Originally published at The Pelican Institute.

​Federal spending is out of control. Washington is racking up debt faster than at any time outside a world war or national emergency, and the consequences aren’t theoretical. They’re hitting state and local governments hard, especially in Louisiana.

The national debt just blew past $38 trillion. This year’s deficit alone will be about $2 trillion, fueled not by declining revenues (they’re up!) but by a refusal to curb spending. And that spending spree is already showing up in Louisiana’s economy.

Louisiana’s Labor Market Shows a Slowing Recovery

The latest job numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics reveal that Louisiana added just 19,100 nonfarm jobs over the past year, a 1.0% increase as of August 2025 (latest BLS data available). That might sound encouraging in isolation, but zoom out, and it becomes a red flag.

Many neighboring states are growing faster. In a region where competitive tax structures and stronger labor markets are drawing people and capital, Louisiana risks getting left behind. A 1.0% job growth rate won’t be enough to reverse declining population trends, expand the tax base, or lift incomes. And here’s where it all ties back to Washington: Federal fiscal recklessness is magnifying Louisiana’s economic vulnerability.

Runaway Federal Spending = Higher Costs, Lower Growth

As the federal government borrows trillions of dollars to cover unsustainable spending, interest rates rise. That makes it more expensive for states and local governments to borrow for infrastructure, schools, and basic services. It drives up costs on mortgages, car loans, and business financing, squeezing Louisiana families and small businesses already facing affordability challenges.

And federal uncertainty breeds local instability. When D.C. starts trimming transfers, grants, or matching funds to rein in deficits, states like Louisiana, which rely heavily on federal support, will feel the crunch first. Whether it’s Medicaid, disaster aid, or education funding, when federal budgets tighten, fragile state budgets get stretched. It’s a perfect storm: Washington overspends, interest rates climb, uncertainty spreads—and Louisiana’s already-sluggish growth stalls further.

The Fire Is Spreading. Baton Rouge Can’t Just Watch.

The implications for Louisiana’s state and local policymakers are clear: don’t wait for D.C. to collapse before acting.

• Cap state spending growth to less than population growth plus inflation. That’s what responsible budgeting looks like, especially when federal instability is looming. 
• Advance pro-growth tax reform. Phase out the income tax. Simplify the tax code. Don’t let Louisiana become even less competitive as other states move ahead. 
• Strengthen local fiscal discipline. Cities and parishes must resist debt-driven budgets and prioritize performance, transparency, and responsible budgeting. 
• Shield the state from federal volatility. Don’t tie Louisiana’s future to Washington’s broken promises; reduce dependency on federal funds.

Congress Must Hear from Louisiana’s Leaders

Louisiana’s congressional delegation has an obligation to act before the fiscal cliff hits. The next budget deal, continuing resolution, or debt ceiling negotiation must include real spending cuts and growth limits—not just political posturing. That means rejecting gimmicks and demanding structural reform. Because the longer Congress delays, the greater the risk that Louisiana becomes collateral damage.

Bottom Line: This Is a Warning

The federal budget isn’t just some distant fight in Washington—it’s a ticking time bomb for states like Louisiana. The combination of slow job growth, rising costs, and economic uncertainty makes Louisiana especially exposed to the consequences of fiscal failure. The job numbers prove it: Louisiana isn’t growing fast enough to absorb the shock. Without immediate policy action—both at the state and federal level—the future looks bleak. The fire is burning. It’s time to break the glass and pull the brake before Louisiana gets scorched.

Originally published on Substack. 

​Black Friday always tells us something about the economy. This year, it tells us everything.

The National Retail Federation expects a record 186.9 million shoppers, the most ever. If you only read headlines, you’d think Americans are overflowing with confidence. They aren’t.
​
According to the Conference Board, consumer confidence fell to 88.7 in November—its lowest point since April and far below the 100–120 range that once signaled stability. Consumer sentiment dropped to near 60. And inflation-adjusted retail sales are flat since 2021.

When record crowds collide with falling confidence, it doesn’t signal prosperity. It signals pressure. Americans aren’t shopping because they feel good. They’re shopping because everything costs more. And the cause of that isn’t mysterious.

It’s federal overspending, inflation, tariffs, and bad policy—not consumer behavior.

Prices Didn’t Rise on Their Own—Policy Made Them Rise

Talk to shoppers and read the reporting, and the pattern is crystal clear.

Reuters highlights shoppers cutting budgets dramatically—one New Yorker dropping her holiday spending from $500 → $300, and a family in Idaho shrinking their budget from $2,000 → $750 due to rising healthcare premiums and higher everyday prices.

Retailers have pulled back on deals because their own costs—driven by tariffs and inflation—keep climbing.
Small appliances that once cost $5 after rebates now cost two to four times more, with fewer promotions and no rebates.

MarketWatch reports that Americans feel pressured to “get the best deals” because their dollars no longer stretch the way they used to. Even off-price retailers are seeing surging demand—not because consumers are thriving, but because they’re searching for value in a high-price world.

Then The Economist drives it home:

Americans are “miserable but still spending.”

That’s not irrational. It’s survival.

Americans Aren’t the Problem—Washington Is

Families don’t always budget perfectly. That’s life. But at least they spend their own money and face their own consequences.

Washington does neither.

The federal government has spent with abandon, avoided accountability by borrowing trillions, and fueled the affordability crisis hurting every household today.

