Democrat Pat Jones and Republican Stephen Mascaro are the legislative sponsors of a popular bill that would help the working poor through earned income credits, would reduce the dependent deduction value of families with more than three children, eliminate the regressive federal income tax deduction and would assist many Utahns with progressive re-bracketing. Jones-Mascaro attracts support from a plethora of Utahns: poverty interest organizations, those who believe larger families need to help with education costs and populists nervous about giveaways to large industries. Jones-Mascaro offers what the flat tax does not — a sugar coating to help Utahns swallow the pill of eliminating corporate taxes.

Webb: Tax reform is truly shaping up as one of the year's hottest political issues, and the flat income tax proposal is squarely in the middle of it.

While the cynics will say that meaningful tax reform will never happen because it's too hard, too politically risky and too complex, I believe it has a real fighting chance this time. It's true that contentious political change usually only occurs in an atmosphere of major crisis or noisy public outcry, but I sense a resoluteness among key legislators that the time to act has come.

The stars have aligned. The Huntsman administration is highly supportive of real tax reform. The very popular former Gov. Olene Walker put a nice foundation in place on which legislators and the current administration can erect a new tax structure.

Perhaps most important, state revenues are very healthy right now, lubricating the process and providing enough head room to keep everyone whole. Most legislators are in fairly safe seats, and a vote for real tax reform isn't going to mean political death.

The objective ought to be quite simple: Create a tax structure for a high-tech, service-based economy that is fair and balanced, encourages economic development and generates enough revenue to meet legitimate state and education needs. That means, where possible, broadening the tax base while reducing tax rates to keep revenue neutral.

The goal of tax reform ought not to be raising or lowering overall taxes. In the face of immense state needs in transportation, education and spiraling Medicaid costs, it would be unwise to cut overall taxes in the name of tax reform. Keep tax reform revenue-neutral, and separately decide if a tax cut is warranted based on revenues and needs in the 2006 session.

I'm no tax expert, but I like the concept of a pure flat income tax with no deductions. No impact on charitable contributions or homebuying will occur so long as the federal deductions remain in place, which is a certainty for the foreseeable future.