Op-ed by Tom Jenny and Phil Kerpe of Americans for Prosperity, arguing against passing a massive tax hike in the guise of climate change legislation.
Don’t Let Cap-and-Trade Become Tax-and-Spend
Tom Jenney and Phil Kerpe
The surprise revenue source to pay for much of the gigantic Obama budget is something known deceptively as “climate revenues,” also known as “cap-and-trade.” But Obama’s cap-and-trade plan is really a tax-and-spend plan. It would mean a trillion-dollar tax increase, with sweeping consequences throughout the economy, both nationally and here in Arizona.
A cap-and-trade tax hike is the worst kind of tax increase, because the tax increase is hidden behind a complex regulatory apparatus that only adds to the cost.
The size of the tax is a mystery. Companies know they have to pay a tax, but they don’t know what the tax rate is, because they will be forced by government to bid at auction for permits to use fossil fuels. The Obama budget initially slated the cap-and-trade auction process to generate approximately $646 billion in revenue for the federal government over eight years.
More recently, however, the deputy director for the White House National Economic Council, Jason Furman, reported that the tax scheme would actually raise two-to-three times that much, bringing in upwards of $1.3 to $1.9 trillion. The truth is that nobody knows how much it will cost — and that’s a large part of the problem.
We do know that the impact on our economy here in Arizona would be staggering. An analysis conducted by the respected forecasting firm SAIC and commissioned by the American Council on Capital Formation projected the economic impact of last year’s version of cap-and-trade for Arizona. They found that by 2020, with the bill in effect just eight years, we would have 23,000 to 34,000 fewer jobs, $800 to $2,600 in lower annual disposable income per household, and an annual hit to the Arizona economy of between $2.6 billion and $3.6 billion.
Much of the damage would be caused by significantly higher energy prices: 20 to 67 percent higher prices for gasoline and 23 to 30 percent higher prices for electricity. The study also found that lower-income families — people who are least able to absorb higher energy costs — would be hardest hit.
Those numbers were the projected impact of last year’s Lieberman-Warner legislation. We don’t have numbers yet on Obama’s new proposal, but it is more extreme and would be even more expensive.
These astonishing economic costs are not an unfortunate side effect of the bill. They are its intended purpose. President Obama explained to the San Francisco Chronicle last year that passing costs on to consumers is an important part of his plan. “Under my plan of a cap and trade system,” he told the Chronicle, “electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket… whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers.”
Worse, these tax increases may not buy us anything of value on the environmental side. Even if emissions targets are met, climate models show that the reductions would have no discernible effect on the global average temperature. The National Center for Atmospheric Research found that the Kyoto Protocol would reduce the global average temperature 0.07 degrees Celsius in 50 years and 0.15 degrees Celsius in 100 years. Feel-good symbolism is not worth trillions of dollars in higher energy taxes.
Lest we be accused of obstructing efforts to deal with climate change, we want to remind readers that AFP’s No Climate Tax campaign simply asks Congress to oppose any environmental schemes that result in a net increase in government revenue. In other words, climate policy should not become yet another excuse to transfer dollars from hard-working citizens to the bureaucrats in Washington and to the beneficiaries of pork-barrel politics.
Arizona Congressmen Jeff Flake and John Shadegg have already signed AFP’s No Climate Tax pledge (www.NoClimateTax.com). But the real fight will be in the U.S. Senate, and we can only hope that Sen. John McCain will decide to vote against any cap-and-trade scheme that raises overall taxes.
We cannot let cap-and-trade become tax-and-spend. The long-term health of our state and national economies may depend on it.
--Tom Jenney is Arizona director and Phil Kerpen is national director of policy for Americans for Prosperity (www.americansforprosperity.org).
