This election MA has a ballot initiative that will eliminate their state income tax. It was previously rejected in 2002 but received 45% of the vote. It seems much more likely that it will pass this time. The NY Times editorial board predicts disaster if it does:
Next month, voters in Massachusetts will face a tempting ballot question: whether to eliminate the state’s income tax. This is a reckless proposal that would hurt all taxpayers. Voters should reject the idea.
How could reducing taxes “hurt all taxpayers”? The Times position is that the state will have to reduce its budget and in their worldview, that will hurt everyone. But is it possible that the state will have to decide what is important and what is not? Surely, there are areas that could be cut to make up for the shortfall. Total state spending is over $20,000 per resident.
I would love to see this type of revolt on a federal level, but as I pointed out earlier, that will be hard when the majority gets a benefit from higher taxes.