A vote for our natural resourcese for our natural resources

By The Gazette Editorial Board -----

Iowa voters are being asked this fall to consider a constitutional amendment creating the Natural Resources and Outdoor Recreation Trust Fund. Under the measure, the next time state lawmakers raise Iowa's sales tax by a penny, the trust fund would get 3/8ths of that added cent.

The presence of this amendment on the November ballot is a sign of how our lawmakers and governors over the years have shortchanged our priceless natural resources. Iowa ranks 47th in such spending nationally. Lawmakers fail time and time again to fully fund the Resource Enhancement and Protection fund, or REAP.

Conservationists, environmentalists, many farmers and others who care about our resources are routinely outgunned at the statehouse by more powerful interests in the race for scarce cash.

The drive to place such a fund in the state Constitution also underscores the reality that lawmakers routinely raid unprotected, statutory funds when budget problems hit. Constitutional enshrinement has kept lawmakers from raiding the Road Use Tax Fund and the Fish and Game Trust Fund from similar emergency scooping.

We believe resources funding is a priority. And there is much to like about this proposal.

Still, we're uncomfortable doing budgeting by constitutional amendment.

We realize that the road fund and fish and game fund are in the Constitution, but what sets the proposal apart is its very specific earmarking of a general tax, in this case, the sales tax. We think this could set a troubling precedent that prompts future General Assemblies to store pet projects in our state's guiding document. The Constitution, we believe, should be amended rarely.

We wish, instead of this measure, that Iowa law would allow voters to make a straight up or down vote on a tax increase for natural resources. Iowa doesn't have initiative and referendum, so we're left with this decision.

We wrestled to reconcile our understanding of the state's resources needs with our misgivings about amending the Constitution. But in the end, it was our unbending advocacy for broader, smarter watershed management practices that tipped the scale. We urge a “yes” vote.

Two-thirds of the dollars raised by a future resources fund would be used for water quality measures, which could provide much-needed funds for efforts to improve land use practices and slow raging runoff. These measures could lessen the severity of future flooding in the Cedar River watershed and across Iowa.

Watershed management could make a big impact on the future of this community and others. Yet, the issue has struggled to gain momentum at the Statehouse. This future fund could provide the resources and the push needed to get something done.