Showing posts with label Americans for Prosperity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Americans for Prosperity. Show all posts
Friday, March 27, 2009
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Voters Oppose Tax Increase, Cuts, Support Sending Limits
AFP Arizona Releases Poll Results:
Likely Voters Oppose Tax Increases
Respondents Reject Deficit-Reducing Options,
Support Constitutional Spending Limit
PHOENIX – Likely voters in Phoenix and Glendale rejected sales and income tax increases by large majorities, in poll results released today by the Arizona chapter of Americans for Prosperity (AFP Arizona), a taxpayer watchdog group committed to fiscal responsibility and limited government.
Gov. Jan Brewer’s proposed billion-dollar-a-year tax increase fared badly in the poll, with 62 percent of respondents in Phoenix opposed, and 64 percent in Glendale. Opposition to tax increases crossed party lines, with 47 percent of self-identified “strong Democrats” in Phoenix opposed, and 52 percent in Glendale.
Respondents also rejected by wide margins a ballot proposition that would allow the state Legislature to make cuts to areas of the state budget that are currently protected from cuts, including parts of K-12 education and state health care programs for the poor.
“The poll results suggest that there’s no point in the Legislature trying to fix Prop 105 at the ballot,” said AFP Arizona director Tom Jenney, referring to the constitutional provision that makes it nearly impossible for the Legislature to make reductions to voter-mandated spending programs.
The least unpopular of the short-term deficit fixes was a proposal to sell state assets, including public lands, and privatize state functions. Fifty-five percent of respondents in Phoenix opposed the proposal, as did 52 percent in Glendale. The only short-term deficit fix that won approval of majorities of respondents was a proposal to allow gaming at horse and dog racing tracks to generate new revenues for the state.
“Nearly all of the deficit-reducing options are unpopular,” Jenney said, “so our elected officials may as well vote on principle.” AFP Arizona has urged the governor and legislators to hold fast to conservative principles and balance the budget by reducing spending, privatizing state functions, and selling state assets.
For a long-run solution to the state’s recurring budget woes, the poll asked likely voters how they felt about a constitutional amendment that would keep the state government from increasing its budget faster than the rate of growth of the state economy. Seventy percent of respondents in Phoenix and 78 percent in Glendale supported the proposal.
“The spending limit reform won’t fix our current problems,” Jenney said, “but it would go a long way toward preventing a budget deficit crisis in the next recession. At some point, the state of Arizona needs to get off the fiscal rollercoaster.”
Completed Monday night, March 23rd, the polling effort surveyed 300 likely voters in both Phoenix and Glendale on local and state-level tax and budget issues. The poll was conducted by Public Opinion Strategies, a firm with extensive experience in polling Arizona citizens. AFP Arizona released the survey results for local issues yesterday.
For the complete list of polling questions, visit www.aztaxpayers.org.
Americans for Prosperity (AFP) is a nationwide organization of citizen leaders committed to advancing every individual’s right to economic freedom and opportunity. AFP believes reducing the size and scope of government is the best safeguard to ensuring individual productivity and prosperity for all Americans. AFP educates and engages citizens in support of restraining state and federal government growth, and returning government to its constitutional limits. For more information, visit www.americansforprosperity.org
# # #
Tom Jenney
Arizona Director
Americans for Prosperity
www.aztaxpayers.org
tjenney@afphq.org
Likely Voters Oppose Tax Increases
Respondents Reject Deficit-Reducing Options,
Support Constitutional Spending Limit
PHOENIX – Likely voters in Phoenix and Glendale rejected sales and income tax increases by large majorities, in poll results released today by the Arizona chapter of Americans for Prosperity (AFP Arizona), a taxpayer watchdog group committed to fiscal responsibility and limited government.
Gov. Jan Brewer’s proposed billion-dollar-a-year tax increase fared badly in the poll, with 62 percent of respondents in Phoenix opposed, and 64 percent in Glendale. Opposition to tax increases crossed party lines, with 47 percent of self-identified “strong Democrats” in Phoenix opposed, and 52 percent in Glendale.
Respondents also rejected by wide margins a ballot proposition that would allow the state Legislature to make cuts to areas of the state budget that are currently protected from cuts, including parts of K-12 education and state health care programs for the poor.