Here are the facts from the ATR Sustainable Budget Project:

• Federal spending is up more than 50% in a decade.
• From 2020–2024, spending grew 10.9% per year—nearly triple the sustainable rate of 3.6%.
• Had Congress followed a responsible population-plus-inflation limit, Washington would have spent $2.2 trillion less this year.
• The U.S. would have $1.8 trillion less debt, instead of adding $14.3 trillion in a decade.

This isn’t complicated. It’s arithmetic. Inflation didn’t happen because of “greed.” Prices didn’t jump because Americans suddenly forgot how to shop.

The affordability crisis is the direct result of overspending and policy mistakes—tariffs that raised consumer prices, regulations that slowed investment, and deficits that stoked inflation.

Families are trying to manage the fallout. Washington is pretending it didn’t cause it.

Bad Policy Creates Bad Incentives

For years, federal policy encouraged households to overspend too:

• Inflation punished saving
• Easy money rewarded borrowing
• “Stimulus” checks trained people to spend rather than invest
• Tariffs raised the price of essentials
• Regulatory uncertainty weakened hiring and wage growth

Households are reacting rationally to bad incentives created by Washington—not some mythical “irrational consumer.” People feel they must “buy now before prices rise further” because, for years, they did rise further.
That isn’t a consumer problem. It’s a policy problem.

Savings and Stability: The Real Engines of Prosperity

Healthy economies depend on savings—the fuel behind entrepreneurship, investment, and long-term growth. But savings erode under inflation. And record federal deficits crowd out private investment.

Yes, households still have more cash than in 2019, but Bank of America finds they’re reluctant to draw it down—because uncertainty is replacing confidence. That uncertainty originates in Washington, not at kitchen tables.

The Fix Is Simple: Spend Less, Grow More, Restore Confidence

America doesn’t need new taxes, new bureaucracies, or performative “populism.” We need one rule: Limit federal spending growth to less than population growth plus inflation.

That’s the Sustainable Budget model—simple, proven, pro-growth, and aligned with the real-world constraints families face every day.

This rule:

• restrains overspending
• cools inflation
• stabilizes debt
• strengthens savings
• boosts investment
• rebuilds consumer confidence

States like Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Texas, and Tennessee already use versions of this framework. Washington can too—if it’s willing to choose discipline over denial.

My Take: Americans Are Doing Their Part. Washington Must Do Its Job.

Black Friday crowds aren’t a sign of a thriving economy. They’re a sign of Americans navigating abnormal economic conditions with grit and creativity—while Washington keeps making things harder.

Families are stretching dollars. Searching for value. Adjusting to higher prices. Washington is doing none of that.
It’s time for the federal government to relearn the lesson every family already knows: You cannot spend money you do not have without consequences.

The path forward is clear:

• Spend less
• Borrow less
• Inflate less
• Save more
• Grow more
• Trust free people, not central planners

That’s how we restore affordability, rebuild confidence, and let people prosper.

Originally published on Substack. 

​The federal government finally reopened — on my 44th birthday (Nov. 12), no less — after the longest government shutdown in American history.

Forty-three days of drama, political brinkmanship, and leadership failures from both parties ended with a massive spending deal that…cut no spending, kept Biden’s bloated post-COVID spending levels, but preserved the provisions in the so-called “One Big Beautiful Bill”: expanded Obamacare subsidies that were supposed to expire years ago when Biden ended the emergency declaration but now represent $1.5 trillion in new spending over a decade.

In other words: Congress ended the shutdown by agreeing to spend more with continued trillions of dollars in deficits…to avoid talking about spending. But somehow, in the middle of all this dysfunction, they did find one thing they could agree on: A nationwide ban on hemp-derived THC products starting a year from now.

Yes — the government that can’t pass a real budget and running $2 trillion deficits for a $38 trillion national debt that’s 120% of GDP suddenly found laser-like focus when it came to shutting down an entire estimated $28 billion industry, destroying more than 300,000 jobs, and throwing thousands of small businesses under the regulatory bus.

As I’ve been saying for years: When politicians panic, liberty is the first casualty.

The Ban: A Disaster Wrapped Inside a Spending Bill

Tucked into the agriculture portion of the spending package was a provision banning any hemp-derived consumer product containing more than 0.4 mg of THC per container — far below what many products contains.

​For context:

• A typical edible gummy has 2.5 to 10 mg of THC.
• The 2018 Farm Bill allowed hemp with <0.3% THC by dry weight, not per container.
• This new threshold wipes out 95% of the legal hemp market.

It is, as industry leaders put it, “a complete ban dressed up as a safety rule.”
The ban takes effect one year from passage — unless Congress reverses course. That means the clock is already ticking. And as always, when government swings a hammer, real people get crushed:

• Texas, Kentucky, and Utah — states with major hemp industries — stand to lose thousands of farmers, manufacturers, and retailers.
• Consumers who use hemp products for sleep, chronic pain, PTSD, or simple relaxation lose access to legal, regulated options.
• And prohibition predictably shifts demand to black markets, where quality control is nonexistent and bad actors like drug dealers and cartels thrive.

