Tax relief is rapidly ascending on the Hawai'i wish list, especially with all the recent increases that have pelted the state like a summer downpour.

But although it might be politically popular, it would be unwise to launch an enormous giveback on the basis of one or two fat revenue years. That's particularly so given the long list of deferred spending that is the legacy of the current administration's cautious budgetary approach.

In short, let's take care of immediate unmet needs first (and we would put public schools at the top of the list) and then begin a conversation about lightening of the load for taxpayers who must shoulder the high cost of living here.

The tax-relief issue was placed on the front burner by Gov. Linda Lingle, who has unveiled a package of proposals that would provide relief to low- and moderate-income residents (and let's not be coy about it, voters).

OTHER PRESSURES

Lingle has correctly identified the rising political pressure for tax relief. But her pre-election set of ideas to give money back to the taxpayers will not go down easily with lawmakers who have seen programs delayed or vetoed in the interest of long-term state financial stability. They won't be any easier to swallow for public workers who have been asked to hold back their demands in the interest of keeping the state budget on an even keel for years to come.

It's not our intention to pit unions and Democratic lawmakers against those petitioning for tax relief. But a dose of realism is due here.

If there is extra money in the state treasury, shouldn't some of it go to pay for long-deferred or postponed needs (largely one-time expenses) before settling on what in effect are permanent tax reductions?

Clearly, tax relief, both at the county and state level, deserves to be on the table. A little history would show why that makes sense:

For starters, there is a schedule of eight annual increases in the Honolulu sewer fee tax, starting with the whopping 25 percent boost that took effect July 1. The vehicle weight tax on passenger vehicles is up by half this year.

Property owners are gifting the city with a windfall from real property taxes because the tax rate hasn't changed while the valuations have skyrocketed.

And if those owners sell, the state conveyance tax for homes over $600,000 will be up 250 percent over what it was previously. This was one of two tax-raising bills passed by the Legislature and approved by Lingle this year.

Naturally, the people suffering the most are the poor, who will bear a relatively higher burden when the general excise tax goes from 4 percent to 4.5 percent on O'ahu.

According to recently released data collected by the University of Hawai'i Center on the Family, the gap between rich and poor has been growing. The poorest 20 percent of the state's population lost 7 percent of their income since the 1970s, and the richest 20 percent saw a 31 percent increase in theirs.

Government leaders are fully aware of the pressing economic burden on Hawai'i residents. For her part, Lingle's focus was on the right target, offering ideas on increasing standard income tax deductions and boosting tax credits to offset taxes on food, medical services and nonprescription drugs. Still, first things first.

For instance, House Speaker Calvin Say seemed hesitant to commit to Lingle's tax relief proposals, citing the multitude of deferred state needs that could be financed by surplus revenues.

LINGLE CAUTIOUS

He makes a good point. Lingle has been tight-fisted with the budget over the past couple of years, arguing that the state simply cannot afford to jump aboard every program the Legislature comes up with.

She has argued forcefully that the state cannot and should not commit to new expenses without looking at the long-term financial picture.

So, before the state begins handing out popular tax breaks to the voters, it should take a hard look at deferred spending and unmet needs.

Long range, it makes good sense to take a comprehensive look at our overall tax picture and decide if the burden is falling unfairly on one segment of the population over another. Our guess is that an objective analysis will show that lower-income families and those on fixed incomes are taking the greatest hit.

Lingle has argued that everything from school spending to public worker pay raises must be considered in the context of the state's long-term financial health.

That philosophy should apply to tax reform as well.