“The poll results suggest that there’s no point in the Legislature trying to fix Prop 105 at the ballot,” said AFP Arizona director Tom Jenney, referring to the constitutional provision that makes it nearly impossible for the Legislature to make reductions to voter-mandated spending programs.
The least unpopular of the short-term deficit fixes was a proposal to sell state assets, including public lands, and privatize state functions. Fifty-five percent of respondents in Phoenix opposed the proposal, as did 52 percent in Glendale. The only short-term deficit fix that won approval of majorities of respondents was a proposal to allow gaming at horse and dog racing tracks to generate new revenues for the state.
“Nearly all of the deficit-reducing options are unpopular,” Jenney said, “so our elected officials may as well vote on principle.” AFP Arizona has urged the governor and legislators to hold fast to conservative principles and balance the budget by reducing spending, privatizing state functions, and selling state assets.
For a long-run solution to the state’s recurring budget woes, the poll asked likely voters how they felt about a constitutional amendment that would keep the state government from increasing its budget faster than the rate of growth of the state economy. Seventy percent of respondents in Phoenix and 78 percent in Glendale supported the proposal.
“The spending limit reform won’t fix our current problems,” Jenney said, “but it would go a long way toward preventing a budget deficit crisis in the next recession. At some point, the state of Arizona needs to get off the fiscal rollercoaster.”
Completed Monday night, March 23rd, the polling effort surveyed 300 likely voters in both Phoenix and Glendale on local and state-level tax and budget issues. The poll was conducted by Public Opinion Strategies, a firm with extensive experience in polling Arizona citizens. AFP Arizona released the survey results for local issues yesterday.
For the complete list of polling questions, visit www.aztaxpayers.org.
Americans for Prosperity (AFP) is a nationwide organization of citizen leaders committed to advancing every individual’s right to economic freedom and opportunity. AFP believes reducing the size and scope of government is the best safeguard to ensuring individual productivity and prosperity for all Americans. AFP educates and engages citizens in support of restraining state and federal government growth, and returning government to its constitutional limits. For more information, visit www.americansforprosperity.org
# # #
Tom Jenney
Arizona Director
Americans for Prosperity
www.aztaxpayers.org
tjenney@afphq.org
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Governor Appoints Chad Kirkpatrick as Agency Head.
Arizona Governor Jan Brewer today named Chad Kirkpatrick a the Director of the Government Information Technology Agency ( GITA).
The conservative community is familiar with Kirkpatrick, he served as Chairman of the Americans for Prosperity Arizona, a group he helped grow into one of Arizona's largest grassroots organizations.
Mr. Kirkpatrick's appointment as Director of GITA, places him at the helm of an agency created in 1996 to serve as Arizona's official entity for strategic planning and coordination of all state information technology. He will oversee day-to-day operations of: IT coordination and planning, IT project review and monitoring, and maintenance of e-government.
Kirkpatrick comes to state government service from Wells Fargo, where he has served since 2003, most recently as Vice President and Business Systems Manager of Compliance Services MIS (Management Information Services). While with Wells Fargo, he created the "MIS Roadmap" to assess the current MIS environment, identify MIS goals and develop an action plan to align technology and business needs. He was also responsible for: fully automating the business process for regulatory compliance testing, managing the Information Security process for the Phoenix location; developing an innovative data analysis program to proactively identify potential regulatory issues, tracking corrective action and delivering critical information to the compliance team; working with the finance, operations and marketing teams to develop the next generation of reporting and leading corporate efforts to create common data definitions and corporate reporting standards. He has won two Leadership Excellence Awards: Team Leadership and the annual Excellence in Action Award as well as the 19 Legendary Service awards.
Mr. Kirkpatrick received his Bachelor of Arts in Political Science from George Washington University and his Master of Arts in Applied Economics from American University.
Governor Brewer said, "Mr. Kirkpatrick is widely respected and recognized in his field and possesses a unique blend and broad range of technical and leadership skills,"
Chad Kirkpatrick is currently a GOP Precinct Committeemen in LD 6.