If this sounds familiar, it should. We’ve run this experiment before — during alcohol prohibition, in the war on drugs, and every time politicians confuse public health with political control.
The result?
More crime. More cartels. More Al Capones. And less safety, less transparency, and less personal responsibility.
Thank You, U.S. Sen. Rand Paul — One Who Tried
Let’s be clear: not every Republican supported this nonsense. US Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) offered an amendment to strike the hemp ban outright. It was the right move — grounded in constitutional principles, federalism, and basic economic sanity. He deserves credit for standing firm for small businesses, property rights, and individual liberty. But most of the Senate ignored him and voted for prohibition anyway — many of whom preach “limited government” while voting like central planners.
Ask yourself: Are lawmakers protecting public safety…or protecting alcohol lobbyists who don’t want competition Because this looks less like moral conviction and more like the oldest story in politics: Baptists and Bootleggers working together.
Economics 101: There’s No Market Failure Here
For government to intervene in a market, there must be a clear, demonstrable market failure — something the private sector cannot solve. That simply doesn’t apply here. There is no imbalance of information: consumers know what a THC gummy is. There is no externality beyond personal choices: adults consume responsibly or not, like alcohol, caffeine, or Tylenol.
There is no monopoly requiring intervention: the hemp market is one of the most competitive sectors in America. What we have instead is a classic case of politicians treating adults like children and industries like political bargaining chips.
Prohibition is not regulation. Prohibition is not safety. Prohibition is not limited government. Prohibition is force — and force fails every time.
The Real Path Forward: Freedom, Federalism, and Civil Society
If Congress wants to keep communities safe and entrepreneurs accountable, here’s the path:
1. Legalize and Decriminalize, Don’t Criminalize and Ban
Prohibition empowers criminals, cartels, and fentanyl. Legal markets empower consumers, safety, transparency, and competition.
2. State-Level Regulation, not Bans, Work Better
Hemp is overwhelmingly a local and intrastate industry — making it a textbook case for federalism. Let states set testing standards, retail rules, and age limitations, not bans like Texas tried this year and Texas Gov. Greg Abbott vetoed and issued an executive order for 21+ purchases and not near sensitive locations like schools (should be legislation instead of EO as executives are getting too much power these days among populists).



3. Civil Society > Federal Bureaucracy
Addiction and misuse require family support, churches, nonprofits, mental-health expertise, and community care — not another round of federal raids or one-size-fits-all bans.
4. Respect Adults, Respect Markets
Consumers deserve choice. Entrepreneurs deserve opportunity. Liberty requires both.
Conclusion: If Congress Won’t Protect Liberty, We Must
This entire episode — the shutdown, the spending bill, the hemp ban — reveals a simple truth: Washington will spend endlessly, regulate recklessly, and ban freely unless the American people push back.
But there is good news: Liberty is resilient. Entrepreneurs are resilient. And Americans overwhelmingly prefer freedom over prohibition.
The hemp ban doesn’t take effect for one full year. That means now is the time — for advocacy, legislation, litigation, and education. And as someone who’s spent his career fighting for pro-growth, pro-freedom, pro-prosperity policy, I can tell you:

This fight is winnable. Let’s get to work.

​— Vance Ginn, Ph.D.

Originally published on Substack. 

​Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R) has released his Six Steps to Overhaul the Property Tax System, promising relief from soaring appraisals and runaway local tax hikes. Here’s the plan posted on X.

But let’s be clear: while Abbott’s plan is progress, it’s not the destination. Texans deserve full ownership, not perpetual relief. If leaders don’t show courage now, Texas risks becoming the next California—spending too much, taxing too much, and delivering too little.

The right path is simple but not easy: spend less, tax less, and let Texans prosper.

The Positives: Where Abbott’s Plan Gets It Right

Here are the biggest strengths of his plan:

1. Local Spending Limits. Limiting local government spending to population growth plus inflation (or 3.5%, whichever is lower) would impose much-needed discipline. This mirrors the Sustainable Budget model that spending restraint is the only sustainable form of tax relief.
   
2. Two-Thirds Voter Approval for Property Tax Increases. Giving taxpayers the power to veto big hikes would protect wallets and restore accountability. It’s a guardrail against local governments that treat taxpayers as endless tax revenue sources.
   
3. Appraisal Predictability. Requiring appraisals only once every five years could reduce red tape and uncertainty for homeowners and businesses.
   
4. Lower Appraisal Caps and Broader Coverage. Reducing the homestead appraisal cap from 10% to 3% and extending it to all property types could slow some growth in tax bills.
   
5. Empowering Voters to Roll Back Taxes. Allowing 15% of local voters to trigger rollback elections gives Texans direct power to check government excess.
   
6. Eliminating School Property Taxes for Homeowners. The boldest part—ending school district property taxes through a constitutional amendment—could mark the beginning of true property ownership if done responsibly.

Together, these reforms acknowledge a truth fiscal conservatives have preached for decades: property taxes are too high because government spends too much.

The Concerns: Caution, Complexity, and the Need for Courage

Still, Gov. Abbott’s proposal doesn’t go far enough. It tinkers with symptoms instead of curing the disease.

• Caps don’t cut spending. Local officials will simply find new ways to spend around them. Without stronger constitutional limits and voter-approved enforcement at the state and local levels, these caps risk becoming ceilings to hit, not boundaries to respect.
  
• Appraisal limits distort markets. Capping appraisals shifts the burden onto others when local governments jack up tax rates to spend more. Capping appraisals also incentivizes people to not sell their property thereby reducing available supply in the market resulting in higher values for new property purchases and making it more difficult for first-time buyers, households with lower income, and others.
  
