asks us to shift taxes in ways that are basically an investment for economic growth and job creation. Everyone should have a reasonably accurate estimate of how much their investment will be and what level of economic growth is expected to result.
Governments at state and federal levels already provide the aggregate data we use to gauge our progress and assess alternatives in many areas.
We have data on housing sales, forecloses, unemployment, demographics, etc. And these are assessed by research groups and the media.
During the next two years, we will be facing intensive debate and important votes relating to government spending, taxes and economic growth. The crux of the matter is whether investment and spending decisions should be made by the private enterprise sector or by government. We must all be able to compare the scenarios and measure the impact of the alternatives.
Serious participants in the discussion will need the best data and analysis available. That comes from the marketplace of ideas, not from a single monopolistic source.
Today more than ever, we are capable of providing data and accurate analysis in a timely fashion. We can’t allow our discussions to grind to a halt because we haven’t analyzed and discussed the information available to us. And the basic information, not just the processed analyses, should be made more accessible to everyone.
We have decisions before us of historical significance. Today, as never before, everyone can become truly informed.
We have blogs, Facebook, on-line publishing and TV and radio talk shows for the distribution of ideas and debate.
For true and effective competition in the marketplace of ideas we must ensure there is grist for the mill.
The basic information that will allow us to protect the efficiency and effectiveness of our democracy must be available to everyone.
Christine P. Ries, a professor of economics at the School of Economics at Georgia Tech, was a member of the 2010 Special Council on Tax Reform and Fairness for Georgia.
About the Author