The conservative community is familiar with Kirkpatrick, he served as Chairman of the Americans for Prosperity Arizona, a group he helped grow into one of Arizona's largest grassroots organizations.
Mr. Kirkpatrick's appointment as Director of GITA, places him at the helm of an agency created in 1996 to serve as Arizona's official entity for strategic planning and coordination of all state information technology. He will oversee day-to-day operations of: IT coordination and planning, IT project review and monitoring, and maintenance of e-government.
Kirkpatrick comes to state government service from Wells Fargo, where he has served since 2003, most recently as Vice President and Business Systems Manager of Compliance Services MIS (Management Information Services). While with Wells Fargo, he created the "MIS Roadmap" to assess the current MIS environment, identify MIS goals and develop an action plan to align technology and business needs. He was also responsible for: fully automating the business process for regulatory compliance testing, managing the Information Security process for the Phoenix location; developing an innovative data analysis program to proactively identify potential regulatory issues, tracking corrective action and delivering critical information to the compliance team; working with the finance, operations and marketing teams to develop the next generation of reporting and leading corporate efforts to create common data definitions and corporate reporting standards. He has won two Leadership Excellence Awards: Team Leadership and the annual Excellence in Action Award as well as the 19 Legendary Service awards.
Mr. Kirkpatrick received his Bachelor of Arts in Political Science from George Washington University and his Master of Arts in Applied Economics from American University.
Governor Brewer said, "Mr. Kirkpatrick is widely respected and recognized in his field and possesses a unique blend and broad range of technical and leadership skills,"
Chad Kirkpatrick is currently a GOP Precinct Committeemen in LD 6.
Poll: Taxpayers Against Tax Dollar Giveaways
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE – March 25, 2009Contact: Tom Jenney (602) 478-0146, infoAZ@afphq.org
Poll: Phoenix and Glendale Taxpayers Reject Special-Interest Subsidies
Large Majorities Oppose $100 Million City North Subsidy
and Possible Glendale Bailout of Phoenix Coyotes
Results on Gov. Brewer’s Tax Increase Proposal,
Legislative Budget Options to be Released Thursday
PHOENIX – Phoenix taxpayers rejected the $100 million City North subsidy, and Glendale taxpayers rejected a possible bailout of the Phoenix Coyotes, according to poll results released today by the Arizona chapter of Americans for Prosperity (AFP-Arizona), a taxpayer watchdog group committed to fiscal discipline and low taxes.
81 percent of Phoenix respondents expressed the opinion that the City North subsidy was an illegal gift of taxpayer money, compared with only 9 percent who said the subsidy was necessary to help the project land the city’s first Nordstrom and Bloomingdale’s stores. 81 percent of Phoenix respondents also disagreed with the proposition that the long-term economic benefits of City North justified rebating $100 million of Phoenix taxpayer money to the project.
In Glendale, 72 percent of respondents preferred to allow the Phoenix Coyotes to move out of state, rather than have the City of Glendale give the team $3 to $15 million annually in local taxpayer subsidies. 24 percent preferred to use subsidies to keep the Coyotes in Glendale. 76 percent of respondents said the prestige of having a pro hockey team in Arizona was not worth the subsidies.
AFP Arizona director Tom Jenney expressed satisfaction at finding that large majorities of taxpayers rejected the Phoenix and Glendale subsidies. “Cities need to get out of the business of using taxpayer money to try to pick winners and losers in the economy,” Jenney said. “We are hoping that city officials around the state will pay attention to these poll results.”
Completed Monday night, March 23rd, the polling effort surveyed 300 likely voters in both Phoenix and Glendale on local and state-level tax and budget issues. The poll was conducted by Public Opinion Strategies, a firm with extensive experience in Arizona. AFP Arizona is releasing the survey results for local issues today, and will release survey results on state-level tax and budget issues on Thursday.