• “Relief” without reform fades fast. Texans have seen this before—record “relief” packages wiped out by higher appraisals and local rate hikes. Relief without restraint is a sugar high; reform must be permanent.
  
• The endgame is missing. Abbott ran on eliminating property taxes outright in 2022, but this new plan sidesteps that vision.

If Texas settles for tinkering, states like Florida and Tennessee—both leaner and bolder—will leave us behind.
To truly secure prosperity, Texas needs more than a six-step patch. It needs a three-step plan for elimination.

The Three-Step Plan to End Property Taxes

Step 1: A Stronger Constitutional Spending Limit.

Texas currently has five state spending limits—but most are riddled with loopholes. We need one simple, enforceable rule: All state and local government spending must grow slower than population growth plus inflation. Exceeding that limit should require at least a two-thirds supermajority vote. Fiscal responsibility isn’t partisan; it’s arithmetic.

Step 2: Use Surpluses to Buy Down Property Taxes.

Every surplus dollar taken from taxpayers should go toward permanent tax rate compression—not new programs. This surplus buydown model already works at the state level, but has been watered down with bad homestead exemption hikes and excessive spending, and could eliminate school district property taxes within a decade if lawmakers hold the line on spending.

Step 3: Replace Property Taxes with a Budget-Neutral Sales Taxes.

This could be matched to accomplish this quickly for school district M&O taxes, replaced with a broader-based 9% state-local sales tax rate (compared with the 8.25% rate today) that captures final consumption—not production.

Local governments should follow by taking the increased sales tax revenue from the base expansion to reduce their property tax rates then have some combination of a local surplus buydown or other paths to eliminate their property taxes (not the state).

This is the path to eliminating all property taxes and real ownership, not another round of “temporary relief.”

The Economic and Moral Case for Elimination
​
Property taxes are fundamentally unjust. They punish investment, discourage homeownership, and treat property not as something you own but something you lease from the state. If you can lose your home for failing to pay, you don’t own it—you’re renting it.

Property taxes also hit the poor hardest. Renters pay through higher rents, workers through lower wages, and entrepreneurs through lost capital. These taxes distort housing markets, drive up costs, and slow growth. More importantly, they violate a moral truth: once you’ve paid for your property, you shouldn’t have to rent it every year.

The solution isn’t more carveouts, exemptions, or political “caps.” It’s sustainable budgeting and a modern, consumption-based tax system designed for the 21st century.

The Moment for Boldness

Governor Abbott’s plan moves the debate in the right direction—but Texas must go further. “Relief” isn’t enough. Texans want ownership. They want simplicity, transparency, and a government that spends less so they can save, invest, and build more. If the governor pushes forward boldly—pairing sustainable budgeting with surplus buydowns and a budget-neutral tax swap (not revenue neutral to emphasize less spending)—Texas could become the model for every other state.

If he stops short, our tax burden will keep creeping upward, our debt will keep rising, and our competitiveness will keep slipping. Texas will keep looking a little more like California and a lot less like the freedom-focused Texas we love.

Spending less must be the rallying cry for every fiscal conservative, policymaker, and taxpayer who wants Texas to lead again. Spend Less, Prosper More isn’t just a motto—it’s the only way to preserve ownership and opportunity for generations to come.
​
For more on how Texas and other states can end property taxes and restore true ownership, visit my writings.

Originally published on Substack. 

​The Tax Foundation’s recently released 2026 State Tax Competitiveness Index ranks Louisiana 31st in the nation, a middling position that reflects the state’s economic climate. While Louisiana has taken modest steps to simplify its tax code, government spending continues to grow faster than the economy—and that’s what keeps the state stuck in neutral.
Across the country, the story is becoming clear. States that maintain a limited and predictable government are the ones that attract new residents, jobs, and businesses. Those that allow spending to balloon are watching people and investment leave.

The Real Problem: Spending, Not Just Taxes

Louisiana’s tax structure looks competitive in some areas, but high and complex spending patterns undermine those gains. The state ranks 10th in corporate taxes and 15th in individual income taxes after its 2024 reforms. However, it ranks 50th—dead last—in sales-tax simplicity due to its fragmented local collection system. Property taxes are moderate at 22nd, but they continue to climb as local budgets expand.

The real obstacle is not insufficient revenue; it’s a lack of fiscal restraint. When state spending grows faster than population growth plus inflation, taxpayers lose purchasing power, and the private economy—the engine of prosperity—shrinks. Every dollar the government spends must first be taken from someone who earned it. The longer this pattern persists, the more challenging it becomes for families and businesses to plan, invest, and thrive.

Learning from Our Neighbor: What Mississippi Is Doing Right
​
Louisiana’s neighbor, Mississippi, is taking a disciplined and forward-looking approach. Under the Build Up Mississippi Act, enacted in 2022, the state is phasing out its individual income tax through a series of scheduled rate reductions. The top rate will fall to 3 percent by 2030—a goal Louisiana has already achieved—but then further cuts will occur automatically if revenues and reserves meet defined benchmarks. Louisiana has no such automatic trigger or plan to achieve further reductions. In fact, earlier this year, state senators balked at a proposal to lower the rate to 2.75%. Analyses from the Mississippi Policy Center and ALEC indicate that Mississippi’s  forward-looking plan fosters certainty for employers and workers who can anticipate the direction of policy.

