The Tennessean has taken not only a stance for the tax increase, which was expected, but has issued a personal strike against those opposing the sales tax hike.

Opponents of the half-cent sales tax increase on tomorrow’s referendum ballot are offering little more than lame excuses to explain their objection to the tax

Okay, and what would those lame excuses be? That we actually want to see where the money will go before it is spent? It is “lame”, if I too can speak as an irate teenager, to swallow a bureaucratic budgetary request hook, line and sinker, after the mayor himself cut that request by $30 million, before asking for more.

This year, the Metro Council raised property taxes by 67 cents, with six cents of it for schools. But that covers only this year’s school budget. If the referendum fails, schools will face a $20 million shortfall for 2006-07. That would mean cutting possibly hundreds of positions.

Yet despite the budget problem staring schools in the face, some tax opponents have seized upon a hollow rant that there must be waste in the system. They offer little proof — nothing but a belief that there is waste because, well, there must be, they surmise.

First things first. Why only 6 cents to schools? The city is stagnant, if not shrinking. That much more money for sidewalks is, well, laughable.

Next, let’s see what positions can be cut. I haven’t seen that list, probably because no one has gone to the trouble of creating it. I find it difficult to believe that every position in the Metropolitan Nashville Public Schools is needed, required, or otherwise indispensable. The problem here is the mindset - the errant belief that pet government institutions are above reproach, and ought not be evaluated and open for public inspection. We as the people have no say, if it’s for the children, even if no details are provided. God forbid that we propose a meritocracy in the public schools, or challenge the authority of the unions, who care for the children only secondarily, if at all, though they get the full benefit of all doubts.

Finally, the editors here are simply wrong. I and others have been asking only that we be shown precisely what the new revenues are for, and that a new performance audit be conducted before collecting more revenues, with views to merit-based promotions and raises, not in the same static system we’re focusing on now. We’re on the last year of the proposed five years of the last audit - it’s okay to attempt to be efficient earlier than schedule, despite howling to the contrary.

Some objections are downright funny. At first, the argument was that schools were under-performing and therefore didn’t deserve more funding. When test scores revealed that schools were in fact improving, the argument became that it doesn’t really matter about test scores. Then, laughably, the objection became that since schools improved, that proved they never needed more money anyway.

I’m not sure where this came from, unless it’s a misreading of my comments on Teddy Bart awhile back. My contention is that we should see what works. The school system is not an employee who gets a raise and a pat on the head for doing a good job - it’s an entity through which our tax dollars function that is answerable to the people through perpetuity. Let’s see what works, then decide what new funding is needed. We don’t have a positive trend yet, just a positive blip.

Opponents of school funding should either expose detailed deficiencies in the school system or admit they just don’t want to pay taxes. An honest admission of selfishness would be more credible than hazy explanations.

I believe that I have been quite clear as to my opposition. I and others I know are for extreme clarity. Haze acts to the benefit of those proposing the tax increase. Property taxes have increased by $1.55 in the last four years, on two separate occasions. The wheel tax was increased by $20.00 this summer as well. Now, yet another tax increase is being proposed. The burden is certainly not on those opposing the tax to come up with anything new, but in light of the rash of tax hikes, is instead on those who support additional taxation. These same individuals, who seem to be unable to tax enough, can only laugh at accountable government, and go lame at the thought of a meritocratic education system, are bent not on responsible government, but simply more of it.

An increase in the sales tax, which will also go toward tax relief for the elderly in this case, is a regressive way to raise money, because the sales tax hits hardest on those with lower income. But in this case, the greater good must prevail. That means increasing funding for schools, which have earned and deserve the city’s support.

Editorial honesty would be nice here. The only definitive supporter of the constitutionality of the elderly relief scheme is Karl Dean, head of Metro Legal (which is currently breaking federal labor law, if The Tennessean cares to watch Channel 5 now and again) and subservient to Bill Purcell. A similar tax relief scheme in Memphis was met with disapproval by the state attorney general’s office. Prudent and responsible government (and editorializing) would require those supporting the tax hike on these grounds to get another opinion from the attorney general before taxing these same seniors at a higher rate.

So, there we are - if you are for responsible and accountable government, and are not for three tax hikes in three months, you are Lame, Laughable and Selfish.

Go vote tomorrow. And get your friends to vote.

UPDATE Mark Rose over at Right Minded makes mince of The Tennessean’s hypocritical political thuggery as well.