In the City of Phoenix, a $100 million tax rebate for the City North mixed-use development near the 101 and Tatum has stirred extensive debate. The legality of the Phoenix subsidy is now being considered by the Arizona Supreme Court, after the subsidy was deemed to be illegal by the Court of Appeals. Yet, it does not appear that any polling information has been done about the attitudes of the people—Phoenix taxpayers—who are being forced to fund the subsidy.
The questions the survey asked about the City North subsidy, and the poll results, are reproduced verbatim here:
Q: As you may know, The Arizona Supreme Court has been asked to review the legality of an approximately $100 million tax rebate that the City of Phoenix agreed to provide the developer of City North, a mixed use development near Tatum and the 101 Freeway in north Phoenix.
Some people say this money was necessary to help pay for a parking garage and to help the project land the city’s first Nordstrom and Bloomingdale’s store.
...while...
Other people say that the taxpayer money is an illegal gift of public funds to a private developer and these companies should pay their own way rather than asking for such a huge amount from Phoenix taxpayers. Which statement comes closest to your own opinion?
9% MONEY WAS NECESSARY
81% TAXPAYER MONEY IS AN ILLEGAL GIFT
Thinking more about this issue...
Q: Now, I would like to read you a statement about the City North mixed-use development. After I read the statement, please tell me if you AGREE or DISAGREE with that statement.
The statement is... the long term economic benefit to having a mixed-use development like City North with national chains and other stores like Nordstrom and Bloomingdale’s is enough that it is worth rebating $100 million of Phoenix taxpayer money to these companies and the developers.
And do you STRONGLY (agree/disagree) or just SOMEWHAT (agree/disagree) with that statement?
5% STRONGLY AGREE
11% SOMEWHAT AGREE
17% SOMEWHAT DISAGREE
64% STRONGLY DISAGREE
15%^ TOTAL AGREE
81% TOTAL DISAGREE
Meanwhile, the City of Glendale is reportedly considering paying for a bailout for the Phoenix Coyotes franchise, which is losing $30 million a year. As with the City North proposal, AFP Arizona wanted to know where Glendale taxpayers stood on the possibility of spending millions to further subsidize the team—after having already spent $180 million of local taxpayer dollars on the Coyotes’ arena.
Some of the questions the survey asked about further subsidies for the Coyotes, and the poll results, are reproduced verbatim here:
Q: As you may know, the Phoenix Coyotes are having significant financial difficulties, and the current ownership is considering selling the team. I’d like to read you two different options facing team ownership, and please tell me which one you prefer...
…keeping the Phoenix Coyotes in Glendale, even if it costs the city of Glendale three million to fifteen million dollars in local taxpayer subsidies each year, or allowing the team to move out of state?
24% KEEP PHOENIX COYOTES IN GLENDALE
72% ALLOW TEAM TO MOVE OUT OF STATE
Q: Now, I would like to read you a statement about the Phoenix Coyotes’ relationship with the city of Glendale. After I read the statement, please tell me if you AGREE or DISAGREE with that statement.
The statement is... the prestige of having a pro hockey team in Arizona is enough that it is worth having the city of Glendale spend millions of dollars in local taxpayer subsidies to keep the Coyotes here.
And do you STRONGLY (agree/disagree) or just SOMEWHAT (agree/disagree) with that statement?
5% STRONGLY AGREE
16% SOMEWHAT AGREE
26% SOMEWHAT DISAGREE
50% STRONGLY DISAGREE
21% TOTAL AGREE
76% TOTAL DISAGREE
Tomorrow, AFP Arizona will release findings on the attitudes towards various proposals that have been set forth to deal with Arizona’s massive budget deficit.