That clarity matters. Expectations shape behavior. When people know tax burdens will decline, they invest more, relocate more confidently, and hire more aggressively. It’s not simply about the current rate; it’s about the direction of policy. Mississippi is communicating that its government intends to grow less so that its people can grow more.

What Louisiana Should Do Next

If Louisiana wants to rise in competitiveness and attract long-term investment, it needs two straightforward reforms:

1. Cap government growth. Adopt a rule that limits the state’s annual budget growth to less than the combined rate of population and inflation. This approach keeps the government aligned with taxpayers’ ability to pay, allowing surpluses to build naturally without the need for higher taxes.
2. Establish a clear path to lower income tax rates. Once spending is under control, dedicate future surpluses to permanent income tax rate reductions. Louisiana’s current top individual income tax rate is lower than Mississippi’s, yet Mississippi’s trajectory is clearer. Direction and discipline are what create growth, not merely rate differences on paper.

The Bigger Lesson

Economic freedom is not just an accounting exercise—it’s a moral principle. Prosperity occurs when individuals, not bureaucracies, determine how to allocate their earnings. States that respect that truth, such as Mississippi, Texas, Florida, and Tennessee, are outperforming those that treat government as the primary driver of opportunity.
​
Louisiana can join that group, but only if it confronts its spending habits and sends a credible signal that tax burdens will continue to fall. Fiscal restraint and predictable policy are the cornerstones of growth. The path to prosperity is simple: spend less, tax less, and trust people to make their own choices. That’s how Louisiana—and every state—can let people prosper.

Originally published on Substack. 

​A recent Wall Street Journal article provides the charts below that tell a story that’s as old as Washington’s promises: the federal government keeps spending money it doesn’t have—and pretending it’s solving problems while creating new ones.

In FY2025, the U.S. government collected nearly $200 billion in tariffs, a record high according to the Treasury Department and CBO. That’s more than double what it collected just an year ago. Tariffs are supposed to make foreign companies “pay,” but in reality, they’re taxes on Americans. Every imported product—steel, farm equipment, even groceries—costs more. Tariffs don’t punish China; they punish the American people.
​
Even with all that extra tariff revenue, Washington’s finances are a disaster.

The result: higher debt, higher interest payments, and slower growth. This isn’t sustainable.

Tariffs don’t come close to paying the bills. They’re a political illusion—a short-term cash grab that hides long-term economic pain. The chart showing “net customs duties” rising sharply should alarm anyone who understands basic economics. You can’t tax your way to prosperity. You can’t trade-war your way to wealth. Every dollar the government takes in tariffs is a dollar squeezed out of consumers and producers.

And yet, the same Washington that collects record tariffs turns around and hands out record subsidies. Take agriculture. The USDA recently announced plans to buy 417,000 metric tons of corn and sorghum for international food aid—funded in part by tariff revenue. Farmers may appreciate the relief, but it’s the wrong kind of help. The government first hurts them with protectionist policies that cut export markets, then “saves” them with bailouts funded by those same policies. It’s economic whiplash—Washington as both arsonist and firefighter.

Meanwhile, programs like the Department of Agriculture’s spending continue to grow, with no signs of restraint. The truth is that farmers don’t need bailouts—they need freedom to sell to global markets without government interference. When government micromanages markets, it distorts prices, rewards political connections, and punishes efficiency.

This fiscal and trade chaos is the perfect storm:

• Tariffs = hidden taxes on families and businesses.
• Subsidies = distortions that reward inefficiency.
• Deficits = delayed pain, because debt eventually demands repayment.

The solution isn’t more Washington tinkering—it’s getting Washington out of the way. Real prosperity comes from free markets, not managed trade. The Trump administration’s goal should be to cut tariffs, restrain spending, and refocus on pro-growth tax and regulatory reform. That’s the formula that worked in the past and the one that can rebuild confidence today.

As the federal deficit plunges deeper, the charts tell the story better than any speech: Washington is addicted to spending, and it’s trying to fund the addiction by taxing trade and bailing out its mistakes. America deserves better than this cycle of economic self-sabotage.
​
It’s time to stop pretending tariffs can pay the bills or that bailouts create prosperity. The only path to a freer, stronger America is through fiscal discipline, sound money, and free trade—the very principles that let people prosper.

Originally published at Kansas Policy Institute.

​The federal government shutdown on October 1 because Congress couldn’t agree on how much more of our money to spend. It’s become routine in Washington: wait until the last minute, pass a short-term fix, and promise to deal with the problem later. That’s how we ended up with a national debt of more than $37.4 trillion.

For many Kansans, that number feels far away, but the lesson isn’t. The same bad habits that broke Washington—spending too much, saving too little, and putting off tough decisions—are starting to show up here.

Kansas lawmakers have passed one bloated budget after another. They celebrate when the budget gets done on time, but that’s not success if it just means spending more money we don’t have. Passing a budget without discipline is like paying off one credit card with another—it delays the pain but makes things worse later.

According to KPI’s Responsible Kansas Budget 2026, total state spending has climbed almost 40 percent over the past five years. If state government had limited its growth to the rate of population growth plus inflation, as families do when making their own budgets, Kansas could have billions more today for permanent tax relief. Instead, the state keeps adding new programs while keeping old ones, even when they’re no longer needed.

That’s how Washington operates—funding the same projects year after year with no accountability. Kansas can’t afford to make the same mistake. When the government grows faster than the average taxpayer can afford it, the burden lands squarely on Kansans.

