Rep. Neal Kurk (R-Weare), one of many prominent Republicans opposing CACR13, urged that it be killed, "so we have a wonderful issue to beat our opponents up on." But for many Republicans, the income tax is not just a wonderful issue to beat Democrats up on. It is the only issue to beat Democrats up on because on other issues these Republicans are not all that different from Democrats.

    Take, for example, the hottest issue facing the state – education funding. There is no alternative Republican plan to the Governor’s plan. Rather, Republicans are all over the political map on the issue. Indeed, the Lynch plan has nearly as many Republican sponsors as it has Democrat sponsors.

    Republicans who haven’t hopped aboard the targeted-aid express are reduced to hoping that the Senate will send it to the Supreme Court for an advisory opinion in order to get it derailed. But then what? There still would be no Republican plan to deal with education funding.

    Members of the conservative "House Republican Alliance," which constituted the core of Republicans who voted for CACR 13, tend to believe that the solution to education funding involves removing the Court from the equation, which distinguishes them from Democrats. In contrast, there is little to distinguish many Republicans who opposed CACR 13 from Democrats on education funding except the income tax.

    The same can be said for issues that typically distinguish Republicans from Democrats nationally. Republicans who supported CACR 13 tend to support school choice and limits on abortion on demand, while Republicans who opposed the amendment tend to side with Democrats on these issues.

    Because the income tax is the most important issue in state elections, focusing on it allows the Republican Party to gloss over the major internal differences it has on education funding and other issues, especially "values" issues. Take away the income tax, as CACR 13 might have, and Republicans have nothing to unify around.

    The Republican focus on the income tax may be effective in keeping the party from splitting apart. But it will make it very difficult for Republicans to regain the Corner Office as long as Democrats continue to nominate candidates who pledge to veto an income tax, such as current Governor John Lynch, and as long as Republicans continue to have no coherent approach to education funding and continue to eschew "values" issues. Under these circumstances, the only thing that the Republican candidate will have to offer is the same-but-less of what the Democrat is offering. Which has never been a political winner for Republicans.

    The Republican Party in New Hampshire needs to ask itself the following question: What, besides opposing an income tax, does it stand for?

    And as for Rep. Kurk, and like-minded Republicans, they need to be reminded that they are supposed to be representing their constituents’ interests, not their own personal interests. The most effective form this reminder could take would be competitive primaries.

    Mr. Mosca is an attorney practicing in Manchester, N. H.