Americans for Prosperity (AFP) is a nationwide organization of citizen leaders committed to advancing every individual’s right to economic freedom and opportunity. AFP believes reducing the size and scope of government is the best safeguard to ensuring individual productivity and prosperity for all Americans. AFP educates and engages citizens in support of restraining state and federal government growth, and returning government to its constitutional limits. For more information, visit www.americansforprosperity.org
# # #
Tom Jenney
Arizona Director
Americans for Prosperity
www.aztaxpayers.org
tjenney@afphq.org
Poll: Phoenix and Glendale Taxpayers Reject Special-Interest Subsidies
Large Majorities Oppose $100 Million City North Subsidy
and Possible Glendale Bailout of Phoenix Coyotes
Results on Gov. Brewer’s Tax Increase Proposal,
Legislative Budget Options to be Released Thursday
PHOENIX – Phoenix taxpayers rejected the $100 million City North subsidy, and Glendale taxpayers rejected a possible bailout of the Phoenix Coyotes, according to poll results released today by the Arizona chapter of Americans for Prosperity (AFP-Arizona), a taxpayer watchdog group committed to fiscal discipline and low taxes.
81 percent of Phoenix respondents expressed the opinion that the City North subsidy was an illegal gift of taxpayer money, compared with only 9 percent who said the subsidy was necessary to help the project land the city’s first Nordstrom and Bloomingdale’s stores. 81 percent of Phoenix respondents also disagreed with the proposition that the long-term economic benefits of City North justified rebating $100 million of Phoenix taxpayer money to the project.
In Glendale, 72 percent of respondents preferred to allow the Phoenix Coyotes to move out of state, rather than have the City of Glendale give the team $3 to $15 million annually in local taxpayer subsidies. 24 percent preferred to use subsidies to keep the Coyotes in Glendale. 76 percent of respondents said the prestige of having a pro hockey team in Arizona was not worth the subsidies.
AFP Arizona director Tom Jenney expressed satisfaction at finding that large majorities of taxpayers rejected the Phoenix and Glendale subsidies. “Cities need to get out of the business of using taxpayer money to try to pick winners and losers in the economy,” Jenney said. “We are hoping that city officials around the state will pay attention to these poll results.”
Completed Monday night, March 23rd, the polling effort surveyed 300 likely voters in both Phoenix and Glendale on local and state-level tax and budget issues. The poll was conducted by Public Opinion Strategies, a firm with extensive experience in Arizona. AFP Arizona is releasing the survey results for local issues today, and will release survey results on state-level tax and budget issues on Thursday.
In the City of Phoenix, a $100 million tax rebate for the City North mixed-use development near the 101 and Tatum has stirred extensive debate. The legality of the Phoenix subsidy is now being considered by the Arizona Supreme Court, after the subsidy was deemed to be illegal by the Court of Appeals. Yet, it does not appear that any polling information has been done about the attitudes of the people—Phoenix taxpayers—who are being forced to fund the subsidy.
The questions the survey asked about the City North subsidy, and the poll results, are reproduced verbatim here:
Q: As you may know, The Arizona Supreme Court has been asked to review the legality of an approximately $100 million tax rebate that the City of Phoenix agreed to provide the developer of City North, a mixed use development near Tatum and the 101 Freeway in north Phoenix.
Some people say this money was necessary to help pay for a parking garage and to help the project land the city’s first Nordstrom and Bloomingdale’s store.
...while...
Other people say that the taxpayer money is an illegal gift of public funds to a private developer and these companies should pay their own way rather than asking for such a huge amount from Phoenix taxpayers. Which statement comes closest to your own opinion?
9% MONEY WAS NECESSARY
81% TAXPAYER MONEY IS AN ILLEGAL GIFT
Thinking more about this issue...
Q: Now, I would like to read you a statement about the City North mixed-use development. After I read the statement, please tell me if you AGREE or DISAGREE with that statement.
The statement is... the long term economic benefit to having a mixed-use development like City North with national chains and other stores like Nordstrom and Bloomingdale’s is enough that it is worth rebating $100 million of Phoenix taxpayer money to these companies and the developers.
And do you STRONGLY (agree/disagree) or just SOMEWHAT (agree/disagree) with that statement?