Every Kansan knows what it means to tighten their belt when times get tough. State government should do the same. A responsible budget means setting clear priorities, eliminating waste, and keeping spending growth below what taxpayers can support. The rule is simple: if spending goes up faster than population and inflation, it’s too much.

Kansas also needs to stop treating every surplus as free money to spend. That’s similar to how Washington got into this mess. When revenues are strong, lawmakers should focus on cutting taxes so families can keep more of what they earn. Real tax relief—like broad, permanent income tax cuts—creates jobs and strengthens communities. It puts the economy in the hands of Kansans instead of politicians.

Finally, the state needs fewer regulations that get in the way of small businesses, farmers, and local job creators. Reducing red tape helps the economy grow without new spending. When government steps back, people step up.

None of this is complicated. It’s the same common sense Kansans use every day: live within your means, plan ahead, and don’t spend money you don’t have. Unfortunately, Washington has abandoned those values, and the federal shutdown is the result. But Kansas still has a choice.

Instead of copying D.C.’s dysfunction, Kansas can lead by example. Lawmakers can pass a truly responsible budget, return money to taxpayers, and make it easier to start a business or hire a worker. Fiscal discipline isn’t about cutting for the sake of cutting—it’s about giving families the freedom to prosper.

If Kansas acts now, it can show the rest of the country that good government doesn’t require chaos, shutdowns, or debt ceilings. It just requires the courage to say no to overspending and yes to freedom.

The shutdown in Washington should be a warning, not a model. Let’s make Kansas the example of how to do it right: spend less, tax less, regulate less, and let people prosper.

Originally published at Texans for Fiscal Responsibility. Updated in September 2025 with the latest property tax data.

Property taxes are a financial burden that Texans can no longer afford to endure. Over the past 27 years, Figure 1 illustrates how property taxes have increased by an unsustainable 364%, far outpacing population and inflation growth of 149%.

​For Texans, this is not just an economic issue—it’s a question of fairness and freedom. Property taxes make homeowners perpetual renters, burden renters, and businesses, and restrict economic opportunity. Despite six legislative attempts since 1997, Table 1 shows that the latest structural problems driving property tax growth remain unaddressed and unresolved. Texans need bold, permanent solutions.

​Two pathways to finally eliminate property taxes include: 

1. Surplus-driven buydowns funded by limiting spending, or
2. Redesigned tax system that swaps funding by increasing sales or other taxes. 

Ultimately, Texas can achieve true homeownership and foster economic prosperity through spending restraint, transparency, and voter accountability.

The Problem: Why Property Taxes Must Go
​Property taxes are burdensome in both design and execution. Figures 2 and 3 highlight how property taxes have increased more than fourfold since 1998. This unchecked growth has created severe economic distortions and eroded true homeownership.

​Property taxes affect all families who are homeowners, renters, and business owners, as noted in the Texas Comptroller’s 2023 report. Figure 4 from the Texas Comptroller’s Office shows that estimated school property taxes’ final incidence (i.e., burden) hits families across Texas.

​Source: Texas Comptroller’s Tax Exemptions and Tax Incidence Report

• Homeowners: Even after making mortgage payments, taxes continue to come in. If a homeowner fails to pay, the government can seize their property.
• Renters: Landlords pass property taxes down to renters, raising the cost of housing.
• Businesses: Higher property taxes discourage investment and reduce competitiveness.

Homestead Exemptions: A Misguided Solution
While well-intentioned, homestead exemptions, which exempt an amount from the appraised value for property taxes, are not the answer:

• Excludes Renters and Businesses: Relief only applies to homeowners, leaving families who are renters and business owners to carry a greater share of the spending burden. Everyone pays higher property tax rates than otherwise, making eliminating them more difficult.
• Locks People In: Exemptions incentivize homeowners to remain in their properties even if moving would better suit their needs.
• Loses Value Over Time: As property values rise, the relative value of a $100,000 exemption shrinks, rendering it ineffective over the long term.

A Lack of Accountability
Most local governments, except special purpose districts and some other small tax jurisdictions with a maximum of 8%, can raise property taxes by 3.5% on existing property (with no limitation on new property) without direct voter approval. 

With these loopholes in current law, county and city taxes increased by over 10% last year. This lack of oversight enables runaway spending and taxes. To address this, all property tax increases above 0% must require voter approval, with a 0% growth rate unless explicitly approved by the public. 

This means that as the County appraisal office does appraisals, the property tax rate determined by the local governing body must go down, so that the tax revenue (levy) collected doesn’t change from the prior period. This levy cap system makes appraisal caps or tax rate caps unnecessary, and the no-new-revenue rate is what the levy cap should be.

The limitation must be on the levy collected from all property taxes, which a strong spending limit that covers spending from all revenue, including property taxes, sales taxes, and other revenues, should ultimately do. This would make it less relevant where the tax revenue comes from as the spending and, therefore, taxes are held in check and hopefully reduced.

Pathway 1: Surplus-Driven Buydowns
The surplus-driven buydown approach systematically reduces property taxes over time by dedicating state budget surpluses to lowering tax rates until they are zero. This gradual method ensures that essential services remain funded during the transition.

