Playing Nice In Montpelier

The legislature and the administration are pointing fingers and blaming each other for the tax reduction that will not happen. 

Your fault ... no your fault.

This week, Montpelier will get back to work on a campaign finance law that will probably go down in the flames of an expensive court challenge, on decriminalizing the possession of small amounts of marijuana, and on do-overs of some of the bills passed during last year's session.

Taxes and tax relief?  Don't ask silly questions.  And, anyway, the other guy screwed that one up.

Comments

[Mister Guy]

From one of the linked articles above:
"But the estimate that there would be enough money coming in for a two cent reduction in the rate was made based on November revenues. So, after several changes in December, including lower tax revenue projections, a cut in federal money for special education, Medicaid funding and correcting an accounting glitch, the money is no longer there."

The blame game...the Gov. or the legislature. So, who's fault is it that the economy not just in this state (but nationwide) has gone thru a donwturn? I say neither. Who's responsible for the cuts in Medicaid and special ed at the federal level? I say neither again. Who's responsible for the "accounting glitch"? I wouldn't have the foggiest idea. Sounds like there's plenty of blame to go around on the "assumptions" that one side was doing what the other side thought they should be doing.

However, I ho-heartedly agree that our Gov. has nothing to offer on addressing educational spending problems in VT but short-term gimicks. Raise the sales tax, vote more than once if a school budget goes up larger than some completely arbitary number, lease the lottery, etc., etc....band-aid after band-aid fix that only adresses symptoms of a problem & not the real causes of the problem. It's like if your doctor told you to simply stuff a few corks up your runny nose to stop a cold. It simply doesn't work, period.

[Jon Harrison]

The comments re the governor's "gimmicks" are, unfortunately, all too accurate. But we should note that the governor's hands are tied by: 1) a Democrat-dominated legislature; 2) unfunded federal mandates under NCLB; 3) the Act 60/68 mess, the responsibilty for which lies with a handful of unelected lawyers and judges, men (I don't believe there were any women among the lawyers who brought the suit, or among the judges who rendered the decision) who wielded power without any accountability to the people, as if they were the Guardians of Plato's "ideal" Republic.

[Mister Guy]

Our Gov. can come up with real, bold ideas to solve our education funding (read that our health care and energy cost) problems in this state if he wants to. He's a big boy. No one is holding him back or tying his hands IMO. I don't remember him being very bold when the GOP controlled the VT House BTW. If he wants to restore "fairness" to the process of how we fund education that the unelected judges (appointed by the legislature and the Gov., who are accountable to the people of this state) took away, he's welcome to try and do that too.

Sure, unfunded federal mandates are part of the problem too...we are in agreement on that much.

How about we trade a fundamentally regressive local property tax for a progressive state income tax for education? I think if the numbers were actually done up on that...it would be a good deal for most of VT.

[Jon Harrison]

Well, you probably are more familiar with the history here than me. So I'm not gonna argue that point.

As a property owner with a relatively modest income, an end to funding education through the property tax would be welcome. I don't get any real protection from the income limits in Act 68, because I own rental property. Thus, in the eyes of the left-wingers in state government, I must be some sort of plutocrat. Ah, if it were only so.

Whether the idea has real merit beyond my own selfish advantage, I dunno. Perhaps the economists out there will join the discussion and enlighten us.