5% STRONGLY AGREE
11% SOMEWHAT AGREE
17% SOMEWHAT DISAGREE
64% STRONGLY DISAGREE
15%^ TOTAL AGREE
81% TOTAL DISAGREE
Meanwhile, the City of Glendale is reportedly considering paying for a bailout for the Phoenix Coyotes franchise, which is losing $30 million a year. As with the City North proposal, AFP Arizona wanted to know where Glendale taxpayers stood on the possibility of spending millions to further subsidize the team—after having already spent $180 million of local taxpayer dollars on the Coyotes’ arena.
Some of the questions the survey asked about further subsidies for the Coyotes, and the poll results, are reproduced verbatim here:
Q: As you may know, the Phoenix Coyotes are having significant financial difficulties, and the current ownership is considering selling the team. I’d like to read you two different options facing team ownership, and please tell me which one you prefer...
…keeping the Phoenix Coyotes in Glendale, even if it costs the city of Glendale three million to fifteen million dollars in local taxpayer subsidies each year, or allowing the team to move out of state?
24% KEEP PHOENIX COYOTES IN GLENDALE
72% ALLOW TEAM TO MOVE OUT OF STATE
Q: Now, I would like to read you a statement about the Phoenix Coyotes’ relationship with the city of Glendale. After I read the statement, please tell me if you AGREE or DISAGREE with that statement.
The statement is... the prestige of having a pro hockey team in Arizona is enough that it is worth having the city of Glendale spend millions of dollars in local taxpayer subsidies to keep the Coyotes here.
And do you STRONGLY (agree/disagree) or just SOMEWHAT (agree/disagree) with that statement?
5% STRONGLY AGREE
16% SOMEWHAT AGREE
26% SOMEWHAT DISAGREE
50% STRONGLY DISAGREE
21% TOTAL AGREE
76% TOTAL DISAGREE
Tomorrow, AFP Arizona will release findings on the attitudes towards various proposals that have been set forth to deal with Arizona’s massive budget deficit.
Americans for Prosperity (AFP) is a nationwide organization of citizen leaders committed to advancing every individual’s right to economic freedom and opportunity. AFP believes reducing the size and scope of government is the best safeguard to ensuring individual productivity and prosperity for all Americans. AFP educates and engages citizens in support of restraining state and federal government growth, and returning government to its constitutional limits. For more information, visit www.americansforprosperity.org
# # #
Tom Jenney
Arizona Director
Americans for Prosperity
www.aztaxpayers.org
tjenney@afphq.org
Friday, March 6, 2009
Brewer's Ballot Bargain is a Bad Deal for Taxpayers
By Tom Jenney, Americans for Prosperity
Dear Arizona Taxpayer,
Gov. Jan Brewer has suggested sending to a special election two proposals designed to help close the gap in the state’s budget deficit.
One proposal is to ask voters to increase state taxes by a billion dollars a year for three years. The other proposal is to ask voters to let the Legislature make cuts to areas of the budget that have been protected from cuts by past voter mandates.
The obvious danger is that if the two proposals go to the ballot separately, the spending lobbies and tax-takers (who are much more well-funded and well-organized than taxpayers) will pass the tax increase and shoot down the authorization for spending cuts.
Even if the Legislature is able to evade the single-subject rule and legally bind the two proposals together (though conditional enactment clauses in both referenda), here is the result:
The spending lobbies get a guaranteed tax increase, but taxpayers only get the possibility of spending reductions in formerly protected budget areas.
In other words, the spenders and tax-takers get their piece of the pie. But we taxpayers might get our piece of the pie, if the political will can actually be found in the Legislature to make the cuts.
Furthermore, there is nothing in the package to keep the state from resuming its pattern of rollercoaster budgeting as soon as the recession is over. Even if the tax increases really are temporary, and really do expire in three years, the state will still be wracked by uncontrolled spending binges.
When the tax money comes pouring in again, the politicians will spend every penny that comes in, and leverage that money to spend yet more. They will raise spending to unsustainable levels in order to please the tax-takers and the spending lobbies, just as they did during the last six years. They will create yet another gigantic budget deficit crisis during the next economic downturn, when the revenue falls off. Once again, the politicians will come at us with tax increase proposals. And next time, the “fix” may be a permanent tax increase, rather than a temporary one.
