SUPPORTERS of 1-2-3 try to cover up the negative impact of their proposal on the poor by dwelling on proposition 3, which suggests that surplus tax revenue would be used to subsidize rents or build affordable housing. David E. Sullivan, long-time Cambridge City councillor, called this provision a shady appeal to "liberal guilt."

The first problem is that there would not be that much tax revenue. Although newly-bought apartments would be taxed at market value, the home ownership tax exemption would discount the taxable value by about $50,000.

The second flaw with this proposal is that it is entirely unenforceable. The Massachusetts Department of Revenue ruled this summer that the Cambridge City Council would have to grant approval for an affordable housing fund each year as part of the normal funding process. New times and new politicians could easily mean no new affordable housing.

People may feel assuaged by the promise of new construction. But it won't happen unless residents push for it every single year, regardless of Proposition 1-2-3's passage.

Rent subsidies and new affordable housing are worthy causes. There is no reason why they require voting for Proposition 1-2-3.

THERE are problems with rent control that need to be addressed. It is a shame that much of the political debate has focused on Proposition 1-2-3 and not on how to refine rent control or replace it with a fairer system.

Proposition 2--in some form--is one such refinement that merits additional investigation. Now, families who rent out their houses while they go abroad have a hard time reclaiming them when they return--because the rent is controlled. Proposition 2 solves the problem by exempting private home rentals from rent control altogether, but a more equitable arrangement could allow greater flexibility for families who wish to reclaim their homes.

Proposition 2 cannot be supported by itself, however. The initiative should be rejected and the idea considered later.

So far, rent control is the best solution that Cambridge has found to the changing economic times. And to a large extent, rent control has proven effective. Cambridge has kept its diversity. Cambridge is not just another suburb of Boston.

Proposition 1-2-3 reinforces the worst of rent control with only vague promises of a better system. It should be rejected on Tuesday, November 7.