If only there were a magic elixir to create cheaper government and lower taxes at the same time that we have better roads and schools, economic development and uncluttered beaches, healthcare for everybody and a thriving natural environment. Alas, that elixir remains as elusive as our fountain of youth, but we keep talking about it anyway. The state constitution says we have to, at least every 20 years. So in 2007 there will be a Tax and Budget Reform Commission.

The group will have until May 2008 to put any proposed constitutional amendments on the November 2008 ballot, which the commission can do directly, without legislative interference. The only other group with that privilege is the every- 20-years Constitution Revision Commission, which meets again in 2017-18.

The commission's scope is so broad that members can make of it what they want -- and so can the governor and legislative leaders, who appoint all the members. (Some Republicans wishfully speculated that Gov. Jeb Bush would make some of the appointments as one of his last acts. Bush's folks say they haven't thought about it.)

The fundamental question is what we want to achieve with Florida's government. Take education, for example. Bush argues correctly that more money doesn't necessarily produce better education, but "accountability" alone won't either. Republican leaders complain about the cost of meeting class-size standards but haven't said much about the cost of meeting federal and state accountability standards. And we are all but ignoring areas not tested by the FCAT, such as geography, civics and the arts. How good do we want education to be?

Until we know what our societal and governmental goals are, it's harder to address either budget or tax levels. Neither the Legislature nor the governor has done that. Can a commission? It could raise our ambitions or lower our expectations about government services. It would be a shame if it just opts for the same old mediocrity.

The commission could also get government better focused on investment and return. We tend to look at government services as a cost, not as costs and benefits -- except possibly benefits (cost savings) to government itself. Consider this from economist David Denslow of the University of Florida's Bureau of Economic and Business Research in a book called "Tough Choices," which he co-authored for the LeRoy Collins Institute at Florida State University last year: "Underfunded, mediocre pre-school programs actually have negative behavioral effects on students that endure, and create costs and burdens, long after the positive education benefits fade."

Eight years of rhetorical attacks on taxes will surely affect the commission's decisions. The traditional meaning of "tax reform" in Florida is broadening the tax base beyond the sales tax on goods, the biggest source of state money, and the property tax on real estate, the main funding for local governments and schools. That generally means "tax increase," especially since Florida now takes less from its citizens than most other states.

A broader base can also simply mean that more things are taxed so that the overall rate goes down. "Broad-based low rates are the soundest principle in tax policy," says Bob Sanchez, policy director at the James Madison Institute. "It keeps taxes from distorting the economic landscape."

More recently, "tax reform" has meant "tax repeal." Bush and many Republican lawmakers built their political careers on the idea of lower taxes. There has been little structural change, though, other than repeal of the intangibles tax and the communications-equipment tax -- mostly tax holidays and new exemptions.
Today, "tax reform" means one more thing: Restraining local property taxes, especially on homeowners. As a gubernatorial candidate, Charlie Crist promoted a doubling of the homestead exemption -- a break for homeowners but a tax shift to other property owners like businesses and apartments. So property taxes will be very much an issue this go-around -- including the Save Our Homes exemption.

On the "budget" side of the ledger, the last time we had a commission like this, in 1991-92, the constitution was amended to open up the state appropriation process somewhat -- basically giving legislators and the public three days to read the spending bill before a final vote. The most meaningful change, though, was probably the constitutional requirement of a "rainy day" fund equal to 5% of state spending. This was a huge help when state sales-tax revenue dropped dramatically after the 9/11 tragedy. That last commission did its work during the economic blahs that followed the first Iraq war. Back then, state spending was being cut, and the commission focused mostly on where it could get more money to pay for such services as Medicaid for people thrown out of work.

This time around is very different. The good times have rolled for a few years now. Local taxes have soared with property values, and state sales taxes have been boosted by relentless consumer spending.

Fresh in everyone's mind in 1991-92 was the tax reform (and unreform) that killed the re-election of Gov. Bob Martinez in 1990. Martinez championed a broadening of the sales tax to services and got it through the Legislature. But amid the inevitable grousing, he got cold feet. By December, the services tax was repealed. Martinez had managed to make everybody mad, and Lawton Chiles beat him in the 1990 election. (Former state Sen. Curt Kiser said recently that he thought the criticism was fading even before Martinez gave in, and the state sales tax might now be more like 5% instead of 6.5%.)

The 1991-92 group recommended -- but didn't put on the ballot -- eliminating the constitutional ban on personal income taxes, eliminating most sales-tax exemptions, imposing the sales tax on professional services and extending the corporate income tax to partnerships and subchapter S corporations. It also noted without recommendation replacing the array of business taxes with one comprehensive business tax based on "valued added" by the business.
Those proposals went nowhere. As Senate president in 2000-02, John McKay revived the effort, was shut down in the Legislature, tried to push the plan as a constitutional amendment, got turned away at the Florida Supreme Court and now is facing Supreme Court review of a new initiative for the 2008 ballot. At this point, the commission might just do the work for him.

All those ideas inevitably will be back, along with talk about "productivity and efficiency." The ban on a state income tax isn't at much risk. As McKay put it, "An income tax on the ballot would be a death knell for all the commission's amendments."

Sixteen months from January 2007 to May 2008 (the deadline for proposed amendments) is not a lot of time for this major undertaking. But that's what they've got. And you can bet a lot of people will be lined up with a hand on their wallets, arguing, in the words of the late U.S. Sen. Russell Long of Louisiana, "Don't tax you, don't tax me, tax that fellow behind the tree." Every Sunday This new section will help employers fi nd qualifi ed active and passive job seekers quickly.