How It Works

1. Cap Local Tax Increases:
   • Implement a 0% voter approval rate for local property tax increases. Voters must explicitly approve any proposed increase until they are eliminated.
2. Limit State and Local Spending Growth:
   • Cap state spending and local spending growth with a maximum rate of population growth plus inflation, providing higher surpluses over time.
3. Dedicate State and Local Surpluses:
   • Allocate annual state general revenue surpluses to buying down (i.e., compress) school district maintenance and operations (M&O) property tax rates, and local government surpluses to buying down their property tax rates, to zero. 
4. Phase Out Debt Taxes:
   • Local governments have interest and sinking (I&S) taxes for debt purposes. In most cases, eliminate the largest of the two, M&O taxes, first, then I&S taxes.

​
Scenarios of Surplus Buydowns to Eliminate Property Taxes

• Scenario A: State Surplus Buydown of School District M&O Property Taxes
  • This scenario would take about 10 years to eliminate the school district M&O property taxes.
  • Eliminating school district I&S property taxes with either state surplus or local surplus buydown could take another 6 years. 
  • This would effectively move 100% of funding government schools to state taxes (mostly sales taxes), thereby eliminating Recapture (Robin Hood), but it would not change local control under current law. 

​

• Scenario B: Accelerated Buydown of School District M&O and I&S Property Taxes
  • Assuming the 3% spending limit with a 90% surplus buydown and a 2% transfer tax rate on the sale of property, which would need a constitutional amendment, eliminating both could take about 8 years instead of the 16 in Scenario A. 

​

• Scenario C: Buydown of Other Local Government M&O Property Taxes
  • Assuming a 2% spending limit on local governments with a surplus buydown using local taxpayer dollars, mostly from sales taxes, eliminating local government M&O property taxes for cities, counties, and special purpose districts could take 28 years, even longer for I&S. Of course, a transfer tax on the sale of property would help speed up these elimination periods.

​Pros of Surplus Buydown Method

• Reduces Texans’ Tax Burden: Fund the surplus buydown through fiscal restraint from strict state and local spending limits would reduce future taxes and the government’s size and scope.
• Incremental, Transparent Progress: Provide incremental, immediate annual relief for taxpayers and prevent backdoor tax increases by requiring voter approval.

Cons of Surplus Buydown Method

• Reliance on Political Decisions: Could depend on politicians consistently providing surplus generation from spending restraint.
• Requires Coordination: Maintain fiscal discipline by state and local governments, which has been difficult to nonexistent after multiple attempts at reforms.

Pathway 2: Sales Tax (Swap) Redesign
A redesigned tax system in Texas would swap sales taxes for property taxes, preferably with a strong spending state and local spending limit and surplus buydown to reduce sales and other taxes. This approach depends on: 

1. broadening the sales tax base while also, 
2. keeping sales tax rates competitive.

How the Redesign Works

1. Expand the Sales Tax Base:
   • Include currently exempt goods and services, such as boats, airplanes, and professional services, in the tax base
   • Maintain exemptions for essentials like groceries and prescription medications (though the sales tax rates could be lower if these items are taxed).
   • According to the Texas Comptroller, Table 5 shows an estimated $42.2 billion in sales tax exemptions, $12.9 billion in exclusions, and $354.7 million in discounts in 2023, for a total of $55.5 billion.

2. Adjust State and Local Sales Tax Base and Rates:

• The state replaces school district M&O taxes (see Table below): 
  1. Requires a sales tax rate of 11.85% with the currently taxed GDP base of $745.3 billion or an expansion of the base by 44% of $1.07 trillion to keep the state and local sales tax rate at 8.25%. However, by expanding the base by 29% to $963.8 billion while not double-taxing items, the sales tax rate would increase to 9.16% (7.77% for state rate and 1.39% for local rate), which would not be the highest in the country, and nearly half of the property tax would be eliminated. 
  2. Table 6 provides the sales taxes needed to replace school district M&O property taxes with different GDP bases, static state and local sales tax rates, GDP base expansion, and dynamic state and local tax rates.

​

• The state replaces school district M&O, and locals replace their M&O (Table 7)
  1. Requires a static state and local sales tax rate of 16.24% without expanding the sales tax base to cover school district, city, county, and special purpose district M&O property taxes. To keep the same 8.25% combined sales tax rate, the GDP base for sales taxes would need to expand by 51%. These approaches are politically difficult and would make the state highly uncompetitive with neighboring states. 
  2. The better approach would be to expand the sales tax base by at least 29% for a state and local sales tax rate of 12.57%, with the state rate at 7.77% and the local rate at 4.8%. This sales tax rate remains high but could be doable given that 75% of property taxes would be eliminated, and just the I&S property taxes would remain. 

​

• The state replaces school district M&O, and locals replace M&O and I&S (Table 8): 
  1. This requires a state and local sales tax rate of 18.98% without expanding the sales tax base of $745.3 billion to cover school district, city, county, and special purpose district M&O and I&S property taxes along with the sales taxes collected at the state and local levels. To keep the same 8.25% combined sales tax rate, the GDP base for sales taxes would need to expand by 84% to $1.37 trillion. These aren’t politically or economically possible and would make the state highly uncompetitive. 
  2. The better approach would be to expand the sales tax base by at least 29% to $963.8 billion for a state and local sales tax rate of 14.68%, with the state rate at 7.77% and the local rate increasing to 6.9%. This sales tax rate is likely too high. Still, it would eliminate all property taxes in Texas, and the dynamic rate from more economic growth from this approach would bring the combined rate down closer to 13%, which would be the highest in the country but without any taxes on property.

