One of these days, it would be nice to have a thoughtful public dialogue about taxes in this state. Our approach has been to deal with bits and pieces of the puzzle and ignore the big picture. Such isolated thinking leads to bad decisions.

Until we are ready to deal with this subject more rationally, we’ll be forced to deal with isolated proposals like Initiative 1185, which would force the Legislature to get a two-thirds majority to increase any tax or else send each measure to the voters. Now, the idea of a supermajority requirement is popular in the state — voters have passed similar measures four times in the past — but lawmakers have consistently opted to suspend those rules.

Proponents of 1185 contend that state taxes are overly burdensome and that the Legislature cannot be trusted to bring about reforms to make state government more efficient but will instead take the easy way out and raise taxes. Making it nearly impossible to increase taxes, it is argued, will force us to live within our means and lead to greater collaboration between the two parties.

I’m not buying it.

I believe fundamental reforms need to be made in terms of how the state spends money, such as a more modest approach to public employee benefits — something that Democrats have been unwilling to address. On the other hand, I don’t subscribe to the notion that the overall level of state taxation is as crushing as Republicans would have us believe. The Tax Foundation finds that our state and local tax burden ranks us a middling 29th in the nation.

Initiative 1185 has a lot of emotional appeal, but will it lead us toward a better future?

After supporting a similar measure the last time around, I’ve changed my views and believe that the initiative won’t solve the problem, will create others and is bad public policy. For the record, the other two members of the editorial board take the opposite position and are free to make their own arguments on the subject.

The real issue with taxes in this state is our narrow base and accompanying high rates. That’s because the sales tax we rely on includes exemptions for some of our biggest industries, including aerospace, agriculture and manufacturing. A far more equitable system would involve a broader tax base with low rates. That’s the conversation we ought to be having.

State Treasurer Jim McIntire pointed out recently that state tax collections as a percentage of income is declining precipitously. We are, in other words, on our way to becoming a low-tax, low-service state. Do we really want to be a state with minimalist services for the disabled, elderly, etc? Initiative 1185 will hurry that trend along, which will negatively impact the quality of life that we ought to fight for.

With our inequitable tax structure, there are winners and losers. Initiative 1185 will guarantee that the beneficiaries of the current system will retain their advantage and that overall taxation will inexorably head even further downward. Our state and local tax burden will head south from 29th in the nation toward the bottom. We need to consider whether being last in taxes, and therefore services, is an appropriate goal.

I am also uncomfortable with supermajorities. Giving a minority of our elected officials the ability to override the majority seems counter to the principles upon which this country was founded. It’s fundamentally undemocratic to have the votes of some count more than others.

Initiative 1185 will foment further division and partisanship in the Legislature at a time when the state is already facing enormous financial challenges. Somewhere between the two extremes advocated by the parties are solutions that will preserve the quality life of this state.

Initiative 1185 should be rejected.