Lower taxes
I strongly oppose Idaho’s outdated, regressive grocery tax, it’s a shameful burden on basic survival, taxing the food we all need to live. Unlike buying a boat, car, or clothes, which we can do without or make last, food is essential; without it, we die in days.
Idaho is one of just four states still taxing groceries, with two already working to phase it out, leaving us and Hawaii as the last holdouts, ours the second-highest rate. This hits poor and working-class families hardest, taking a bigger bite from their slim incomes than from the wealthy, deepening poverty and inequality. Scrapping it now would free up cash for struggling households, stretch their budgets, boost local spending, and drive economic growth. Taxing necessities has no defense; repealing it is a moral must and is the right thing to do.
Idaho’s property taxes need bold reform, starting with exemptions to protect retirees and paid-off homeowners from being taxed out of their homes. But we must go further: develop an innovative, balanced plan to repeal property taxes entirely through a multi-year phase-out that keeps budgets stable. Our constitution requires balanced budgets each year, so government spending and taxes must never outgrow the state’s economy, tying them to metrics like GDP.
Replacing property taxes with cuts in waste, fraud, and abuse, and new revenue from growth, would free citizens from endless home burdens that rise with values, always ignoring income levels. This repeal would promote stability, encourage ownership, and break a regressive chain, turning homes into safe havens, not financial traps, while upholding liberty and self-reliance.
Taxes are not the government’s right but a necessary evil to fund core duties outlined in the U.S. and Idaho constitutions, always dependent on the people’s approval. True taxes require representation and must serve the public good, not lawmakers or bureaucrats. They form a social contract between citizens and the state; excessive taxes could justify rebellion to protect fundamental rights.
Federalist No. 30 supported federal taxation for defense and stability, warning that governments without funds grow weak. But Federalist No. 45 called for limits, keeping federal taxes minimal while letting states control their finances to block central tyranny. Anti-Federalists feared broad federal powers leading to heavy direct taxes that would crush local freedoms.
The Founders pushed for fair, clear, and balanced taxes, preferring indirect import fees over prying direct ones. They saw taxes as a tool for republican government, not its primary purpose, ensuring representatives serve the people, not rule over them.