3. Ensure Spending Restraint, Transparency, and Accountability:

• Avoid taxing intermediate goods to prevent double taxation, do not allow any future increases in sales tax rates, and 
• Use the surplus buydown approach with a strict spending limit discussed above to reduce sales tax rates, franchise tax rates, or other taxes. 
• Table 9 shows the surplus buydown biennially using historical averages for the school district M&O property tax elimination with a redesigned tax system. This property tax would have been eliminated in 2024-25, and the surpluses of $5.9 billion in 2026-27 and after that could be used to reduce other tax rates.

​Pros of Tax System Redesign

• Immediate Relief: Fully replaces some or all property taxes in one reform, as spending is restrained and there is no need for revenue-neutral redesign.
• Economic Efficiency: Encourages investment and entrepreneurship by taxing consumption, not ownership, and supports greater economic growth.

Cons of Tax System Redesign

• May Not Reduce the Tax Burden: Increasing sales taxes to eliminate property taxes does nothing to reduce state or local government spending or decrease the future tax burden unless it is a net tax cut, which, combined with spending less, is preferable.
• Implementation Complexity: Requiring significant effort initially but possibly needing much less than other efforts later on. 

Rejecting a European-style VAT
Some suggest implementing a Value-Added Tax (VAT) instead of a broader sales tax to fund the property tax swap. This would be a mistake:

• Hidden Costs: VATs embed taxes at every production stage, obscuring the true tax burden for consumers.
• Complexity: Administrative and compliance costs are much higher than a simple sales tax.
• Economic Distortions: VATs disproportionately harm lower-income households by raising the cost of goods.

Texas must avoid adopting European-style tax systems that stifle economic freedom and growth.

Recommendations for Legislators
To ensure success, any plan to eliminate property taxes must include the following:

1. Voter Approval for Any Property Tax Increase
   • Require voter approval for any increases in local property taxes (or sales taxes).
2. Focus on Rate Compression
   • Focus on permanent tax elimination through lowering property tax rates instead of temporary relief measures, like the homestead exemption, that exclude families who are renters or business owners.
3. Cap Spending Growth
   • To reduce the size and scope of government and support consistent surpluses, limit state and local spending increases to, at most, the rate of population growth plus inflation, with surpluses being used to lower tax rates.
4. Pass Constitutional Amendment: After eliminating property taxes, pass a constitutional amendment so they can never return.

Conclusion: A Bold Vision for Texas
Texas must move beyond temporary fixes and fundamentally transform the state-local tax system. Whether through surplus-driven buydowns or a redesigned sales tax, the result will be a freer, fairer, and more prosperous state. 

​Texans deserve true property ownership, economic opportunity, and a government that operates within its means. 
​
Let’s end property taxes and empower Texans to prosper. The time to act is now.

Position Statement: I support HB 73 as a critical first step to rein in local government spending and property tax growth, with recommended improvements to ensure consistency, accountability, and stronger taxpayer protections.
​
Written Testimony of Dr. Vance Ginn
Before the House Committee on Intergovernmental Affairs
In Support of House Bill 73 (With Recommended Improvements)
August 22, 2025

Chairman Bell and Members of the Committee:

My name is Dr. Vance Ginn, president of Ginn Economic Consulting and a proud native Texan. Thank you for the opportunity to submit written testimony in support of House Bill 73.

Texans are burdened with some of the highest property taxes in the nation, and while the state has provided relief, those gains are too often erased by unchecked local government spending. With no limit in place, local budgets continue to climb, driving taxes higher and debt upward. Families and businesses deserve better.

That is why HB 73 is so important. For the first time, it establishes a maximum local spending limit tied to state population growth plus inflation. This is the most reliable and simple measure of sustainable budgeting. It ensures the government doesn’t grow faster than the people’s ability to pay.

Using a statewide standard matters. HB 46, also before you, applies population and inflation at every local level, which creates a patchwork of diverse rules. HB 73 avoids this by adopting one clear statewide metric, the same measure Texas should apply at the state level in both statute and constitution. Consistency matters for taxpayers and accountability.
Still, HB 73 can be improved in three ways:

1. Require a two-thirds vote at a uniform November election to exceed the cap, similar to HB 46.
2. Close loopholes such as disaster exemptions. Texans need more money in their pockets during hard times, not larger local budgets.
3. Cover all spending and all jurisdictions, including debt payments. Without this, local governments will simply shift spending to avoid the cap.

These changes would ensure that every Texan, regardless of where they live, has certainty about what their government will spend—and therefore what their tax burden will be.

Econ 101 teaches us that the government has no money of its own. Every dollar spent is first taken from taxpayers through taxes, debt, or inflation. The real problem is not revenue but spending. When spending exceeds population growth and inflation, it erodes private sector growth, leaving families poorer and businesses weaker. By contrast, a sound limit keeps government in check, preserves economic opportunity, and strengthens prosperity.

HB 73 is a strong step in the right direction. With the improvements I’ve outlined—drawing from HB 46’s two-thirds provision, closing loopholes, and ensuring broad coverage—Texas can lead the nation in fiscal discipline. We can give families peace of mind that relief passed in Austin won’t be erased by excess at the local level.

Thank you for your leadership on this important issue and for the chance to share my perspective.