Robert C. Jubelirer, R-Blair, president pro tempore of the Pennsylvania Senate, is among the lawmakers aligned with the idea that state voters should be able to decide the fate of school district property tax increases. In the state House, Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, R-12th, has introduced House Bill 1988, which would require any and all future local tax increases, excluding increases for public health or safety concerns, to be approved by a voter referendum.

"Referendum tied to property tax reduction and control is nothing new," Jubelirer said May 11 at a "YES on Referendum" news conference hosted by The Commonwealth Foundation for Public Policy Alternatives. "It has been at the heart of bills I have introduced since 1990. It was a central part of Act 50 that we passed in the late '90s. And it must be part of any property tax relief measure passed this session."

But if Jubelirer is so intent on limiting local-level taxing ability, he ought to be equally enthusiastic about pushing for implementing the "referendum factor" into state-level taxation. Jubelirer would seem to wield considerable power toward achieving such an objective because of his leadership position and the control Republicans enjoy in both houses of the General Assembly.

That hasn't happened despite the Republicans having also wielded control of the state government's executive branch for the eight years prior to the inauguration of Gov. Ed Rendell in January 2003.

Tax reform by way of reduction or elimination of the property levy is always a popular topic for politicians. To many Butler County taxpayers, Metcalfe's referendum measure is a great plan, although many school directors and administrators view it as a potential pathway to disaster.

As the past has shown, state voters are wary of reforms that spell temporary relief from high property taxes but do not ensure that the reductions will remain in place. They should be equally wary of those who would limit or control others' taxing authority without exercising similarly directed vigor at their end of the government taxing spectrum.

"At least three dozen states have (taxing) limits through some form of referendum," Jubelirer said at the May 11 news conference. "We hear all sorts of horror stories about the situations in those states, but yet we end up chasing some of those same states in terms of education results."

While that may be true, it's also true that Pennsylvania's lawmakers have so far been unproductive in producing meaningful tax reform that state residents can enthusiastically embrace - despite being what amounts to a full-time legislature.

From a legislative perspective, some states accomplish much more with a smaller, part-time, less-costly legislature not so hellbent on partisan politics than Keystone State lawmakers.

"So, the dispute comes down to this," Jubelirer said as he leveled criticism at education groups and all who make money off the education system, for stridently opposing the referendum idea. "The taxpayers want property tax reductions today and limits on tax hikes tomorrow. The education establishment wants access to new tax money, state and local, without any restraint whatsoever on their power."

What the senator didn't say was that the taxpayers also want lower state taxes and elimination of wasteful spending while the legislature prefers to retain unrestricted access to state residents' wallets and pocketbooks whenever lawmakers choose to grab for more.

It's nice that Jubelirer is concerned about Pennsylvania residents' tax loads, but that concern should be all-encompassing.

Unfortunately, past history - the lack of leadership by Jubelirer directed at requiring referendums on state tax increases as well as local property tax hikes - gives Jubelirer's Commonwealth Foundation comments a somewhat hollow ring.

- J.R.K.