In GD because of the potential of a “this is a great idea” vs. “this idea sucks” partisan debate.
So, Alabama’s governor, Bob Riley, is trying to push through a fairly comprehensive tax reform package this year. It seems to have a fair chance of working. So, what do the more politically savvy among our group than me think of Riley’s tax reform plan? I’ve seen the borderline-slander commercials on TV that are dead-set against it, but I’ve done a bit of other research on it, and the salient points, according to the oppostion, are as follows:
The Alabama government will get approzimately $1.2 billion in new revenue.
According to most sources, this new revenue will come from a slight raise in property taxes (which Alabama is desperate for,) and a significant tax burden hike at the top 1% and on businesses.
In contrast, apparently the tax threshold will be raised from the
shameful present level of $4,600 per year to a more nationally normal $16,000 for a family of 3, $19,500 for a family of 4.
70% of filers will pay the same or less tax, all concentrated on the bottom of the spectrum. The top 30% will all pay more.
Personal exemptions and dependent deductions increase substantially.
But this is the point that makes me lean in favor of the bill:
Of the $1.2 billion in new revenue, 2/3 of it is committed to public education.
Alabama’s educational system is in an absolute state of disrepair. A godawful number of teachers got laid off last year because of YET ANOTHER year of proration, and the US Dept. of Education is taking over schools down here like it was 1864 all over again.
Apparently, this plan promises to pump $792,000,000 dollars in new revenue directly into the education system.
In related matters, are there measures in the works to refit the education system from the top down? I’ve heard of new measures to implement teacher testing (the AEA must love that) and to enable the state to remove sub-par teachers easily, even if they have tenure (the AEA must reeeeeeeally love that.)
One thing that made me sit up and do a double-take on this thing, by the way, is that some of the main supporters of the plan are members of a group called Arise Citizens’ Policy Project, a strongly left-leaning group who style themselves as advocates for the Alabama poverty-stricken. They normally support the types of things in this bill, as well as abolition of the death penalty, etc.
So what makes it surprising? Riley is a Republican governor, which means that if the plan has both Republican and widespread Democrat support, it actually has a chance, and tax and education reform are things the State of Alabama hasn’t seen in a long time.
Let me put it this way: if he gets tired of being governor and decides to toss his hat into the Republican Presidential Primary ring (let’s say, 2008, although I admit I’d dearly love it if he did it in '04), I just might have to register Republican so I can vote for him in the primaries; and depending (of course) on the rest of his platform I could well end up casting a Republican vote for prez for the first time in over two decades.
Hmmm? Is this thread a joke? Or maybe a plant by that rino Bob Riley?
What an embarresment. Most good thinking folk voted for Bob Riley for governor. Then, out of the box, Republican governor Bill Riley proposed the largest tax increase in Alabama history (1.3 Billion dollars) in un-earmarked funds in order to meet a budget deficit that he was apparently unaware of only a year before when he ran for office.
The guy is a joke. But he is slick. He thinks that an astronomical influx of discretionary funds will allow him the lattitude to spring to run for president of your unassuming United States in 2008.
Don’t laugh. Many of you all voted for Slick Willie and Allegory for president the last two spins.
Ah, now we get to the meat of the matter. Can you give me some sources for the claim that the money is unearmarked? I have a source in front of me by a strongly liberal group that says, and I quote,
Now, a couple of things: 1) this does not sound “unearmarked” to me at all. Quite the contrary. 2) Which part of the plan is there a problem with, specifically? Alabama does have ludicrously low property taxes, and according to the info I’ve read, the plan will only increase yearly property taxes by about $11 a month for a $100,000 house. Keep in mind that the current property tax for a $100,000 home is $39. Per year! The plan would raise it to a higher (but still extremely modest $175 per year.)
Also, I have a problem condemning the plan for several reasons, most notable of which are the specific stipulation that 2/3 of the money will go to education, that exemptions will rise (in the case of the personal exemption, it will exactly double from the $1500 it’s been since 1935,) and that the top 30% of the taxpayers will pay more. In the state of Alabama as it stands now, the government taxes you all the way down to $4600 (absolutely ridiculous).
