Last week we reported on Tax Freedom Day, the day when each of us has earned enough income to pay our tax liability to the federal and state governments. Many readers appreciated the comparative data and the insight gained about how they fared state-to-state. If you missed it, or want it for reference, go to this newspaper’s Web site archives, or send me an e-mail to get a copy.

We closed that column noting, “Taxes are necessary;” asked two questions: “How much tax is necessary for our federal government?” and, “How much tax is necessary for your state government?” Then stated: “These are questions for each citizen taxpayer to consider this year.”

Those are indeed important questions.

Given the special-interest group politics that has permeated our society and government decisions, it is not surprising that many citizens have come to believe it impossible to stop the overarching growth of government outlays at all levels. That could be the case, perhaps more than many readers will care to admit; but I don’t believe it. I believe that viewpoint limits our thinking and public debate to a framework preferred by those same special interest groups and decision-makers, who, as the old saying goes, “Rob Peter, to pay — or is it pay off — Paul.”

What can cut through all the rhetoric and emotional appeals is this simple bottom-line question: “Can I afford more taxes”? That is the first question that every taxpaying American citizen should ask of themselves, and answer only for themselves.

Whenever an individual (let’s use the Smith surname) answers that question with the intent or disregard for another individual (we’ll use the surname Jones), then that is the instance in time when Smith wants something from government. Of course, that something must be funded by Jones and his fellow citizens, who are obviously the providers, not the recipient, of the government largesse.

The increase in costs of all the federal, state and local government programs instituted and expanded over the past decades is staggering. The money to fund those programs doesn’t grow on trees, otherwise there would be many more farms and urban gardens worldwide. In reality, the money government uses is collected in the form of taxes from productive individuals and entities. And, more and more money is confiscated in the aggregate from our citizen taxpayers each year in order to fund new programs and the increased cost of existing programs.

It is indeed the exception that any program established ever gets reduced or closed out. The receivers of all the program pay outs would never let that happen. After all, as the special interests have told us and the media ‘go-alongs’ have drummed into our heads, the government pay outs are “entitlements.”

For example, despite the original stated intentions behind the implementation of Lyndon Johnson’s social welfare reform legislation, we have known for some time the unfortunate results of the un-Great Society programs, as well as their effects on so many of our fellow citizens.

But the spending continues and increases. And the insatiable thirst for taxpayer dollars has become unquenchable.

So, again, Can you afford more taxes?”

If your answer is “No,” there is a second question to be asked of every candidate for every office: “Do you pledge now that you will not vote to raise any taxes — Yes or No?”

This year more citizens than ever before will decide who to support based on a candidate’s response to that question.

Richard Olivastro is president of People Dynamics, an executive leadership development company, is a professional member of the National Speakers Association and founder of Citizens For Change. He can be reached at Rich@Olivastro.net.