If Arizona taxpayers and fiscal conservatives are even going to begin to consider a ballot bargain package that includes a temporary tax increase, it will have to include the Taxpayer Bill of Rights—the only reform that can stop the spending rollercoaster. The Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR) would create a sustainable upper limit to state spending growth, by limiting the growth in state government to the rate of growth of population plus inflation, with immediate refunds to taxpayers of excess monies.
See this chart for a visual of how TABOR would have worked, had it been in effect since 1993:
http://www.americansforprosperity.org/files/AzGenFund2003-2012--01-31-09.pdf
If TABOR is not attached to the package in a bomb-proof manner, Arizona is better off balancing the budget with the tools currently at the disposal of the Legislature and Governor. They should start with the $2.2 billion in spending reductions suggested by the appropriations chairmen in their January 15 budget, and find creative ways to save the other $1.5 billion by selling state assets, privatizing state functions, and eliminating entitlement fraud.
For Liberty,
--Tom
Tom Jenney
Arizona Director
Americans for Prosperity
(Arizona Federation of Taxpayers)
www.aztaxpayers.org
tjenney@afphq.org
(602) 478-0146
Dear Arizona Taxpayer,
Gov. Jan Brewer has suggested sending to a special election two proposals designed to help close the gap in the state’s budget deficit.
One proposal is to ask voters to increase state taxes by a billion dollars a year for three years. The other proposal is to ask voters to let the Legislature make cuts to areas of the budget that have been protected from cuts by past voter mandates.
The obvious danger is that if the two proposals go to the ballot separately, the spending lobbies and tax-takers (who are much more well-funded and well-organized than taxpayers) will pass the tax increase and shoot down the authorization for spending cuts.
Even if the Legislature is able to evade the single-subject rule and legally bind the two proposals together (though conditional enactment clauses in both referenda), here is the result:
The spending lobbies get a guaranteed tax increase, but taxpayers only get the possibility of spending reductions in formerly protected budget areas.
In other words, the spenders and tax-takers get their piece of the pie. But we taxpayers might get our piece of the pie, if the political will can actually be found in the Legislature to make the cuts.
Furthermore, there is nothing in the package to keep the state from resuming its pattern of rollercoaster budgeting as soon as the recession is over. Even if the tax increases really are temporary, and really do expire in three years, the state will still be wracked by uncontrolled spending binges.
When the tax money comes pouring in again, the politicians will spend every penny that comes in, and leverage that money to spend yet more. They will raise spending to unsustainable levels in order to please the tax-takers and the spending lobbies, just as they did during the last six years. They will create yet another gigantic budget deficit crisis during the next economic downturn, when the revenue falls off. Once again, the politicians will come at us with tax increase proposals. And next time, the “fix” may be a permanent tax increase, rather than a temporary one.
If Arizona taxpayers and fiscal conservatives are even going to begin to consider a ballot bargain package that includes a temporary tax increase, it will have to include the Taxpayer Bill of Rights—the only reform that can stop the spending rollercoaster. The Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR) would create a sustainable upper limit to state spending growth, by limiting the growth in state government to the rate of growth of population plus inflation, with immediate refunds to taxpayers of excess monies.
See this chart for a visual of how TABOR would have worked, had it been in effect since 1993:
http://www.americansforprosperity.org/files/AzGenFund2003-2012--01-31-09.pdf
If TABOR is not attached to the package in a bomb-proof manner, Arizona is better off balancing the budget with the tools currently at the disposal of the Legislature and Governor. They should start with the $2.2 billion in spending reductions suggested by the appropriations chairmen in their January 15 budget, and find creative ways to save the other $1.5 billion by selling state assets, privatizing state functions, and eliminating entitlement fraud.
For Liberty,
--Tom
Tom Jenney
Arizona Director
Americans for Prosperity
(Arizona Federation of Taxpayers)
www.aztaxpayers.org
tjenney@afphq.org
(602) 478-0146
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