The top 1% of state taxpayers pay at an ultra-low rate of 3.8%, whereas the bottom 20% pays at a 10.6% rate (and lest you think I’m comparing apples and oranges, the top 20% is split into three brackets, the top 1%, the next 4%, and the next 15%. The average rate of taxation among these groups is 5.2%.)
Also, timber and agriculture will get a tax hike, which IMO is also long overdue, but which they’re having a running, stomping fit over. I can’t tell you the number of times in the past couple days I’ve seen the “po’ family farm” thing come up. I’m not sure I’m buying it, since I actually saw one farmer, in an interview, say, “We just can’t afford it this year because of the bad farm prices, bad weather and the general bad conditions around here.” Uh huh. Near-perfect rainfall this year, corn up to an elephant’s ass by the first of July. The reason the “farm prices are bad” is that the market is full of top-quality produce around here. You ought to SEE the goddamn strawberries. They were bringing the things in by the 18-wheeler load earlier this summer, and the things were the size of baseballs. The peaches…oh sweet God, the freaking Chilton County peaches.
Anyway, it’s a strange industry that has an off year even when they’re having a perfect year.
Also note that timber will face a tax hike…again, no big deal to me, since they own approximately 1/3 of the state west of Birmingham and they pay a pittance in taxes as it stands. In fact, if I were to guess, it would be the timber industry that is putting all the “Fat cats in Montgomery are out to rob you” commercials on air right now. Their big feature is that apparently, the power companies wouldn’t face as big a hike, and they’re strongly implying that Alabama Power is greasing palms like mad to keep it that way. I see it a bit differently. While I wouldn’t mind seeing AlaPow hit with a tax hike, I understand that because of the local market inherent with their business, they probably aren’t being hit because the increased tax payout would simply trickle right back down within the state borders and raise what are amazingly low power rates. The ones that are being hit are the international and national corporations who own land here, use Alabama labor and resources, then promptly send that profit margin out of state.
Anyway, my mind is becoming made up in favor of the tax plan, unless someone can gie me some really convincing arguments (with sources) that it’s a bad idea. To start with, I’d love to see a cite for the claim that the money is unearmarked.
Then the Ogre said…"… To start with, I’d love to see a cite for the claim that the money is unearmarked."
In Alabama we have a General Fund and an Education Fund. Both funds are traditionally abused by politicians. A large measure of the** one point three billion dollar tax increase that Bob Riley and his special interest cronies **have brought before the citizens so that they may vote themselves a larger fatter form of paternal government, is to be put into a “Special Education Fund” overseen by only Bob Riley. A group of Riley appointed citizens will advise Bob on how to spend this hard earned tax money but won’t have legal standing or a vote.
Ok Ogre I’ll do better than provide you with data from strangers. I’ll give you facts that I know to be true. You don’t think that I would lie do you Ogre?
***since 1982 the number of students in Alabama’s Elementary and High Schools has declined by 17%.
***since 1982 the number of teachers and assorted adminstrators in the Alabama school system has risen 37%.
***average test scores of Alabama Schools peaked in 1962 and have declined ever since.
***the salaries of the administrators of the Birmingham Board of Education are slightly higher than those of New York City.
Since I don’t know you from Adam’s housecat, you may very well lie through your teeth. I dunno, which is why I keep asking for your sources. How do you know? Where do those numbers come from? Where did you get them? And how do you justify them with continued proration?
No offense, but I need cites.
Since I’ve done a bit more research on earmarking, by the way, how can you say that unearmarked funds are bad? One of our major problems right now is that we earmark 80% of the state budget, which means that the state budget is utterly inflexible. When we need money for something else, we’re screwed and have to “tighten the belt,” resulting in prorated midyear budgets, pink slips for teachers, etc.
I will agree with you about one thing, though, as I mentioned in my first post, we need either a rider on this package or a completely separate HB for teacher reform, including tenure reform and teacher testing. I’ve heard that there is such a thing in the works. Any info on that?
I’m leaving today for California to interfere for a week in their re-call process. When I return I will gather enough “cites and sources” and “facts and figgers” to please a football team of accountants and perhaps bring a rare moment of joy to your dry dark pedant heart.
And then after the good voters of Alabama reject Bob Riley’s absurd tax increase, I hope you will join me in a worthy attempt to emulate the Californians and re-call “Tax-and-spend” Bob.
