On virtually every page of Walker's plan, you can begin counting the hornets that would be stirred. It recommends a flat income tax, eliminating many exemptions. It would eliminate the corporate income tax. It would set a statewide sales-tax rate that would take the burden of many local-option taxes (the ZAP tax is one example) and spread them equally to all parts of the state. It would add a sales tax to most consumer services. It would shift a lot of the overall burden onto property taxes and make it easier for local governments to raise their rates to keep up with inflation.

Two of its recommendations are especially enticing. One would distribute sales tax revenues to local governments based entirely on population, not on which jurisdiction generated the most sales through its stores. This would end, finally, the way Utah cities continually raid each other by luring big-box retailers with special tax giveaways.

The other would remove nearly all property-tax subsidies from water districts, which would spur conservation efforts.

But the first plan would be opposed by the cities that already have the most big stores, and the second has already been defeated several times by water interests in recent legislative sessions.

In theory, the plan wouldn't bring in any more money than the current plan does, but it would broaden the tax base and cost people less individually. That reasoning, however, likely would fly out the window as soon as higher property tax bills hit mailboxes.

McKeachnie ended his comparison by saying it was up to us, the editorial writers, to craft the "federalist papers" that would give this plan wings. If only we had that kind of clout.

If Walker's plan does not become law, it will forever sit as an indictment against those who could have chosen a better way. At the least, it ought to serve as a challenge to state lawmakers to come up with something better.

---

Jay Evensen is editor of the Deseret Morning News editorial page. E-mail: even@desnews.com